While we support the aims of improving efficiency, encouraging the early resolution of complaints and ensuring resources are used proportionately, we are concerned that the proposed fee regime is neither fair nor supported by sufficient evidence. 

Under the proposals, legal service providers could face fees of £750 when a complaint reaches investigation and £1,500 when it proceeds to an Ombudsman decision. A separate £200 fee is also proposed for complaints reaching Early Resolution. Thompsons believes these increases are excessive and could encourage firms to settle complaints for commercial reasons, even where they consider a complaint to be without merit. 

The potential impact on access to justice

The cumulative cost of the proposed fees could discourage firms from taking on lower-value, complex or higher-risk claimant cases, particularly in areas where recoverable legal costs are already restricted.

This could make it more difficult for injured people and other vulnerable consumers to obtain experienced legal representation, widening the existing justice gap. 

We are also concerned that the proposals appear to move away from a fault-based charging model. Firms could incur significant costs simply because a complaint progresses through the Legal Ombudsman process, regardless of whether a service failure is ultimately identified. 

A fairer, evidence-based approach

Thompsons is calling on the Office for Legal Complaints to reconsider the proposed fee levels and publish a comprehensive assessment of their potential financial and access-to-justice impacts.

Any charging model should take account of uphold rates, overall case volumes, the type and complexity of legal work undertaken and the effectiveness of firms’ internal complaint handling. Thompsons is also calling for clearer rules on what constitutes taking “all reasonable steps” to resolve a complaint. 

Technology should also form part of the solution. Better digital triage and filtering could help identify complaints that fall outside the Legal Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, lack essential information or should be directed to another body. 

A proportionate, transparent and evidence-based system is essential to maintaining confidence among consumers and legal service providers, without placing further barriers in the way of access to justice.

Read the full consultation here