Representative bodies and consumer champions have lined up to attack the legal ombudsman's expansion plans – but with mixed responses to demands for an inflation-busting budget increase.
The Office for Legal Complaints (OLC) outlined last month how it was recommending a 12.1% increase for 2026/27, taking its annual expenditure to £22.4m. The complaints handler says the extra funding is necessary to deal with a massive increase in workloads and to make ambitious plans for the future.
Some initial responses to the consultation agree to the ombudsman getting its increase, but with the caveat that this should not be taken as an endorsement of current performance.
Tom Hayhoe, chair of the Legal Services Consumer Panel, said the service is not working as it should for those who make complaints, with waiting times now ‘unacceptably long’ and address coming ‘too late to be meaningful’.
He added: ‘Against this backdrop, the panel supports option three [the 12.1% increase] of the draft budget proposals for 2026/27. This is not an endorsement of higher cost for its own sake, but recognition that option three is the only credible option that balances value for money with the scale of the challenge. Without additional investment, delays will worsen and consumer outcomes will deteriorate further.’
The OLC states that waiting times for a decision fell by 22% in 2025, although the wait time still stood at an average 275 days at the end of the second quarter.
New complaints rose by 26% - more than 1,300 additional new customer complaints in the first two quarters alone. Based on the demand in the first half of 2025/26, almost 9,000 cases will intervention by early resolution or an in-depth investigation.
The Law Society acknowledged that the ombudsman has made progress on its performance but rejected the 12.1% proposed increase.
Society president Mark Evans, said the backlog of unopened cases is projected to be 3,754 by March 2026 – way beyond the ombudsman’s original target of between 500 and 1,000. ‘LeO is currently failing to meet its own targets for reducing the case backlog, with customer journey times at unacceptable levels,' said Evans. ‘It is particularly concerning that LeO is proposing to undertake additional work such as a Scheme Transformation Review while struggling to deliver its core statutory function of resolving complaints quickly.’
In its response to the consultation, the Council for Licensed Conveyancers accepted the proposed budget increase ‘with great reluctance and significant reservations’.
The CLC said it has ‘ongoing concerns about operational efficiency and whether… LeO represents value for money’ but accepts that the increase is ‘necessary to avoid deterioration in service levels and turnaround times for consumers’.
A final proposal on the budget will be made in the new year and this figure will then be subject to approval by the Legal Services Board.
2 Readers' comments