Firms should respond to all reviews -  ‘particularly negative ones’ - that have been published online, the Solicitors Regulation Authority has said in its latest thematic review of first-tier complaints handling.

The SRA visited 25 firms and reviewed two of their complaint files. It also surveyed 750 firms of various sizes and specialisms, from which received 743 responses. Of those interviewed, 18 said they proactively try to identify concerns and complaints from additional sources such as client feedback forms and online reviews.

Highlighting its guidance on engaging with online reviews, the SRA said: ‘We recommend that you respond to all reviews, particularly negative ones, whether you agree with the validity or accuracy of the comments that have been published or not. Firms should also consider responding by setting out a route as to how an issue can be resolved, for example by making a complaint.’

It added that poor practice would be to respond ‘inappropriately to online reviews (for example, sending defensive or dismissive responses)’.

All interviewees and 99% of survey respondents had a complaints procedure, while two survey respondents said they felt this was unnecessary on the basis that they had never received a complaint. Of those asked, 91% of respondents with a complaints procedure said the procedure included an attempt to resolve concerns informally.

The thematic review, published this month, added: ‘Some interviewees offered optional virtual or in-person meetings with clients to discuss their concerns and agree a way forward. While interviewees felt this helped them to understand and resolve issues quickly, they said that in practice, clients appeared reluctant to participate. Interviewees acknowledged that clients may feel concerned about a power imbalance, or that they would be encouraged to withdraw their complaint or accept a resolution they were not happy with.’

Read more

Almost a quarter of survey respondents with a complaints procedure (24%) required a face-to-face meeting. The SRA understood ‘the reluctance of some clients to attend’. It added: ‘We would, therefore, discourage firms from requiring a meeting in order to progress a complaint. Good practice is being adaptable in how you accept complaints.’

The review also noted ‘some instances of defensive or dismissive tones and use of legalistic language’ in responses to complaints, which it described as ‘poor practice’.

‘Some of the good responses we saw adopted a neutral or empathetic tone, even where the complaint was rejected, and avoided legalistic language,’ it said.

In looking at the challenges for firms when dealing with complaints, it found that interviewees ‘perceived a change in the tone of complaints in recent years’ with ‘an increase in rude, threatening or abusive language used by clients’. It added: ‘Some interviewees felt that the influence of online misinformation had also contributed to a wider change in the motivation for complaints.

‘They said that this had resulted in an increase in what some interviewees referred to as "tactical complaints". They intended this to mean clients making a complaint to achieve an outcome, when they were not in fact dissatisfied with the firm’s service. For example, firms told us of clients making complaints because their estate agent had told them it would speed up the conveyancing procedure.’

An SRA list of good practice included offering clients several ways to make a complaint, considering whether a client needs additional help and support, a clearly set out complaints procedure including timescales, and providing regular training to staff who handle complaints.

 

This article is now closed for comment.