Law firms may choose to pay off clients who lodge tenuous complaints just to avoid the expense and hassle of dealing with them.
That is according to the Law Society, which today published its response to an SRA consultation on reforming first-tier complaints-handling.
Chancery Lane also wants more guidance from the regulator on dealing with AI-generated complaints, which have led to a sharp increase in the number and bulk of complaints received by law firms and regulators alike.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority proposes that when a complaint is first made, clients are provided with a timeline for resolution. Clients would also have to be given regular updates.
Responding, the Society warns that requiring firms to provide fixed resolution dates when first notified of a complaint, together with routine progress updates, will only add unnecessary regulatory burdens. It also questions whether this is the time to overhaul the rules when firms are grappling with the ‘unique challenges’ arising from AI-assisted complaints.
‘An outcomes-focused approach based on estimated timescales and meaningful, proportionate updates would better balance consumer expectations with the practical realities of dealing with legal complaints,’ it argues.
Guidance on AI-generated complaints should be a priority, the Society adds. ‘Firms should be encouraged to focus on the substantive issues raised rather than being expected to respond line by line to lengthy AI-produced submissions. Guidance should also make clear that complaints-handlers may reasonably seek clarification where the issues raised are unclear, repetitive or inconsistent.’
The SRA’s prescriptive proposals may also create an incentive for firms to settle complaints on purely commercial grounds rather than according to their merits, the Society says. ‘Firms may sometimes decide that the cost of dealing with a weak complaint exceeds the cost of offering a modest goodwill payment. If so, complaint outcomes may not always be a reliable indicator of service quality, and the SRA may wish to consider whether its guidance should acknowledge this reality.’
Law Society president Mark Evans said: 'We support the SRA’s intention to improve first-tier complaints handling, but urge the SRA to consider whether now is the right time to introduce new requirements. Existing rules already require complaints to be handled promptly. Any reforms implemented must be proportionate, evidence-based and applied in a manner that avoids unnecessary burdens on firms. Additional targeted supervision and intervention may be more effective and less burdensome on firms.'
No comments yet