Report comment

I have just had two matters referred to the LeO (they seem to be like buses...). One was a client in a matter where the seller was doing all sorts of subsales before the sale to us so we didn't get complete papers for six months. When we saw what had been drafted it was a mess so we advised the client of a fee increase. That was accepted then rejected almost immediately but in the gap we had applied for searches. He complained about 'six months' delay, wanted all his money back - even the money spent on searches although we had supplied him the results electronically and sent copies to his new solicitors.
The other was a client who complained about delay in submitting a final completion statement where a lender failed to provide a written redemption statement or confirm the debt was cleared with a payment of the last verbal balance and the joint sellers wer in dispute as to the entitlements to proceeds.
Now, I am more than happy for clients to have recourse to an Ombudsman, but a level playingfield might be a reasonable expectation. If a firm's service is upheld (as mine has been to date), should not the client pay the £400 fee??
The customer is NOT always right in fact - though it may be good business to pretend otherwise..... and heresy of heresy - not eveerything stated to be in the best interests of consumers actually is; particularly when taken to extremes.