Legal Ombudsman Bewertungen 

My experience was when we moved to our new house there was an 11,00 Volt cable in the back garden around 10 feet from the kitchen and 2 feet from the patio, We asked UK Power Networks to investigate and they said as well as the existence of the cable it was also not in the industry required depth. When we asked our solicitor why the search had not identified the cable they said the search found nothing. I investigated the search company and they generated the report of energy infrastructure from Data and Maps from National Grid. On further investigation I found out that National Grid supply electricity to parts of Wales, The South West and West Midlands. Our house is in Norfolk and the electricity supplier is UK Power Networks, hence why no energy infrastructure was found and reported. We would not have bought the house had we known about the cable, furthermore UK Power Networks said they would have reported the cable if their system would have been interrogated by a search company. On raising the complaint with these Ombudsman people (who I suspect are funded by Law companies) they said the case was not winnable so dropped, they repeated this on appeal.

This pretend service is further evidence of a corrupt country. We are brought up to believe that the United Kingdom is a Great country and far more fair and equal than all other countries but those of us who are committed to learning and truth realise as we become older and wiser that this country is riddled with corruption and bureaucracy. The people who we should be able to trust are very limited and ability and are simply short sighted bureaucrats. The Truth is depressing but rather than waste your time fighting against these institutions you are better off living your Life.
God is watching and if there is any Justice in this World He will punish those who really deserve to be punished.
The Legal Ombudsman is not neutral or impartial. They say they are but they are lying. Don't waste your time with them. We need a real revolution so we can open the minds of all the bureaucratic slaves who hold all the administrative positions.

ABSOLUTELY CORRUPT
Don't waist your time! Ridiculous delays.
Hard evidence will not be acknowledged.
Judgements will be made using supposition, fabrication and bias to dismiss complaint.
Their corrupt decisions are incontestable.
An absolute waist of time and effort

Judicial Review anyone?

Along with most of the comments on here I am amazed by the appalling service and bias presented by this allegedly independent and tax payer funded organisation.

They will not justify their decision and my only option is to go for a Judicial Review.

I assume this is a tactic they use to prevent further challenge of their incompetent and biased decisions in the knowledge that the Judicial Review costs a significant amount of money.

My proposal is, therefore, that we put together a Judicial Review as a group which will hopefully spread the costs across more complainants.

Anyone interested can trace me through the ICAEW website - I am in Nottingham.

I will also be writing to my MP - this service is an absolute scandal and needs to be disbanded or fixed

I have just read the reviews and seriously I could cry, I gave the 2 stars as I'm waiting on the outcome regarding Progress Law (Alam Law) I have PTSD as I was assaulted 3 years ago, Criminal Injuries have made me an offer the lawyers are charging me 35% in legal fee's at the time I was very traumatised as you can imagine, they said I signed online, I have contacted numerous lawyers and they all say their fees are 20, I have pleaded with this lawyer as a goodwill gesture to reduce the fees, I know they can do this, but they said NO, I'm disgusted as I wont be left with much, I was advised to contact the Legal
Ombudsman , now I feel deflated at reading all the reviews, I have suffered enough trauma, and I really hope they go in my favour.

Using the Legal Ombusdman is a completely useless pursuit. They are clearly biased in favour of the legal firms. I had expected that the people investigating my complaint would have some legal awareness at least, but this was clearly not the case. The whole process took 15 months to investigate my case against Co-op legal services and the eventual painful outcome was that I should be awarded £50. Still leaves me £1,700 out of pocket as the Co-op wrote our Wills with a Discretionary Trust and refused to change this. As I had paid at the time of the phone appointment I had no come back. The Ombudsman isn't interested at all in supporting the customer. It was more stressful going through this whole thing again. I was disgusted with their lack of knowledge, interest and empathy. You have NO CHANCE of a reasoned outcome.

Total GARBAGE most probably a company set up by solicitors to protect solicitors.

Gave all proof of being scammed by a solicitor firm it took them a year to respond after which at first they said I didn't fit their criteria to file a solicitor complaint, then when I showed them I do fit the criteria being both an executor and beneficiary in an inheritance they said they couldn't do anything about it.

Literally all of the poor reviews are spot on. I can’t add much more to what has already been said.

My conveyancers failed to inform me of a clause that could leave me owing money and although they accepted their failure, their only recourse was an apology when I made them aware of their incompetence leading to me owing nearly £600, 3 months after buying the flat! Not to mention the £1400 odd I paid for the conveyancing

I was told to raise this via the ombudsman if this was unsatisfactory as it obviously would be. 4 months later, I get an email saying that after an initial assessment, the best recourse would be £100 compensation and that would most likely be the best outcome however if I decide to take it further, the case would either be reviewed in 2025 or completely rejected.

I often wonder if the people who work for such organisations have any grasp of reality as they clearly are lacking in intelligence.

It is no wonder that literally all government and regulatory bodies are unfit for purpose given how lacking they are when it comes to the basic comprehension of how to function properly, yet when the shoe is on the other foot, they suddenly grow a pair and come at you so hard you would think you had violated their mother rather than just made a very small clerical error!

If I could have given them zero stars I would have done.

Simple scenario. We were informed that we had completed in purchasing land and our money released to the vendor, only to be told 34 days later that we hadn't actually completed as the correct documentation hadn't been signed and the vendor hadn't been correctly ID checked/validated, prior to the funds being released. In this time we had established ground work dates and lost money to these ground works contractors as had to be delayed. Completion didn't occur until the November. Money already lost by this point.

The timeframe from making the complaint to resolution took several months. The resolution went against us, but we found an extreme level of bias against us the client. They were extremely toothless and unwilling to question the solicitor.

They dug as deep as possible to find minor detail to support the 'firm' as they called them, even when our evidence completely outweighed the 'firms'. We provided hard fact emails, they argued with hearsay provided by the solicitor, which they didn't question - so we lost!

They lack any form of legal credibility. Simple conveyancing law such as the term 'completion', they didn't have a clue and blamed the Land Registry for the errors. Even though it was the Land Registry who established the errors and informed the solicitor. If you're told by a solicitor you've completed, you move in. Not according to the Legal Ombudsman.

If you plan on using them - good luck! If you can get away without using them - then don't use them! Save yourself the grief! Solicitors clearly have a ridiculously better outcome through this service!

Freedom of speech and freedom to complain.

Once upon a time, we were control over people we employ to help us. Not in the case of solicitors now - the power imbalance is tilted towards them heavily, even though we PAY them. This is because organisations such as the Legal Ombudsman and SRA are useless.

The Legal Ombudsman is the most useless organisation I have ever come across, and filled with incompetent, ill-trained staff.

I waited 2 years for my case to be passed on and finally resolved - in which their 'findings' were absolutely biased and lacking in all common sense.

Not to mention before, I emailed them twice after calling them to make sure an issue I didn't mention beforehand would be included in the review. There was no reply to these. They are clearly underfunded - leading to solicitors to TAKE ADVANTAGE of ordinary people because they know the Legal Ombudsman is so useless we cannot get anywhere with our complaint if we go to the SRA or Legal Ombudsman. The result was it was not taken into account until I mentioned it further, but by this time I had low hopes for it being acknowleged as poor service, because the investigator assumed it was some type of computer error. Before she even looked at the evidence. LOL. Later on, as you can see in the next paragraph, it was simply ruled as not appropriate but not unreasonable.

Something which was absolutely unacceptable was done by the solicitor - no one in their right minds would say it is correct, or a 'reasonable service'. Yes, it's very reasonable for a solicitor to take the p*ss out of you. When asked, the Legal Ombudsman said she never said it was appropriate, but that it was a reasonable service. (I will update this review on what precisely it was once the issue is fully resolved).

I had a call with the Legal Ombudsman where they were very dismissive, very inexperienced with dealing with customers on the phone who are distressed. Lack all common sense. She asked me: why didn't you complain about x? I said I did, several times, but then she said OK I will have a look at it, but I know it's not there. Very rude, probably some inexperienced worker. I did put that issue in the forms, many of the documents I sent across (which they required me to do over and over again). I wrote down the same problems in a zillion ways, yet apparently I didn't write this down, despite there literally being evidence of me doing this. I just didn't put it as it's own bullet point, as a separate issue, but instead under some other issue. Are they incapable of reading anything else or using their brains a bit more?

My recommendation:
Try them if you can, it costs nothing monetary wise but it will take a toll on you. It takes more than a year for your case to be taken on. The government is underfunded, and yes this is not the fault of the individuals working there but it's not fit for purpose. Try to get another solicitor if you can to help you write the complaint. Take care of your wellbeing if the fault of the solicitor if taking a toll on you. Be prepared for the LO to say the solicitors have done nothing wrong from the start - never get your hopes up. Look at the previous reviews on here, they are all in harmony it needs to be shut down.

They have cut costs everywhere, as evidenced by their new time date rule - they changed the amount of time you can complain about after something has happened to a much shorter length of time. Do a quick search of 'The Times legal ombudsman' and you will see what a reputable reporting organisation has said about them.

What an absolute joke of a 'service'. It is honestly embarrassing. I made a complaint in early December. Precisely nothing happened for weeks. Then I had to fill in another form. Nothing happened for weeks more. Then I get a letter telling me they aren't even going to look into the matter - which completely fails to understand what the complaint was even about. Nobody even bothered to speak with me. I used this service to try to avoid having to a solicitor to court. I've now wasted four months on a complete and utter nonsense and will have to go to court anyway. They've not even understood the basics and made no attempt to clarify it. My taxes fund this service. What a waste of all of our money.

I do not understand how with so many 1 star reviews this can go on. In my case the LO determined they would not look at my case as I had no chance of success against the solicitor acting for me whilst my actual case might still have merit. During the time it took the LO to review the legal firm accepted they could deal with things better and are but the LO felt they could not look at the claim even though the very legal firm admitted they got the original review wrong. Claire Orzel said under scheme rule 5.7 she could not look at my claim so they decided to not even look at the evidence presented to them. It appears to simply be a bias system that is typical of the current government,

Absolutely appalling. It has taken 3 yrs to even hear the complaint and then having asked us to present evidence they are trying to say it would be disproportionate for them to look at it properly. Absolutely unprofessional service and no concern from them about the delays. They also seem to be pre-judging the matter without looking at evidence. No wonder bad solicitors are not worried.

WHO CREATED LEGAL OMBUDSMAN?

Who appoints ombudsman in England?

THE CROWN
The Ombudsman is an appointment made by the Crown under the terms of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967.

Indeed... then you need to read SRA Rules.
in fact SRA linked the UK solicitors to Insurance and indemnity inusrances.
A bit like an Car Insurance. You can drive a Ferrari, if you have the right Insurance. Solicitors too, they must have the right indemnity insurance, to take the big BANNERS to court.

You can't chose a solicitor who wants to get justice for you... You need to chose a solicitor who actually has the right Indmentiy Insurance..
If you try.. Then Good Luck to You.

Supposodally high risk... solicitors need to aks permission by their indemnity insurances , in whether they can take such a case on board.

That means almost no one has the right indemnity insurance.

The Ombudsment created to give this hope to those grieved.. that indeed, someone is there to take notice.
Ombudsment, SRA, FCA, are filled with graduats either in the UK or abroad.. just to give the impression of facad... they are designed.. to creat exasperations.. to give one impression, when the entire exercise is a full deception.

In any demonratic country, we resort to Solicitors.. in the UK they send everyone to Ombudsment.

Don't lose your time and your energy. They will further damage your health.

SRA.. we provided.. Tangible evidence of falcified documents.. Solicitor wh was either qualified nor registered with SRA. When they have nothing to say to justify their lies.. the adopt ignorance and silent treatment.

they are not even based in the UK , they don't even understand the very rules of SRA themselves.

It is quite shocking..

We now notice that there is even irregularities with both High Court and County Court...

You are just wasting your time and truly damaging your health, by going through Legal Ombudsment... SRA.. FCA, The Met Police.. IOPC..

Read our other reviews.. just to see the level of suffering that we have faced as a family in the UK

THE ENTIRE SYSTEM SUCKS..
IT IS QUITE SHOCKING THAT UK TURNED TO THIS LEVEL, WHERE DECEPTION HAS BECOME DAILY LIFE.

WE ARE YET TO EVALUATE THE HIGH COURT.. IF THEY PROCESS OUR COURT PAPERS, FOR WHICH WE PAID 20,000£.. YES 20,000£.. IT IS NOT CHEAP TO GET JUSTICE IN THE UK.. YET.. NEARLY 2 MONTHS.. PAYMENT IS MADE AND NOTHING IS PROCESSED..

They brake front door through their Debt collectors for few hundred pounds.. yet thousands is kept , and so far NOTHING.

YES OUR CLAIM IS AGAINST THE VERY METROPOLITAN POLICE.
CRAWFORD AND CO...
with Tangible , audible , footage and beyond evidence. EVERYTHING IS LITERALLY PROVEN AND PROVIDED.. AND PLEADED ON AN ALMOST 30 PAGE PARTICULAR OF CLAIMS, and hundreds of pages of Evidence/recording/and beyond

MY SISTER WAS NAIVE TO THINK, THAT SHE WILL GET JUSTICE , BUT WE ARE SHOCKED TO SEE THAT EVEN AT COURTS.. WHETHER COURT STAFF ARE INCITED OR TRAINED TO RATIAL AND NATIONALITY PROFILE.. IN ORDER TO PROCESS YOUR CLAIMS .. AND ALLOW YOUR CASE TO REACH THE COURT.. OR INDEED WHETHER THEY ARE LEFT TO THEIR OWN DIVICES, BADLY PAID.. THROWING THEIR GRUDGES AND ANGER AT CALLERS.. OR CLAIMANT .

Solicitors, are using tricks.. to ensure the case is not reaching the hearing... that your case is dissolved for invented reasons. Where can you go?? What can you do?? literally nothing.

They know that no judge will ignore that much evidence provided and not to render the right judgement.

COMPLAINTS PROCEDURES.. are all Hoax.. they are just there to back each other. No matter the mountain of evidence you provide.

We were obliged to send letters to the 12 members of parliment designed to protect so to speak the Human Rights in the UK

(The Joint Committee on Human Rights consists of twelve members, appointed from both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The Committee is charged with considering human rights issues in the UK but cannot take up individual cases. )

They are all contacted, and we are hoping to see that someone stops that much unacceptable situation created in the UK, which goes against the basic human and legal rights.

Those solictors, big banners, Met Police, who caused pain, health damage and financial damage to my sister, my siblings.. ultimately The Court of His Majesty if , impartial , will need to make ultimate decision.

We won't give up.. We will support her , until justice is prevailed.

Last Important Information.
Solicitors are turned to Mediators in the UK.
whoever, says the contrary, we will provide hundreds of emails, as soon as they realise that the case is against a big banner... they decline.

it is as if you needed a surgery and your surgeon would need to ask their indemnity insurances, in whether they can perform the operation.

Quite shocking.. How could this be demoncray

Please follow us..

I agree with the negative feedbacks given here. System is a farce- unfair, biased & dont follow their own guidelines. Discard evidence- not to their standard. Twist every comment or arguement around to benefit the solicitor. Total disregard for vulnerable, distressed, disabled clients misled by solicitors. LeO impolite & abrupt, bordering on offensive & insulting. How can anyone trust 'regulated professionals' & the regulating processes. Need a legal support to protect you against a solicitor & a legal team to take on any of the solicitors failings. No fairness, justice, truth dismissed.

Appalling used twice for disputes with legal companies. They are so bias to the companies and pretty much toothless. Don’t even waste your time considering using this service.

1 star is too much

Ashley Taylors Legal Solicitors admitted an error in writing yet refused to compensate me of c10k of losses and double charging

Legal Ombudsman indicated that they did make an error yet support the legal firm in not paying compensate , but will be spoken to ?

We're not in kindergarten?

How is this even rational

Clearly discriminatory and biased

So Solicitors can make errors, admit to the error and have no repercussions!!!

Why go to a solicitor then ?

Total joke of a service

Not fit for purpose - My complaint took 39 months from start to finish; other people's complaints about the same solicitor took more than 4 years. The solicitor filed false claims in the UK money courts in order to circumvent the LeO process and was highly successful in doing so (in plain sight of LeO and the SRA). The solicitor stole the initial fee and did not do the work she said she would do (eventually ratified by the Administrative court and the SRA who used the euphemism "failure to account"). LeO did not think it reasonable for the solicitor to apologise, pay interest on the money that was misappropriated or compensate me for the additional costs involved. LeO hid information of the deceit. LeO has been misrepresenting the anticipated timescales on its website for years, knowing that it did not have the staff, or competence to deal with complaints within 12 months. It has now changed its rules so that it can dismiss any complaint it likes for more or less any reason (including its own incompetence) so it can manipulate its statistics and justify its existence. The average complaint currently takes nearly £3k (!) to deal with and so this is a cost cutting exercise. It has nothing to do with any of its statutory objectives as per legal Services Act 2007. It is all about "appearances". LeO strap line says that it makes it easy for consumers of legal services to complain. Yet look at the new rule 5.7 a-q. If an Ombudsman wants to clear his/her desk before the long weekend or Christmas holidays, s/he can choose any or all of the 17 reasons (!) to dismiss the complaint and complainants will have to spend 4k on a judicial review to challenge the decision!!!!! If the complaint is "discounted" before the final decision, there is no right of review. There is a culture of dealing with as few complaints as possible, and getting rid of everything as quickly as possible. If your complaint doesn't fit into a neat little box (i.e. one that a decent law firm would sort out itself and so there would be no reason to turn to this useless organisation), then you have absolutely no chance. Also get this, LeO can't be made to compensate its incompetence / negligence unless there is bad faith involved (Schedule 15 Legal Services Act 2007) so it can be as negligent/ incompetent / wasteful as it likes and its CEO/ Chief Ombudsman can be paid in excess of £100k a year and have absolutely no accountability whatsoever! Wowzer, what a job. I complained about LeO's incompetence and it took more than a year - yes, more than a year, for LeO to deal with the complaint about itself! So, I ask you what is the point? Unfortunately, you might as well take your solicitor complaints to court and wait years in the queue, because you might end up there anyway. The Ministry of Justice and the Legal Services Board are aware of how pathetic this organisation is and held meetings in September 2021 with a view to shutting it down. LeO does not wish to share the output of those meetings (under a freedom of information request) because, it says, its executive would not be able to speak freely (!) and yet it holds itself out publicly to be open, transparent and interested in a fair society!!!!! What an absolute joke. The reason that LeO does not defend itself is because it cannot. It is universally disliked by legal professionals and lay people alike. It is another one of Britain's institutions which is an absolute disgrace. Panorama or any investigative journalist - this is an institution worthy of investigation in an election year. Apparently, LeO has recently been sued by a complainant who adopted the "bad faith" argument and LeO's legal department says it successfully defeated the challenger but it won't say the name of the case, or provide a copy of the judgement (even when asked). The case is hidden from view so that others cannot learn from it. LeO is using it as a threat, but won't let anyone see it. Mr Sunak if you are reading this, it is the next big scandal waiting to pop up and bite you on the bum. You have been warned! The notes to this site ask me if my review is genuine and if I have received an incentive to write it. My review is genuine. My incentive is anger and disbelief and, of course, injustice. The Ministry of Justice is protecting its own. This has nothing to do with proteting or promoting the public interest, supporting the constitutional principle of the rule of law, improving access to justice, protecting and promoting the interests of consumers, increasing citizens legal rights and duties, promoting and maintaining adherence to the professional principles, maintaining standards in the profession, or promoting the prevention and detection of economic crime (statutory objectives of the Legal Services Act 2007). It has everything to do with smoke and mirrors.

I engaged with the Legal Ombudsman in September 2021 to investigate a solicitor practice on a number of issues. It took two years from start to finish before I got their final decision. After much submission of evidence, and a number of telephone calls with a case worker to discuss a complex situation, he found that the solicitor had provided a “reasonable service” on all five counts. Needless to say I was not happy, and asked for the complaint to be considered by an “ombudsman”. What appeared to be a locum ombudsman picked up my complaint and investigated. Again, he found the solicitor had provided a “reasonable service” and made this clear in his final judgement. I asked for a definition twice of what “reasonable service” meant, and was never provided with one. I had further exchanges with the ombudsman trying to evidence what was clearly malpractice on behalf of the solicitors I was complaining about. He refused to consider any of this, and repeatedly stated that he had already made his final judgement. Despite me paying for a Trust deed to be drafted and executed by the solicitor, and they failed to execute it thus rendering the document useless, this was deemed “reasonable service” by the ombudsman. This I find quite fantastic, and repeatedly asked him why he thought this bearing in mind I had paid a significant sum of money for this service, and the solicitor had failed to complete the task. This was a black and white issue, and yet he awarded in their favour!! Its no wonder the reputation of the Legal Ombudsman is the pits, and woeful with all these poor reviews. Just like the post office scandal, the ordinary person is ignored and dismissed by this big organisation who are clearly bias in favour of the legal services they are meant to investigate. After making further complaints, I was signposted to complete a pre-action letter to the legal ombudsman’s own legal team, and this they dismissed as no case to answer!! All I wanted was an explanation as to why they thought the solicitor was not professionally negligent when not executing a trust deed that I had paid good money for, and all you get is the door slammed in your face. All adverse reviews on this website cannot all be wrong. The personnel assessing our complaints are inexperienced and incompetent. It begs the question of the mentality of some of these people. They have no legal training. Their default position is that they find the services reasonable whatever that means? When challenged on this point they refuse to comment. In my case there has been a very important part of my complaint whereby any reasonable person would see I have a justification in challenging the solicitor supported by a barristers comment, and that of the othersides solicitor correspondence. Despite requesting several times for my issue to be responded to, they flatly refuse. This cannot be justice. As above it is not surprising they have woeful reviews and I state again we cannot all be wrong! I conclude by suggesting all those that have been unfairly judged should unite and lobby the government. I intend to pursue this matter with the Minister of Justice. I urge everyone else to do the same as it is a waste of time engaging with the legal ombudsman. They are corrupt beyond any reasonable doubt. The only way justice will be achieved is for people to unite and demonstrate their dissatisfaction as did Mr Bates of the post office scandal. This is another one.