Communication is key when dealing with delays, says Legal Ombudsman in new guidance

The Legal Ombudsman (LeO) has set out its expectations for service providers when dealing with third-party delays, which stress the importance of effective communication.

The LeO says almost half of the complaints it receives are about communication and delays, with a ‘common feature’ being whether the delay could have been caused or influenced by a third party. However, it says that when investigating complaints, it will examine ‘whether the service provider could or should have contacted the party who caused the delay to try to progress matters more quickly for the customer’.

The LeO explained:

“LeO recognises that third-party delays can be burdensome to legal service providers, and that many providers work very hard to deliver good standards of service despite the challenge such delays can present.

“Whilst LeO won’t generally hold service providers responsible for delays they did not cause or could not have avoided, effective communication and managing clients’ expectations from the outset both play an important role in preventing complaints arising in the first place.”

The third-party delays referred to in the guidance include those caused by the Land Registry, Probate Registry, the courts, the Home Office, waiting for expert reports and waiting for responses from the other side. ‘In general, any periods of delay caused by a party other than the service provider are not considered to be the fault of the service provider’, the LeO said.

However, the Ombudsman will expect the service provider to attempt to reduce or avert the delay and keep the customer informed, with ‘reasonable service’ including sharing clear information regarding progress, dealing with other relevant actions while waiting for  third parties, keeping track of the expected length of the delay, and telling customers if or when that is likely to change.

At the outset, service providers should manage expectations, LeO says. This includes giving the customer an overview of the process and ensuring they are aware of systems and potential problems before work begins.

‘Good communication is the key here’, the LeO commented. 

“If the firm provides good communication and where possible seeks to explain or avoid unnecessary third-party delays, it is likely that the Legal Ombudsman would consider its service to be reasonable.”