A survey of legal services clients has found that although the vast majority (84%) are happy with the service they receive, 66% said they would never leave a review.
Access Legal surveyed 1,000 clients who have used conveyancing, wills and probate, family law or personal injury legal services in the last two years for its 2026 Client Experience Report and found what the technology provider calls a growing ‘advocacy gap’ that could result in a loss of business.
And, although two thirds of those surveyed said they would never leave feedback, 40% said they rely on reviews when choosing a firm. The result, Access Legal general manager Andrew Stevens says, is a real commercial impact.
He explained: “When a ‘silent’ majority of satisfied clients leaves no public feedback, it can have real commercial implications for law firms. The online reviews and ratings they do receive may be out of date or not accurately reflect the quality of service being delivered across the sector, especially if a vocal minority of negative comments dominate.
“This results in a benchmarking blind spot, where firms appear to be underperforming relative to peers, despite delivering strong outcomes across fees, communication and results.”
Stevens continued: “Without visible advocacy from the majority of satisfied clients, firms risk reduced visibility, lost referrals, weaker competitive advantage and skewed benchmarking against peers. In effect, happy clinets have become invisible clients – and that’s a business problem.”
However, despite the growing significance of online reviews, the research found that traditional word of mouth recommendations remain the top reason for choosing a firm, at 17%. Location and convenience came in second, with 16%, competitive pricing was cited by 15% of respondents, with 14% saying they choose firms based on online reviews and ratings.
When asked what they value most about the service they receive, only a quarter of clients (28%) said they prioritise cheaper fees above all else. Faster turnaround time provided the most value for money for 27% of respondents, with 19% saying better communication represents value for money.
The research also questioned clients about their attitudes towards AI. When asked if AI could ever replace the need for a qualified solicitor in handling legal matters, only half (46%) said a solicitor should always be involved. When split by age, 58% of under 35s believe AI has a role in legal matters, compared to 38% of respondents aged between 56 and 64.
Over a third of participants (36%) said AI could handle simple routine matters such as will writing, with 14% saying the technology could handle most legal issues.
Email was cited as the most popular method of communication amongst respondents at 27%, closely followed by phone calls (22%) and face-to-face meetings (22%). Only 6% said they preferred letters, with the same number saying they wanted updates via text message or other mobile messaging.
However, online document signing has emerged as the digital tool clients believe offers the most value, with 29% of respondents choosing the technology. Online payment systems were cited as the favoured digital tool by 21% of those surveyed, with 19% saying they valued a client portal for case updates.
Only 1% of respondents said they believed AI-powered chatbots offered value for money.
Danielle Park is a non-practising solicitor and product manager at Access Legal. AI can never replace a solicitor, she agrees, but adds the technology is increasingly important for firms’ reputations.
She explained: “In my litigation experience, there were long periods where not much happened because we were waiting on third parties – like medical records in PI cases, and responses from the other side with their prescribed time limits. Clients would ring asking for updates, sometimes just wanting reassurance that their case hadn’t been forgotten.
“Modern portals and AI could handle those routine status updates, freeing solicitors to focus on the complex advisory work and sensitive conversations that genuinely need human judgment and empathy.
“So it’s not about replacement – it’s about AI supplementing the process-driven tasks so solicitors can focus on where they add the most value.”
