The price of separation - Legal Ombudsman

09Putting it rightCentral to the Legal Ombudsman’s approach toinstances of poor service is seeking to put thecomplainant back in the position they would have beenin had the service been adequate. That is not alwayspossible. In many cases we see, although there hasbeen poor service, it is of a relatively minor sort andthere is no connection between the service failures weidentify and the disappointing case outcome that mayhave prompted the complaint in the first place. Minordelays, unimportant slips and overcharging are unlikelyto have had any real effect on the judge’s decision yetthey can be blamed by unhappy complainants for thefact that they did not get the settlement they sought. It istherefore not uncommon for an ombudsman’s decision tobe rejected by the complainant even where poor servicehas been identified.Where the poor service has resulted in a direct financial loss,imposing an appropriate remedy is usually possible. Take the caseof Ms F, who had to spend money putting her lawyer’s mistakesright after he incorrectly advised her to sign a consent order. Themistake meant that Ms F would not receive money from all of herhusband’s pension schemes (to which she was entitled), leavingher out of pocket. To make matters worse, the firm failed to takeMs F’s complaint seriously meaning she had to bring it to theLegal Ombudsman. Once we had investigated, we were able toachieve an informal resolution by getting the firm to agree on areimbursement of £6,500.The firm could have saved themselves the time and expense ofresponding to an Ombudsman investigation if they had resolvedthe issues when Ms F raised her initial complaint.The price of separation: Divorce related legal complaints and their causes