The proposed reforms include a 12-year long-stop and clearer grounds for ombudsman escalation
Scheme Rules changes proposed by the Legal Ombudsman would introduce a 12-year long-stop for historic complaints and set clearer expectations around when complaints should be escalated for an ombudsman’s final decision.
The proposals form part of an ongoing consultation by the Office for Legal Complaints covering changes to the Legal Ombudsman’s Scheme Rules, case fees and approach to publishing ombudsman decisions. The Legal Ombudsman said the three areas should be understood as a connected package of reforms rather than separate initiatives.
The organisation said the proposed changes are intended to support earlier and more effective complaint resolution, reduce unnecessary escalation and ensure its service remains accessible and proportionate.
The consultation comes after the Legal Ombudsman said complaints increased by 37% in 2025/26, creating significant pressure on its service. The organisation said the proposed changes build on, rather than replace, amendments made to the Scheme Rules in 2023.
One significant proposal is a 12-year long-stop for complaints. The Legal Ombudsman acknowledged that failings in legal services can sometimes come to light many years later, including where an issue relating to a property purchase is discovered during a subsequent sale.
However, it said a time limit is intended to address cases where too much time has passed for a fair investigation to take place. The factors identified include files having been destroyed, a service provider having closed, or relevant people no longer being available.
The proposed 12-year period is intended to balance access to justice with fairness and certainty for legal service providers.
The proposals would also clarify that the Legal Ombudsman should focus on complaints involving a real impact or detriment, rather than matters that are trivial, inconsequential or purely theoretical. The organisation said it would continue to provide appropriate support to consumers who face barriers in explaining their complaint or the impact of poor service.
The Legal Ombudsman also said consumers would be expected to explain how alleged poor service affected them. It said understanding the impact is necessary when deciding what would amount to a fair remedy. The same principle applies when complaints are first raised with a legal service provider.
For solicitors and other legal service providers, the practical point is that complaints handling should consider not only what went wrong but also the identifiable impact on the consumer. The Legal Ombudsman said distinguishing between a technical or administrative failing and one that caused genuine detriment could help achieve a proportionate resolution at an early stage and prevent unnecessary escalation.
The consultation also proposes continued support for people unable to use an online complaint form. Although online forms are proposed to improve efficiency and consistency, the Legal Ombudsman said reasonable support or adjustments would remain available, including alternative formats where appropriate.
The proposals would not remove either party’s ability to request an ombudsman’s final decision. However, the Legal Ombudsman said escalation should occur where it is necessary and appropriate to resolve a complaint, rather than becoming the norm.
Under the proposals, simply disagreeing with an investigator’s findings would not, by itself, be enough to require escalation. A party seeking an ombudsman’s decision would need to explain the grounds for the request, such as new evidence, a material error, procedural unfairness or a substantive dispute.
The Legal Ombudsman said the proposed Scheme Rules changes are intended to ensure complaints are dealt with at the right stage, with minimum formality, while allowing independent investigation to focus on cases where it can make the greatest difference.
The consultation remains open until 2 September 2026.