Legal Ombudsman under fire as Law Society demands action on delays

Law Society urges Legal Ombudsman to cut delays before pursuing rule changes or budget growth

The Law Society has called on the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) to focus on improving performance and reducing its growing complaints backlog, warning against pursuing further structural reform while core service targets remain unmet.

In its response to LeO’s consultation on the draft business plan and budget for 2026–27, the society also opposed a proposed twelve percent increase to LeO’s budget, equivalent to £2.4 million, which would take total annual funding to £20 million.

LeO has argued that additional funding is required to manage a sharp rise in complaints and to carry out a radical scheme transformation review (STR) of how the organisation operates. However, the Law Society said it was concerned by what it described as a “continuing failure” to reduce the backlog of unresolved cases.

The society highlighted the gap between previous forecasts and current projections. LeO’s business plan last year anticipated a complaints queue of 2,875 by 31 March 2025, reducing to 1,949 a year later. The latest draft plan now estimates the backlog will stand between 3,378 and 3,754 by 31 March 2026. Earlier targets had aimed for a manageable level of between 500 and 1,000 cases by March 2024.

According to the Law Society, the failure to bring the backlog under control was “particularly worrying” given LeO’s intention to undertake additional work, including the STR, while struggling to deliver its core statutory duty of providing a timely complaints resolution service.

Demand for LeO’s services continues to rise. The organisation received twenty-six percent more complaints this year, a trend the society said made it “even more vital” that resources were directed towards improving efficiency and productivity before expanding activity beyond LeO’s core function.

The society said the proposed budget increase represented a significant rise beyond inflation and noted that previous funding increases had not delivered the expected reduction in complaints requiring investigation.

“It appears that among the reasons for that failure are a lack of improvement in staff productivity, weaknesses in current processes, and the use of budget for services extending beyond LeO’s statutory remit,” the response said.

While not rejecting reform entirely, the society said LeO should instead carry out a limited review focused on handling rising demand, particularly through process improvement and efficiency gains.

It also questioned the need for another major review so soon after changes introduced in 2023, including reducing the time limit for bringing complaints to one year and expanding LeO’s discretion to dismiss cases involving non-significant loss. The society said no evidence had yet been presented on the impact of those changes.

The Law Society further raised concerns about the Office for Legal Complaints’ decision to pause an inflation-linked increase in case fees from £400 to £600 while exploring alternative models, including tiered or polluter-pays approaches.

Law Society president Mark Evans said LeO should prioritise operational efficiency, including outsourcing and automation, and ensure any increase in funding was supported by clear improvements in performance. He said timely, fair and transparent complaints handling remained essential to maintaining public confidence in the legal profession.