Proposed fees aim to encourage earlier complaint resolution and reduce avoidable escalation to LeO
Case fee proposals from the Legal Ombudsman could introduce additional charges for legal service providers where complaints require further intervention, under reforms currently out for consultation.
The Legal Ombudsman published a question-and-answer article on 13 August 2026 addressing concerns raised during engagement with stakeholders over proposed changes to case fees, Scheme Rules and the publication of ombudsman decisions.
The organisation said the three areas should be viewed as a connected package of reforms rather than separate measures. It said proposed Scheme Rules changes would help focus on complaints involving real impact or detriment, while the case fee changes are intended to encourage providers to respond to complaints, engage earlier and resolve issues before formal intervention is required.
For solicitors and other legal service providers, the key proposal is that case fees could become payable in circumstances where poor service or poor complaint handling has been identified.
The Legal Ombudsman said it is proposing an additional £400 fee where a provider has not issued a final response within eight weeks. Around 25% of complaints received each year involve consumers reporting that they have not received a final response from their provider. The organisation said this represented around 2,000 cases in 2024/25 and 2,300 in 2025/26.
Where there is no final response, the complaint cannot be resolved through one of the Legal Ombudsman’s early resolution processes and requires a full investigation. The organisation said this creates additional time and costs that should not be borne by the rest of the profession through the levy.
The proposed model would also include a £1,500 case fee at the ombudsman decision stage. The Legal Ombudsman said a case resolved through early resolution typically costs approximately £500, while decisions require significantly more resources. It said the proposed £1,500 fee is lower than the average cost of resolving a complaint through a final decision.
The organisation rejected concerns that the proposals could pressure providers into settling weak complaints simply to avoid fees. It said the purpose is to encourage meaningful engagement with complaints and their resolution at the first tier, rather than settlements where complaints lack merit.
The Legal Ombudsman also said it would continue to dismiss complaints where there is no real detriment, where a reasonable remedy has already been offered, or where further consideration would be disproportionate. No case fee would be charged where neither poor service nor poor complaint handling has been identified.
Not every complaint within the Legal Ombudsman’s jurisdiction would therefore automatically attract a fee. Under the proposal, fees could be waived where a complaint is resolved in the provider’s favour or dismissed and the ombudsman is satisfied that the provider took all reasonable steps at first tier.
The organisation also clarified that the proposals are not intended as a revenue-raising exercise. Based on closed cases in 2024/25, the current regime generated around £940,000, representing about 5% of the Legal Ombudsman’s costs. It said the proposed model could have generated nearly £3.5 million, or around 20% of costs, reducing the levy-funded proportion from 95% to about 80%.
The consultation remains open until midday on 2 September 2026. The Legal Ombudsman said further Q&As will follow on the other areas covered by the consultation.