Proposed changes to the way solicitors handle first-tier complaints could unintentionally encourage law firms to settle questionable complaints simply to avoid the cost and administrative burden of dealing with them, the Law Society has warned.
The concern follows the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (SRA) consultation on changes to complaints-handling requirements. Under the proposed approach, clients would be given an expected timeframe for resolving their complaint when it is first submitted, alongside regular updates on its progress.
The Law Society supports the broader objective of improving the complaints process but has questioned whether introducing more prescriptive requirements would be proportionate. It argues that firms already have obligations to deal with complaints promptly and that additional fixed deadlines could create unnecessary administrative pressure.
The Society has also raised concerns about the growing use of artificial intelligence to produce complaints. Law firms and regulators are reportedly receiving complaints that can be significantly longer and more numerous as AI tools become more widely used. The Law Society believes further guidance would help complaints handlers deal with submissions that are repetitive, unclear or contain issues that require clarification.
A particular concern is the potential financial incentive created by a more demanding complaints process. Where the cost of investigating and responding to a weak complaint becomes greater than the amount involved, a firm could decide that making a goodwill payment is commercially easier than pursuing the matter. This could result in settlements that do not necessarily reflect the strength or validity of the underlying complaint.
The Law Society has therefore called for an approach that focuses on outcomes and realistic estimated timescales rather than rigid resolution deadlines. It has also suggested that any reforms should be proportionate and supported by evidence, particularly while firms are adapting to the challenges created by AI-assisted complaints.
The debate highlights the importance of maintaining an effective complaints system while ensuring that regulatory requirements do not create unintended consequences for law firms or undermine the reliability of complaint outcomes as an indicator of service quality.
For law firms and their clients, the proposed changes could therefore have a significant impact on how complaints are submitted, assessed and resolved if the SRA proceeds with reforms.
