Mr H had a negative experience with the firm as they did not communicate with him in the way he requested...
Mr H instructed the firm to pursue a personal injury claim. Mr H’s injuries and health conditions meant he found it difficult to read and write. He said he told the firm that they needed to communicate with him verbally, but they failed to do so.
Mr H felt that the firm had not supported him and complained that the firm failed to follow instructions as they continued to send him letters.
We decided that the firm’s service was unreasonable as they did not handle Mr H’s requests for reasonable adjustments as well as they could have. The firm knew of Mr H’s condition from the start of the retainer and although Mr H specifically asked for calls, this did not always happen.
We accept that some written correspondence will need to be sent to clients. However, the firm could have called Mr H to explain the contents of the letters that were being sent to him, which they did not always do. In those instances, Mr H had to chase them.
The evidence also showed that the firm delayed in telling Mr H about the additional support he could have received, such as a litigation friend.
The firm’s service did not impact Mr H’s claim, but it did affect his experience. Mr H experienced repeated inconvenience by having to chase the firm but the impact of this was short lived. To remedy this, we proposed that the firm pay Mr H £250 compensation for the emotional impact.
Both the firm and Mr R accepted the ombudsman’s decision.
Guidance: Our approach to determining complaints | Legal Ombudsman
Guidance: Our approach to putting things right | Legal Ombudsman
