header-logo header-logo

04 October 2013
Issue: 7579 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Is it good to talk?

Lawyers’ telephone technique loses them clients

A mystery shopping exercise among law firms of all sizes has revealed a catalogue of telephone inefficiencies, missed business opportunities and inappropriate comments. 

In more than a third of 254 “mystery calls”, neither party knew who they were talking to because the caller’s name was not taken and the call handler did not introduce themselves.

In 97% of the calls, the call handler failed to either ask if the caller wanted to go ahead or make an appointment. 93% of firms called during lunchtime either had nobody available to deal with the enquiry or were closed with a recorded message.

Telephone bloomers include one call handler who told a potential client: “Yes, a broken ankle is a very good injury…and if you are lucky, it will develop complications and you can claim more.”

Another potential clients was told: “If it’s a quote you want for a will, you should know we don’t do cheap wills. You see the problem with doing cheap wills is that there is very little profit on it, until people die and often it’s a long time before that happens.”

The research, by Ian Cooper, a business development consultant for the legal profession, included interviews with senior management in 92 law firms about strategy.

Cooper found that 70% of firms made no attempt to formally track and monitor incoming new enquiry calls and conversion rates, and nine out of 10 people who dealt with incoming potential client calls admitted to not liking it or not being good at it.

However, 90% of firms who trained their staff in how to deal with potential clients benefited from at least a 10% improvement in conversion rates within a month.

Cooper said: “It is quite amazing that at a time of massive competitive pressure and changes in the legal sector, law firms have not yet fully embraced the importance of converting their leads into profitable business. Most firms don’t have a proper strategy and have simply not switched on to the fact that this is a high priority area, which is costing them business.”

Issue: 7579 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll