header-logo header-logo

Ombudsman changing the rules

10 September 2015
Issue: 7667 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The Legal Ombudsman has launched proposals that would allow it to become an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) entity—and give clients a longer time to lodge complaints.

From 1 October 2015, under EU legislation, legal services providers must “signpost” consumers to an ADR entity that is competent to handle their complaint. In order to be compliant with the ADR Regulations, the Legal Ombudsman needs to change its rules, hence the consultation.

Under the ADR Regulations, the entity can refuse to deal with a complaint if it is brought more than 12 months after the trader tells the consumer it cannot resolve their complaint.

Currently, consumers must bring their complaint within six months of being told in writing by their lawyer to take it to the Legal Ombudsman, or within 12 months if that time span is specified in the lawyer’s letter.

The consultation also proposes changes to the grounds on which the Legal Ombudsman can refuse to handle complaints.

Issue: 7667 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll