Revealed: the Wills & Probate Practitioners most often up before the Ombudsman
These are the ten firms most often subject to decisions by the Legal Ombudsman with regards to wills and probate work.
In total there were 244 firms subject to a total of 279 decisions between 1st April 2015 and 31st March 2016.
Handley Brown LLP were subject to seven decisions, with the Ombudsman requiring a remedy in each case. This included two instances where the Ombudsman required the firm to pay compensation for emotional impact up to £4,999 for a failure to follow instructions, with another requiring them to refund fees up to £4,999 for a failure to follow instructions and a failure to progress.
Swinburne & Jackson LLP were subject to five decisions with a remedy required in each case. This included one instance of a delay and a failure to progress resulting in them being required to pay compensation of up £4,999.
Carter Devile were the subject of three decisions, each requiring them to pay up to £299 for a variety of reasons including a failure to keep informed, a failure to keep updated and costs information deficient.
Wards Solicitors: 3 decisions, no remedies required.
NAPTHENS LLP: 3 decisions, 1 remedy required.
Whitehead Monckton: 2 decisions, no remedies required.
BERKELEY SOLICITORS: 2 decisions, 2 remedies required.
WBW SOLICITORS LLP: 2 decisions, 1 remedy required.
THOMAS EGGAR LLP: 2 decisions, 1 remedy required.
PITMANS LLP: 2 decisions, 1 remedy required.
Several other firms were subject to two decisions, including Shakespeare Martineau, Penningtons Manches LLP, Millington Wallace LLP, John Hamilton Leyshon Solicitors, Montague Lambert & Company, Parabis Law LLP, Chaimberlain Martin Solicitors, Bkythe Liggins, Kitson & Trotman, Blockslegal LLP, Humphries Kirk LLP and Streeter Marshall.