LSB Research Reveals Troubling Statistic

The headline for recent research commissioned by the Legal Services Board says that as some firms charge less than others for the same work it "proves that shopping around for legal services can save the consumer money.".

But the underlying data is troubling -

Out of 1506 firms surveyed 631 confirmed that they either "occasionally", "often" or "very often" charged clients more than their original estimate. That is 41% of firms.

That is not to say that all such instances are cases of overcharging. There are a number of good reasons why an estimate might prove inadequate. Equally there a number of reasons why it ought at least to be taken into account in determining the final level of fee.

But in any event are clients given a sufficiently clear explanation ofthe difference between an estimate (which is not necessarily binding) and a fixed quote (which most certainly is)? Are they told why the estimate is no longer realistic before the solicitor goes "over budget"? To what extent do the 5% of respondents who go over budget "often" or "very often" explain that, in reality, their estimate is likely to have little bearing on the final bill? The survey is silent on those points.

Bearing in mind that the 41% comes exclusively from self-reported data, it is not difficult to conclude that in reality the true figure is much closer to and perhaps way higher than 50%.. If that is right then itis a major cause for concern, because it would suggest that whether or not a client can rely on the initial estimate really does come down to the toss of a coin!