I instructed the Hampstead branch and worked with a partner (Jennifer Moore) and junior solicitors. The firm was aware from the outset that I was working within a limited budget. After the instruction, fees increased, and the solicitor assigned to my case was replaced by a more senior one, which significantly increased my costs.In my experience, the partner on the matter was frequently unavailable, resulting in delays and a heavy reliance on junior staff with limited supervision. I did not receive clear or proactive strategic advice and often had to research issues myself and ask specific questions to understand the implications of decisions being made.Errors occurred when matters were not closely monitored, which then required additional chargeable work to correct. Some of these issues had lasting negative consequences for my case. I was repeatedly advised that certain steps would be quicker or more cost-effective, only to be told later that this was not possible.I requested interim financial relief (MPS/LSPO) at the very beginning, yet it took around five months with no clear explanation. By that point, I was financially exhausted and in debt. Costs consistently exceeded estimates, and there was limited tangible progress relative to the fees incurred.At one stage, the firm was unaware of a scheduled court date and instead arranged a private FDR shortly beforehand, stating it would be faster. I was not properly advised on how binding certain agreements would be, which left me locked into an outcome that was later difficult to challenge due to vague drafting.The entire LSPO budget was exhausted before the work was completed, and shortly after I raised concerns, the firm terminated the retainer.Overall, I felt the service I received did not justify the cost, particularly given my circumstances at the time. Based on my experience, I would strongly advise others to carefully consider alternative firms before instructing this one.Also, I would strongly encourage anyone who is dissatisfied with their experience to raise concerns with the Legal Ombudsman.As a reply to Rayden’s reply: They were already provided a long detailed list of feedback, and as a reply, they said they’re satisfied with the service they provided and the result achieved and they terminated the retainer due to criticism without finalising the process. 50/50 is not a result to achieve but where the negotiation starts (and I was the disadvantaged party with a strong case) and I’ve spent more than £90k and wasted more than a year. So, unless they intend to improve, I believe the public should be aware. That’s why I wrote this comment. I never wish for anyone else to experience this.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
