The Bar Council has criticized proposed changes to the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) scheme, arguing that the reforms could worsen delays in resolving complaints instead of tackling the core problem: an unresolved backlog. The Office for Legal Complaints recently invited public feedback on rule adjustments, including case fees and publication policies, but barristers, who make up just 4% of LeO complaints, contend the plans are too sweeping and lack evidence of real impact.
Stephen Kenny KC, chair of the Bar Council’s regulation panel, said the proposed measures would pull LeO’s attention away from clearing the backlog. Many of the proposed changes, if implemented, will absorb LeO’s time and resources, and distract from addressing the backlog. That is why, in large measure, the Bar Council disagrees with what has been put forward thus far.
Read Also: Migrant status now default suspect in crime reports
Among the most contentious proposals is an increase in the flat fee for complaints, rising from £400 to a maximum of £1,500. The Bar Council warns this could encourage service providers to settle unfounded claims to avoid higher costs rather than improving complaint resolution. Additionally, the plan introduces a 12-year limit for complaints, which the Bar Council insists should be shortened to 6 years, in line with data retention policies and Bar Mutual cover. Late-discovered harm cases would still require case-by-case approval.