Brethertons LLP

Brethertons agreed with the Legal Ombudsman’s proposed outcome November 2025 that they made an error, did not rectify the error and were unreasonable. These findings are significant to me because they address both the original drafting error and the firm’s response when I tried to have it corrected. I relied on that understanding and the firm did not say otherwise until very recently. 
Quotes directly from The Legal Ombudsman (LeO) Case Assessment.
 LeO's email 2.12.25 'I am writing to let you know that Brethertons have accepted my case decision.' 

‘1. The firm failed to identify an error with the currency detail on the consent order

2. The firm failed help rectify this error when Ms M identified it in 2022
Ms M says she wants the firm to admit they made an error as this has cost her thousands of pounds.
Following my investigation I have found the firm’s service to have been unreasonable, and I have upheld both complaints. For the reasons explained below.’

‘The firm had the right information but drafted the order incorrectly’

‘2. The firm failed help rectify the error when Ms M identified it in 2022’

Brethertons then helped me represent myself in court to correct their error.

‘2.18 Ms M transferred £167 to the firm on 24 August and the following day the firm confirmed they had amended the application as she had requested and now needed her address and her ex-husband’s address before the application was sent to court.’

The court could not locate this application, I was told it was sent to Liverpool but it should have been Bury St Edmunds. Brethertons refunded the money to my account after 2 years in 2025 before the LeO investigation.

‘2.24. 
LeO was provided with a copy of a letter which the firm sent to the court on 9 November 2022. This explained that the firm were acting in an advisory basis.
Ms M had been told that the application from August 2022, could not be located, and she had been advised to submit another one, which the firm were now doing.'

When I called the court the second application was not in process I told them that I was LiP and that Brethertons had paid for and submitted the application. Brethertons had also written a cover note for this application saying they were assisting me. The Court told me that it may have been binned and that a law firm cannot help or pay for a LiP.

My third application to court to address the Error with a ‘slip rule’ was accepted, I had posted and paid the fee and it was not rejected.

‘2.32 Once Ms M had highlighted the error to the firm they should have realised that they had made an error and although Ms had not originally identified this, I do consider that the firm should have taken some responsibility for the mistake and sought to assist Ms M. 
As it was the firm seemed to want to lay the blame onto Ms M for not identifying the error. I do not consider this to be acceptable as a firm should draft documents
accurately. I therefore find that the firms service was not of a reasonable standard, and they should have assisted Mrs M further.’

‘R.1. As shown in the sections above the firm had the right information but drafted the order incorrectly and when this was highlighted to them at a later point did not take action to assist Ms M as she tried to rectify the matter. I find the firm’s service was not of a reasonable standard and I have upheld both complaints.
Case Decision
Following my investigation I have found the firm’s service to have been unreasonable, and I have upheld both complaints.’

After LeO case agreement I wrote to Brethertons seeking an apology, but did not receive a response. I subsequently sent a letter of claim to DWF, its insurer. Brethertons eventually set out its arguments in response being 2 letters and rejecting my claim.
I then I paid a highly respected independent law firm to assess merit and they considered ‘Brethertons' arguments that your claim is barred because of the Legal Ombudsman process to be weaker than they suggest.’ 

I put forward a loss-of-chance argument, as I believe the drafting error affected my ability to obtain the money I understood I was entitled to under the Consent Order. 
Brethertons have rejected my claim and the concerns I raised have not been resolved. 
In Sept. 2026 Brethertons have now said it does not agree with LeO findings. 

I am still seeking accountability.

I used Bretherton’s to deal with my divorce. From beginning to end my solicitor, Dominic Wisdom, was professional, personable, very organised and proactive, very quick with communication and felt like a truly safe pair of hands. I recently had to make contact with him again in relation to another matter and, again, he was very helpful, informative and personable.

My experience with Dominic W. was disappointing. Written work contained avoidable errors that I had to correct, and at one point another person had to check his work, which I paid for again. After my finance form was disclosed, discussions felt increasingly focused on fees, and at times he seemed overly friendly with the opposing solicitor. Money was requested frequently, and without a clear cost breakdown I couldn’t understand what work was being done. Despite spending a significant amount, my matter was left unfinished, and I had to resolve issues myself at critical moments, including hours before a hearing. The complaints process did not feel supportive, and I did not feel taken seriously. I ultimately reported the issue to the Legal Ombudsman. Based on my experience, I would not return to this company and would prefer to manage matters independently. I would also advise others to double‑check itemised bills carefully.

During the process I found my allocated solicitor Lottie Dunkley very helpful in all arears. She kept me informed of all stages and was always ready help when I called to speak to her, no matter how small the enquiry was. I was very happy with the service during a difficult time

When we dealt with you we found you were very efficient, and helpful.

Had an appointment yesterday with Daniel Cridge. He was very helpful, totally put me at ease and explained everything thoroughly. Highly recommend!

good and efficient service very professional

Lottie and Julia are absolute stars the keep you updated regularly and help you with any queries no matter how small If you are moving house they are definitely the go to people

This firm is excellent. We have had experience of Brethertons during bereavement as the firm handled our late Aunt’s estate; and now with the Conveyancing team for our recent house purchase. Daniel in Conveyancing is thoughtful, professional, empathic when things don’t go according to plan and just excellent really. He also makes himself available - none of that ringing round trying to get hold of your solicitor. Very responsive and deals with matters quickly. I have so much confidence in Brethertons and can thoroughly recommend Daniel Cridge, Emma Morris and Sarah Spiby in the Conveyancing department. Also Amber Morris who dealt with our late Aunt’s estate. Five stars!

I had the misfortune of using Brethertons following the death of my mother, and have been absolutely appalled by the poor communication from my solicitor which had a direct impact on progress being significantly slow and frustrating during this already difficult period. I had to constantly chase my solicitor both over the phone and email, even needing to call through to the main reception and complain about my emails going unanswered for over a month before he would get back to me. My assigned solicitor didn't chase the other parties involved when he said he would, directly leading to delays on the important matter. You should be able to trust they'll do what they say without babysitting them. He was also promoted to lawyer during this time, which is absolutely astounding to me based on his work on my account. Just to illustrate this further, I received an email yesterday (13th July) from my solicitor to close up the account, something he told me he was going to do on the 1st of April! Not surprised but disappointed. I'm sure some services are fine, but avoid wills and probate.