Luke
Wish I could have had someone warn me against using them
I instructed Lawcomm Solicitors on 17 January 2026 for a straightforward property purchase. No chain, no estate agents, the seller was a family member, and I was already living in the property. Completion did not occur until 16 June 2026. Five months, for a transaction their own conveyancer described on our one and only call as straightforward. My assigned conveyancer contacted me once by phone, indicated completion should be achievable by end of February or shortly thereafter, and then never contacted me again. Weeks of emails and portal messages went unanswered. I discovered my case had been reassigned through an automated system log message, not a phone call or personal communication. I was only informed my conveyancer had left the firm after I filed a formal complaint, at which point Lawcomm acknowledged an automatic message notification should have been sent to me but appeared not to have been received. During this period, the draft contract pack had been sent by the seller's solicitors on 13 February 2026. In my experience, Lawcomm had no record of receiving it and had not proactively followed up on it for 18 days. I only identified this gap because I investigated it myself. In their own formal complaint response, Lawcomm acknowledged in writing that they should have chased for documents sooner and that communication had not been as expected by a valued client. The management pack required for the purchase had not been requested from the property management company by anyone. I contacted the management company directly, confirmed that no request had been received from any solicitor, formally requested the pack myself, paid for it, and distributed it to all parties within two days. These are tasks I should never have had to perform as the client (law comm suggests this should have been requested by the seller, which is fine if true, but as my representatives, they should have been asking for it, it took me requesting it directly and paying for it for anything to progress). After case reassignment, direct questions I raised went completely unanswered for days at a time. Correspondence was sent to me twice with an incorrect postcode, the second time after the error had already been acknowledged and confirmed as corrected on their system (the address they kept getting wrong was the address for the property they were managing the conveyance for. How they got that wrong, delaying communications as a result, is astounding). Responses to my queries only came after I escalated directly to the Head of Conveyancing on each occasion. The failures did not end at completion. A £150 Notice of Assignment fee, required to transfer the property into my name with the estate managers, was taken from me on 9 June 2026 by Law Comm. By 6 August 2026, nearly two months later, the funds had still not been transferred and the notice had not been sent. I sent four unanswered emails during this period. The estate management company sent two unanswered chasers of their own. It was only resolved after I copied every director and staff member I had contact details for into a single email. I filed a formal complaint in March 2026. Lawcomm's own complaints procedure requires a written response within 8 weeks. The Head of Conveyancing attempted to defer the complaint beyond that window without any prior agreement with me. When I challenged this directly and repeatedly in writing, asking for evidence of when this variation to the complaints timeline had been communicated to me, the question was avoided and was never answered. The individual who investigated the complaint was the Head of Conveyancing, who was directly named in the complaint itself and responsible for the department where the failures occurred. In my opinion, this does not represent an impartial complaints process. The outcome was a finding of no material wrongdoing on their part, which seems obvious since one of the people I was complaining about was assessing the complaint, and an offer of £150 in settlement. I raised this conflict of interest along with multiple points I disagree with, and one of their directors reviewed my complaint, only to side with the original department head’s findings. I am pursuing this matter with the Legal Ombudsman. In my experience, this firm does not communicate proactively, does not follow through on basic tasks without the client chasing, and does not manage its own complaints process correctly or impartially. I would not recommend them.
from Lawcomm Solicitors
We are sorry to read that your experience fell short of the standard of service we aim to provide. We take concerns regarding communication, case handling and complaint procedures seriously. We understand how frustrating this must have been and note that you are pursuing the matter with the Legal Ombudsman. We will engage with the appropriate process to address the concerns raised.
