Simpson Millar LLP

I had a genuinely disappointing experience with Simpson Millar. After providing detailed information about my case and engaging with their enquiries team, my case was abruptly closed without any proper explanation or assessment. I then received a generic email stating they “didn’t want to disturb me” and had therefore decided to close my enquiry. This made no sense — I had not asked them to stop contacting me, nor had I disengaged. In fact, I was actively waiting for an update. I responded immediately to challenge this and asked for clarification, but no meaningful explanation was provided. There was no attempt to review the case, no feedback, and no transparency about why it was dropped. This raises serious concerns about their internal process: -Cases appear to be closed arbitrarily without client consent -There is no clear communication or accountability -Enquiries are not properly assessed despite clients taking time to submit details For a firm that promotes professionalism and client care, this experience was the opposite. It felt like my case was simply discarded without consideration. If this is how initial enquiries are handled, it does not give confidence in how they would manage a live case where communication and diligence are critical. Very disappointing.

I had an extremely disappointing experience with Simpson Millar Solicitors. After four years, my case was ultimately dismissed due to a lack of evidence and poor-quality specialist reports. This outcome was incredibly frustrating given the amount of time invested. Throughout the entire four-year period, I was constantly chasing for updates and progress. Communication was very poor, and there was no sense of continuity — I had approximately 12–13 different case handlers, which made the process chaotic and disorganised. The handling of my case caused me a great deal of unnecessary stress and anxiety. I never felt properly supported or informed, and the service fell well below what I would expect from a professional legal firm. Due to the unacceptable level of service, I am now referring Simpson Millar to the Legal Ombudsman. I would not recommend this firm to anyone seeking reliable, competent legal representation.

Dear Maya I hope you are well. Thank you for recent email forwarding invoice. I have had a barrage of emails of no communication, unfortunately I've been unwell last week certainly not responding to emails. I find this clearly incorrect as I have made a payment recently the sum of £1500 which I have clearly stated it was payable to you despite the major error you made with FDR and furthermore the previous amount which has been pending from when Neelam mall was Acting on my behalf which I mentioned to David Lister, Head of Family Law Department and was advised not to speak to the accounts department, I had raised my concerns about work not been done by Neelam and not only that she was not charging me for any emails which you will be able to see from WIP sheets unfortunately her moving over to your firm was counter intuitive to her family life as she had to address several departments and that was too much for her ( As she clearly stated ) and that's why she decided to move firms again which was a smaller firm. I became aware that Neelam did not carry out any work from the previous FDR which was in January 2022. I did not hear from her until 24th of February 2022 in the assumption that she was chasing the other party and surveyors as she advised in an email which was in relation to an outstanding bill which I settled immediately, it was a 35 day deadline no response from other party but I decided to contact them myself and was advised no correspondence was made by Neelam which at that point I was very concerned, I instructed her not to chase anything as I had corresponded with them myself and found that she was being untruthful unfortunately. ( I have email threads of our conversations though some were telephone conversations). when leaving Neelam asked during telephone conversation that she was moving firms again and to sign form to transfer to new firm and that I was to pay balance of £650 as she was reducing it from £1500 by this time I was very disturbed and distressed by her behaviour this was clearly I believe negligence and incompetent as she had not done any work as instructed. Since Neelam's departure from the firm nobody has addressed this matter and I've been ignored despite me informing yourself but no correspondence from anyone. In regards to you discussing to continue acting on my behalf, I instructed you not further contact because I did not just want to pay for correspondence with yourself. I instructed you for results, with an excellent bio of expertise you have not delivered any of the services unfortunately. Our communication has been mainly via emails which not sufficient and major errors were made as you aware in regards to last FDR which you incorrectly calculated my earnings and inserted on E1 form which should have been completed with changes failing to confirm with me, which led to me being coerced into negotiating at hearing and matters persisted further as I wasn't aware of the incorrect figures until mention by Mr. Sawar, lack of competency on your behalf and better position for the other side as my wages exceeded Mr Hayats. what also came to my attention was that second FDR was not required and could have been advised by you but you failed to do so, I asked you to blind copy me into everything but only on two occasions. There were so many other errors when I asked you over telephone conversations about likely outcomes or reading my whole file as you initially charge me for reading but couldn't really advise over phone call or despite me attending office also very concerning which I was quite alarmed as you just sent me information which already in the court bundle no definitive answers from yourself. I've also emailed you in regards to the major errors and conversation in office and you didn't think that this is inappropriate and simply decided to ignore it. Also, when I attended the office you didn't know much about my file when I asked questions. the recent ones were where you were asking me for documents which were already on file this in reference to " have you had a Decree Absolute also could you provide non molestation order this was very concerning as they were on file and many other documents. I did mention that this matter would be later address as at this point in was exhausted and very exasperated and confused as to what I should do with you and the firm as I had already been through enough. You asked me for dates I was not available for court in August but later advised next year in March 2023 I believe that's because I prepared section 25 statement as you clearly demonstrated from the FDR, a lack of client care. What has also come to my attention is as to why you were persistent on emails as they were incurring excessive charges as you can recall you were advising me to have a video meeting rather than in person. This is not ethical way of working and no client care it is also, a misconduct of business. It's unfortunate that I was not in the best states of mind as well as being in a very vulnerable state of mind which you have clearly taken advantage of (my circumstances) as well as misleading me with information. Just so you could build on your retainer fees until I realised that I'm merely paying to correspondence. I'm glad I picked up on your inappropriate behaviour since the FDR and most recently when you were asking for documents which you clearly already have on file, sadly my cause for concern was when you asked me for non-molestation document and absolute decree that demonstrates that you did not read all my file. I realized from there on wards there's no compassion or empathy on your behalf even though I explained to you what I've been through. You have oversold and under delivered your services. I will reference this in regards to your performance with as an associate solicitor and an excellent bio, overselling and underperforming with no integrity as you have demonstrated in work ethics. The total balance that you are referring to is incorrect as if you check your previous emails, you revised the new bill. After your recent email these fees you are trying to add clearly indicates your level of competency as you have not worked on my case as much as the outrageous fees added and have caused me inconvenience combined with excessive amount of stress that I do not need. You mentioned all of the work, most of fees are just emails. The cap of £600 was due to myself instructing as there wasn't much work on your behalf to be carried out except email correspondence. I'm well within my rights to make queries for work and payments I have never asked or questioned until what happened at FDR you made it questionable due to poor inappropriate unprofessional behaviour. I'm your client who is paying you for services I can assess if inappropriate charges are being made. In regards to final hearing you are not a solicitor whom I would instruct for the conduct of my case. In regards to offers Mr. Hayat has a clear stance as you are fully aware. As a solicitor you are lacking in your role, lacking in communication also lacking in client care the list can go on and its imperative to understand your role. I was concerned the moment you made major error and realised that you can't work to the standards that you stated clearly you only has best interests in mounting excess amount of fees. I felt due to the errors made our professional relationship had broken down since FDR and no longer have any confidence in your work, I may have been vulnerable and been through DMV however, I have a great attitude of understanding, I hope you can understand and appreciate as to why I'm rescinding my services from you and your organisation. Could you please kindly revise invoice immediately along with ensuring there is no further inconvenience caused. I kindly ask that you compensate me for all the difficulty and undue stress that has been caused, my time that has been wasted along with the cost of the FDR whereby major error was clearly made by you, also you could have advised for a final hearing but fail to do so again no client care. Could you kindly send all my file via email or post immediately please.

This law firm failed to carry out work we instructed them to do on our behalf and of which they accepted payment - due to an incredibly short sighted decision by Greg the CEO to protect its clients from financial ruin myself and my partner now find ourselves on the verge of homelessness and we are now being completely blanked by the company! AVOID USING this company at all costs when there are far more competent alternatives around.

After six months Simpson Millar Solicitors, we’re unable to complete a simple Will. They have lost important documents, not answered emails or phone calls and complaints have been ignored. Don’t use this firm if you want anything done.

I recently used this solicitor for my hearing claim and was extremely impressed throughout the entire process. Professional, knowledgeable, and always quick to respond to any questions or concerns I had. They kept me fully informed at every stage and handled everything efficiently and confidently. I would highly recommend their services to anyone looking for a reliable and professional lawyer.

Simpson Millar Solicitors have been fantastic in handling my negligence claim. From the first contact, their communication was clear and professional, and I always felt informed about my options. I would especially like to thank my solicitor, Emily Roberts, whose hard work and expertise were key in achieving the best compensation outcome. She explained everything in simple terms, kept me updated, and was supportive throughout what could have been a stressful process. I genuinely appreciate everything she did and would not hesitate to recommend Simpson Millar to anyone.

I had an extremely disappointing experience with Simpson Millar Solicitors. After four years, my case was ultimately dismissed due to a lack of evidence and poor-quality specialist reports. This outcome was incredibly frustrating given the amount of time invested. Throughout the entire four-year period, I was constantly chasing for updates and progress. Communication was very poor, and there was no sense of continuity — I had approximately 12–13 different case handlers, which made the process chaotic and disorganised. The handling of my case caused me a great deal of unnecessary stress and anxiety. I never felt properly supported or informed, and the service fell well below what I would expect from a professional legal firm. Due to the unacceptable level of service, I am now referring Simpson Millar to the Legal Ombudsman. I would not recommend this firm to anyone seeking reliable, competent legal representation.

Extremely Disappointing Service My case was taken on February 25, and since then, I have experienced a complete lack of progress and communication. Over this period, the matter has been passed between four different solicitors, despite the fact that it involves life-changing injuries. Each time the case changes hands, weeks are lost while the new solicitor reviews the file, causing unnecessary delays. Despite being the appointed professionals, Simpson Millar has made no meaningful effort to gather evidence or advance the case. All evidence submitted has been sourced, chased, and provided by me personally. Their involvement has been minimal at best. To make matters worse, I recently received a letter stating that they will no longer be progressing the case, leaving me with just over a year to bring this matter to court. This is unacceptable given the time already wasted. I strongly advise seeking alternative legal representation—even at a higher cost—if you want a competent and proactive approach. Based on my experience, Simpson Millar has failed to deliver even the most basic level of service

5 years and 5 solicitors. It seems that there's was no continuity as every time a new solicitor was appointed files were missing so had to be requested again. One had different views to another. Hopefully never have to go down the clinical negligence route again but if I do, I wouldn't use Simpson Millar.