The 3 Most Common Complaints I Hear About Lawyers

Since moving into the role of Business Development Manager for Aptum a few months ago, I’ve been speaking with a lot of people who deal with lawyers. People in various industries and in various positions, including business owners, general counsel, and other lawyers.

But despite the ranging experiences I’ve heard about with dispute resolution and litigation lawyers, three common pain points have emerged again and again. ?

A big part of my role is to listen, understand and ask the right questions of potential clients so that I can work with the best available resources to help them effectively achieve their objectives. In service to that, I’ve been documenting these pain points, and looking for patterns to enable me to reflect on and improve our service delivery at Aptum.

These are the three most common complaints I hear about lawyers:

1. Communication (or lack thereof)

The most common complaint I hear about lawyers is poor communication. When someone is unhappy with their current lawyer, there has invariably been a breakdown in communication in some form.

One scenario occurs where a lawyer is extremely communicative at the beginning of the dispute, but then retreats to work the dispute to its end, only returning to the client for consultation or instructions once a resolution is proposed. Some clients might prefer this approach; however, the vast majority grow anxious without structured contact from their lawyer. Exclusion from the process is a common cause for uncertainty in the middle of disputes. This approach tends to trigger the most frustration when the resolution eventually proposed by the lawyer is distant from what the client initially expected.

Another communication complaint surrounds the flavour and regularity of lawyers’ updates. Many have told me that they will generally only hear from their lawyer when there is a positive update. This makes clients and other interested parties fear that a prolonged period without contact is a cause for concern. An ‘update with no update’ is preferred to no update at all. And, sometimes, being listened to is just as (or even more) important than being spoken to.

Clients who are inexperienced with litigation often report inadequate education from their lawyer. This surrounds things like litigation process, expectations around timing, but also a generally limited understanding of the reasoning behind important advice they receive, such as whether to accept settlement offers or not. There is greater hesitation in decision making when decisions are based on trusting the lawyer’s intuition, as opposed to clear and thorough explanations of legal analysis .

2. Fee proportionality

The second complaint I commonly hear relates to the fees invoiced by a lawyer not being proportionate to the sum of damages in dispute.

Most clients compare pricing between firms before engaging a lawyer. Though dissatisfaction arises where unforeseen costs are incurred such that the client would not have taken on the dispute to begin with. And research tends to back this up. The 2020 Victorian Legal Service Board and Commissioner Annual Report shows that disputes about legal costs are the most common complaint they receive about lawyers (accounting for 31% of all complaints).

I have understood certainty around legal budget as a top important priority for businesses following the impacts of COVID-19.

I’ve also discovered that concerns about proportionality is a common reason for clients to avoid pursuing their dispute altogether. A few conversations have even revealed that when considering litigation, clients are just as mindful of their own lawyer as they are the opposing party (which is troubling considering that a client and their lawyer are supposed to work as a ‘team’). Again, this seems a widespread issue. The Clio 2018 Legal Trends Report shows that the top three reasons for a client’s decision not to engage a lawyer relate to uncertainties around costs and cost transparency. When lawyer and client interests are not aligned (i.e. a law firms performance metrics and remuneration are inconsistent with a client’s needs and expectations), clients are cynical of the value a lawyer will provide .

3. Lack of proper analysis

Finally, the third complaint I hear about lawyers is a failure to undertake a thorough analysis at the beginning of a dispute, and then again throughout the lifespan of a dispute (or, apparently, at all).?

Often in commercial litigation, clients will approach lawyers with a grievance – a legal problem fuelled by emotion. But a grievance doesn’t always amount to a legal cause of action .?What can happen when a lawyer mirrors the significance of this emotion without effectively assessing a dispute at the outset, is a rapid cumulation of costs and time that doesn’t necessarily contribute to an effective resolution. In fact, often, it results in an eleventh hour need to extricate the client from the dispute – often via a less-than-commercial settlement offer.

For clients, this can manifest as frustration with their lawyer once 6-12 months pass in a dispute without any meaningful progress, or sight of any resolution. Clients become dissatisfied when they sense there is no strategy for achieving their objectives, and again, if the final result is far from what their lawyer initially assured.

I am always interested in hearing people’s experiences with litigation and discussing new and alternative approaches to resolve commercial disputes. If you want to reach out, connect with me on Linkedin , or contact me here .