Why demonise legal comparison websites?

All that was mentioned in the papers for that meeting was the plan by several frontline regulators, including the SRA, to launch a consumer website going by the subdued name of ‘Legal Choices’. The new site will have a slogan which some consumers could find uncomfortable if taken too literally, as it pledges to “put you in the driving seat with your lawyer”. That’s not the only problem with it though.

The SRA’s director of inclusion Mehrunnisa Lalani put board members’ minds at rest when she assured them that “this will not be a TripAdvisor or a Solicitors From Hell”.

Now, neither the profession nor consumers benefitted from Solicitors From Hell, but it is a pity that the regulator appears to dismiss the idea of a web-based comparison tool for consumers.

Sure, some comparison websites have given the word ‘comparison’ a bad name, but consumers are getting more savvy and don’t take any old recommendation for granted – that’s if they ever really did.

Deep down, aside from allowing consumers to compare prices, these sites are about standards and service. They will exist in the legal sphere before long, whether they are developed by an official organisation or by private companies.

The Legal Services Act has had one major unintended consequence: all the bodies it has created have been trying to convince the profession, and to a lesser extent the public, that they are David Clementi’s heirs.

The resulting tug of war has been accelerated by the government’s review of legal services, which has nudged these various bodies into a race for legitimacy.  The race will be won by the one that demonstrates both to the profession that it can uphold the highest professional standards and to consumers that it makes legal services accessible. This is where comparison websites come in.

Already some referral sites offer an element of comparison based on customer feedback, including star-rating. And what’s LeO’s complaints register if not a comparison website in the making?

Putting the consumer first is not an alternative to upholding the highest professional standards. Consumers’ purchasing habits have changed, they spend time online, and comparison websites can be what the Consumer Panel calls “empowerment tools”. There is nothing the profession or the regulators can do about that. And instead of fearing the negative impact these sites can have, the profession and legal interest groups should start thinking about how lawyers can really use them to their advantage.

So rather than demonise these sites and potentially leave it open to other Solicitors From Hell to occupy that space, regulators and quasi-regulators should take the lead and set a credible benchmark for the comparison of legal services online. It could empower not just consumers but the profession too.