Understanding complaints and early resolution opportunities

The latest episode of the Today’s Conveyancer podcast welcomes Senior Ombudsman at the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) Clair Daniel to explore the current landscape of legal complaints handling, the challenges facing firms, and the strategic work underway to improve first‑tier resolution across the legal sector.

The backdrop to the discussion is the increase in the number of cases in which LeO identify poor complaints handling, up from 46% in 2023/24 to 49% in 2024/25; and efforts to stop complaints at source by equipping firms to better deal with issues before they become complaints.

Daniel says demand for LeO’s services has risen sharply, across all areas of law, with several likely drivers: rising customer expectations shaped by instantaneous digital communication, cost‑of‑living pressures increasing the inclination to complain, and sheer volume of transactions. Communication and delay remain the two most common causes of complaint—together accounting for around 47% of complaints. Often, complaints arise from mismanaged expectations, such as unclear service‑level agreements or clients misunderstanding the steps and timeframes in transactions.

There is the increasing role AI plays in complaints to consider. LeO is increasingly seeing (as are firms) consumers rely on tools such as ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot to produce lengthy, formalised, and at times overly legalistic complaints, complete with copied‑and‑pasted case law. While understandable, this can hinder early, informal resolution. She encourages firms to avoid mirroring an escalated tone, instead refocusing on the core issue and maintaining a professional, calm approach.

Keen to dispel misconceptions about LeO Daniel reiterates the ombudsman is strictly impartial and supports firms as much as consumers, including dismissing complaints where service has clearly been reasonable. To help firms get matters right at first tier, LeO provides resources such as the technical advice desk, sector insights, and forthcoming Model Complaints Resolution Procedure, complete with templates and toolkits. A new learning platform with training and webinars is scheduled for 2026.

Listen in to hear more about LeO's attitude to setting and managing client expectations early, strategies to handle AI‑generated complaints effectively, and internal communication and processes that reduce escalation risk and improve client trust.

The Today's Conveyancer podcast can be found on your preferred podcast provider and also at www.todaysconveyancer.co.uk. Subscribe and listen in for all the latest conveyancing industry news and views. 

Thank you to our podcast sponsors LEAP Legal Software, Moneypenny and Compass.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:23

You're listening to the Today's Conveyancer Podcast, the leading source of information for residential property lawyers in England and Wales. Don't forget to subscribe and sign up to our free newsletter at today'sconveyancer.co.uk. You can also follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter.

SPEAKER_01 0:44

Hello, welcome to the latest Today's Conveyancer podcast. Today I'm delighted to welcome Claire Daniel, uh senior ombudsman, and uh topic of discussion today, although I suspect in 25 minutes to half an hour, we're not going to do it justice, is uh complaints and the current direction of travel, uh, the ombudsman, and just general kind of things that firms can take away, hopefully, from the course of the discussion to implement in their own organisations. There's a real focus at the moment, both from the regulator and from the ombudsman, on uh what they describe as first-tier response. So the ability of firms to respond to complaints and deal with them in the first instance before they even get to you, presumably, Claire.

SPEAKER_02 1:29

Absolutely.

SPEAKER_01 1:30

Fab to have you on the podcast. I hope I'm done a little bit of justice to the conversation. But in the first instance, uh useful to hear a little bit about yourself and your role at Leo, please.

SPEAKER_02 1:41

Absolutely. Thank you, David. Uh as you said, I'm Claire Daniel, uh a senior ombudsman at Leo. I've been with Leo for around 11 years, uh, and I've been a senior ombudsman for the whole of that time. I have a number of different roles within the senior ombudsman hat. So that includes uh working with our early resolution team and reviewing the complaints literally as they come through our door. I also work at the end of our process making final decisions on some of our most complicated cases. Besides that, one of my areas of expertise is I am the lead ombudsman expert for vulnerable customer issues. Interestingly, I'm also currently on to comment and leading on some work with a number of colleagues to develop and deliver a number of priority initiatives to improve tier one complaints handling across the sector, which is obviously why I'm talking to you today.

SPEAKER_01 2:30

Excellent. Well, let's get right into that then. As I said in the start, there's this big drive to improve that initial handling. And I know it's something that the Ombudsman are very keen to support firms with. Tell us a little bit about this second. What's the objective behind it?

SPEAKER_02 2:48

There's been a number of drivers for this. Critically, we have found an increase in poor complaints handling in cases with investigative outcomes over the last few years. In 23-24, um, 46% of cases with investigative outcomes had poor complaining, and that's increased um in 24-25 to 49% of cases. Those statistics, alongside a number of other issues, um, have been highlighted by the Legal Services Board, who are the oversight regulator for legal services in England and Wales. They issued a statement of policy with some requirements and guidance uh in May 2024, very much aimed at improving that tier one complaint handling across the sector. So that guidance isn't just for us, it's for all of the regulators. And we've been working together with all of those regulators to look at what we can do to improve complaints handling across the whole sector. So I said it isn't just stemming from the fact that we've seen unreasonable complaints handling in our casework. There's also a number of other concerning themes in terms of the number of cases that we see that haven't been raised with the service provider first. We call those premature cases, but also studies around customer awareness of how to complain. So we do see quite a high proportion of customers that either don't know how to complain or aren't sure. So putting all of those things together, as if the Legal Services Board uh has come out and tasked regulators with essentially finding the best possible complaints resolution system for legal services by using all of the tools that are available to us?

SPEAKER_01 4:36

Desperately making notes as we go along, Claire, because there's a huge amount to unpack there. In the first instance, why do you think, given your experience, that whether you might describe it as a downturn in the quality of complaints handling or perhaps customers have got higher expectations? I don't know where that barometer is, but why is it that you think the ombudsmen are receiving more complaints?

SPEAKER_02 4:59

That's a really never.

SPEAKER_01 5:00

Million-dollar question.

SPEAKER_02 5:01

Yeah, absolutely million-dollar question. Um, we absolutely are seeing more complaints. We are seeing quite a significant increase in demand for our services across all areas of law, more so even than I think we expected to see. We've actually come out recently with our uh business plan and budget consultation for the for the next year. It's available on our website. And one of the first questions that's asked in that consultation is what do respondents think is driving that demand? Because we're really interested in understanding the views from both the sector and our service users as to what is it that that's that's leading that increase in complaints. Absolutely. I think there are a range of potential answers. They do definitely include an increase in customer expectations. Technology, the speed of communication has really quite obviously changed what these customers expect in terms of information and communication from their service providers.

SPEAKER_01 6:01

Is that the main sort of bone of contention for people? I mean, I know we sort of hear about communication a huge amount in terms of the context of complaints, but that that's the kind of crux of the issue, is it, in a lot of these cases?

SPEAKER_02 6:14

It varies, but absolutely yes. The two main types of complaints that we see in terms of percentage are delay and communication. So around 47% of complaints are are either about delay or communication, or have an element of one of those two things in there. In addition to the customer expectation piece, there are a number of other drivers for demand. They are everything from you know just more people using legal services. Um, so there's actually a higher volume of transactions. They said may well be because we're seeing a higher propensity to complain because of cost of living pressures. It really is, as you say, the million dollar question. There could be lots of different reasons, and we are really, really keen to understand what is driving that demand and what we can do to help both customers and the sector deal with that increase in demand.

SPEAKER_01 7:09

It's very easy to sit here and say, well, you know, it's the law firm's fault and they're getting this all wrong, or something like that. But yeah, I I know that that's not the angle we've taught, we've prepped this discussion, you know, we're not going to bash the law firms here. But at the same time, what are they getting right? And then, you know, what are they getting wrong?

SPEAKER_02 7:26

They're getting lots of things right. And it's really important that we recognise that we see lots and lots of solicitors and and and other legal professionals that offer an excellent level of service and also do really, really good first-hate complaints handling, but we do also see some consistent themes in terms of what service providers get wrong. I've already said that the two main aspects of complaint, just in terms of volume that we see, are around communication and delay. One of the key things in both of those cases is around customer expectation and the management of those expectations. For example, on communication, not setting out clear clear SLAs at the beginning of a retainer. A lot of customers, because again, we use technology more than we used to, they'll they'll send a text message or an email and we'll expect an immediate reply or a same-day reply. And actually, that might not be the SLA that the service provider is working to. They might have a five-day turnaround, but if they've not highlighted that to the customer and it's not clear, then then that expectation has been mismanaged. The same is true in terms of, for example, delay. One of the really common areas that we see complaints in, uh, particularly in residential conveyancing, is in the leasehold space, because customers don't understand the difference between a freehold and a leasehold transaction and the different steps that might happen during that transaction. And because they've perhaps not had that explained to them, it hasn't been explained that the average timescale for dealing with those types of transactions may well be longer than the average timescale for a standard transaction. They go into it thinking, oh yeah, you know what, 16 to 18 weeks, that's me. And actually, then when it takes longer, they they complain because it's taken longer than they expected. But that's in part because it hasn't been explained to them that this is a different type of transaction and there may well be different things happening which extend the overall length.

SPEAKER_01 9:24

I know conveyancing has a bad rap when it comes to complaints, but equally, I know your data also shows that things like private client, family, even commercial, that the proportion of those complaints are on the increase, aren't they?

SPEAKER_02 9:37

We are getting increases across the board. Interesting though, said residential conveyancing, we have seen, particularly in quarter two of 25-26. We have seen uh an increase in the percentage of complaints that we're getting in this area, in particular. And it's actually the highest volume of complaints that we've accepted into about residential conveyancy in any quarter since Q1 of 24-25.

SPEAKER_01 10:04

Well, and that'll be related, presumably, to the stamp duty deadline and the fact that people miss out on their savings.

SPEAKER_02 10:10

Absolutely. There are there are certainly a number of reasons, but that will definitely be one of the drivers. And again, we we know obviously that because there are so many trap property transactions going on, that in itself will also drive complaints. And as if they are there across a whole range of reasons in that space.

SPEAKER_01 10:29

You mentioned that uh customers don't understand necessarily how to complain. Again, I know there's been a lot of guidance around this, but what are what are firms expected to do? I mean, at one point there was a suggestion that firms should publish all of their complaints as well.

SPEAKER_02 10:45

The key thing, obviously, is making sure that complaints handling procedures are signposted in accordance with the requirements of firms' regulators, because obviously regulators have have slightly different requirements, and that they are signposted at the key points in the transaction. But it's also really important that they are easy to find on websites and that where customers raise concerns, for example, outside of a publicised process, a lot of complaints handling procedures will say, if you'd like to complain, here's the email address to complain to. Some customers won't do that, they'll raise a concern with their case handler or another person working at the firm. And so it's important then if the firm are receiving complaints coming into other individuals other than that listed email, that they're then signposted in the right way, so that complaint does then get dealt with.

SPEAKER_01 11:35

Because there's a fine line, I suspect, between a grumble and a complaint. And when does a grumble become a complaint? And do you kind of see that in in the stories that you hear that the firm didn't take my grumble seriously enough and therefore it became a complaint?

SPEAKER_02 11:53

Absolutely, it's not a bright line. A complaint in our skin rules is defined as expression of dissatisfaction, which alleges a detriment. So it has to be I'm unhappy and it's caused an impact to me. And that's that dis the definition of a complaint. But as you say, you kind of have those kind of initial grumbles and gripes, which may not be clearly articulated as a complaint, but you're absolutely right. If they aren't then dealt with promptly, it can quite quickly escalate. So one of the most common things that we see, again, particularly in merchandise convenience, will be initial complaints of I've not heard back, I was expecting a reply, and I've you've not contacted me. And when they then do not get a response to that initial where are you I haven't heard, that then is escalated into a formal complaint.

SPEAKER_01 12:47

I mean, does Leo provide kind of best practice guidance around how firms might successfully communicate back to people that have sort of raised complaints? Is there standard wording that perhaps you recommend that that's used, or is there a standard process that you recommend that that firms go through?

SPEAKER_02 13:06

So we have uh a range of guidance available on our website in terms of good complaints handling and best practice. We're also in the process of developing our complaints resolution procedure, which is something we are currently working on and recently piloted with the sector, where we will be sharing both a procedure and some supporting guidance templates and toolkits to help service providers across the whole legal sector improve their complaints handling and really sharing the insight that we've got from dealing with so many complaints and doing complaints handling for a significant period of time and saying these are the things that we know work.

SPEAKER_01 13:48

And what you've explained there, from my understanding, there's a piece of work that the legal ombudsman is doing where you're going to waive the uh case fee, aren't you? But the this isn't quite the same thing.

SPEAKER_02 14:01

No, so we uh in 2051 we implemented a new way of reviewing incoming complaints, and what that means that we do is that every single complaint that comes to Leo is reviewed by a senior ombudsman right at the beginning, and we assess that complaint for whether or not it's suitable for resolution under our early resolution team. Cases that are most suitable for early resolution are cases that have a final response and where, if there is poor service, that's been recognised by a service provider and they they've made an offer to put it right, or where there has been no service failing, that that's clearly explained and supported with some examples or potentially a little bit of evidence. Cases that are resolved in our early resolution team do not incur a case fee. Anything that we are unable to resolve in early resolution still goes into our full investigation process. And really importantly, the one thing that will automatically guarantees something goes into that formal process is where a service provider hasn't provided a complaint response.

SPEAKER_01 15:04

Music to people's ears, no doubt. We're galloping through this, and there's so much to cover. Wanted to come on to the nature of the complaints that you receive. We've written about the increase in the number of complaints generated by artificial intelligence, people plugging into Chat GPT or Microsoft Copilot or any of the other AI agents that are out there. My lawyers said this. Is that right? And ChatGPT comes back with something that may or may not be particularly useful, and then simply copying and paste that over and saying, Well, look, this is what I my understanding of this scenario is.

SPEAKER_02 15:42

We are very aware of the increase of the use of AI tools in in complaints, and we have been talking to already started talking to the sector about what they're seeing, and again, how we can support them because what's really clear, particularly from AI-generated complaints, is that they tend to be longer, they tend to potentially be more um litigious, and the language that's often used isn't resolution focused, and so the complaints will they'll kind of immediately go into oh, here is some case law that that supports my position. And actually, when what you want is is for two parties to engage in a conversation where the complainant says, Look, this has gone wrong for me, and the service provider says, And how can I help you and how can I put that right? That's less easy if the initial complaint is 50 pages long and and cites case law and potentially uses language which is much more formal, and as a result, the service provider needs to respond to a a more detailed and longer complaint in a more formal way, and and that in itself can actually inhibit early resolution of complaints.

SPEAKER_01 17:01

I'm not sure that we've come to a conclusion or a resolution with this ourselves. This this is an incredibly difficult situation for firms to be in, then essentially, is what you're saying. And they should, to the best of their ability, try and introduce language that is going to lead to more of a resolution than you know create more of an issue for the sake of argument.

SPEAKER_02 17:24

Absolutely. We would very much recommend that service providers don't escalate in response to a more formal, escalated tone of formal complaints. And it is essentially trying to see through some of the perhaps the detail and the extra things that the AI chatbots are putting into those kinds of letters and say, Well, okay, I can see that you've raised a number of issues, but it's really clear that the central issue is still one of communication. We recognise there have been some issues, we're sorry about that. How can we put it right? Or alternatively, where there haven't actually been issues, perhaps explaining to the customer why it is they've got the wrong end of the stick. So, for example, um, it's entirely reasonable for a service provider not to talk to a customer if there's nothing new to tell them. Now, absolutely, if the customer's chasing, the service provider should respond to that. But they should also then manage expectations for that customer in terms of future correspondence. If it's a case of we know you want this transaction to progress, but actually we can't do anything until we've received information back from a third party, and just explaining that to the customer in terms of we're waiting, we're chasing, and this is when we expect to see a response. That explanation can then really take the heat out of that complaint.

SPEAKER_01 18:48

As much as it might be tempting to go back with something that's a bit glib.

SPEAKER_02 18:52

It's really important that we know that having a complaint made about about you, about your work is is unpleasant. And it's something that we know is difficult for service providers, particularly when they're working really hard, particularly when they're carrying high case holdings, and particularly when they're working on on lots of difficult and and you know fraught transactions. Um, but absolutely remaining professional and neutral and really focusing on resolution really is the way forward because we know from experience that that tone is absolutely critical to complainants, and it's much more likely that we will see a complainant choose to escalate to Leo rather than resolve at tier one if the tone of the formal response is more argumentative or difficult.

SPEAKER_01 19:46

And there's a role for managers there, isn't there, in protecting inverted commas their staff as well, and and whether it's taking it away off their plate or whatever it might be, but making sure that that they're not the ones that ultimately end up dealing with the complaint as well.

SPEAKER_02 20:00

So most firms have a separate complaint handling department, um, not all firms, because obviously sole practitioners they don't have that luxury. There is a role for other staff in in firms to support with complaint handling to ensure that that level of kind of neutrality can be brought into the process. And again, that focus on resolution can then be there.

SPEAKER_01 20:22

And in your experience, does that neutrality help with resolution?

SPEAKER_02 20:26

Really, really does. One of the things that that we see time and time again in complaint forms. So in in our complaint form, there's actually a section asking the complainant what it is they're looking for from our process. And one of the most common answers in that section is around they would like the firm's complaint handling to be looked at because they haven't had a good experience. So poor complaint handling absolutely definitely leads to additional escalation escalations.

SPEAKER_01 21:21

You may not appreciate the accusation, but there are perhaps times when firms don't feel as though uh Leo is particularly supportive of them. I know that that's something in the run-up to this discussion that you were very keen to kind of try and myth bust because you do support firms as much as you support clients in the cases that you handle.

SPEAKER_02 21:43

I mean, I I think the first thing to say is that Leo is a completely impartial service. So we do not take the side of either the service provider or the customer. Our job is to find a resolution where the parties haven't already been able to find a resolution themselves. And really importantly, there are lots and lots of things that we do to support the profession and share our insights with them. So, for example, one of the things that I do on a regular basis, I run our technical advice desk along with a colleague, and that is a service whereby service providers can come in and then they can ask us questions about how to handle a particular complaint or remedies or particular issues that they're seeing, and we will support them, we'll phone them or email them and give them some advice about what that good complaints handling might look like or answers to particular jurisdictional questions that are tricky. We also obviously are sharing our insights in a variety of different spaces so service providers can see what is going wrong and potentially how to put those right. I've also referred to the work that we're doing on our model complaints resolution procedure, which is another thing that we are doing. To share those insights and experience with the sector and say, these are the things that we've learned about what good complaints handling looks like. And here are some tools and some templates that we can share with you so that everybody can improve their complaints handling and yeah, potentially reduce the level of escalations to us at all.

SPEAKER_01 23:09

Is there a line in terms of Leo's view on offering compensation, whether it's justified or or not? And let's take a scenario where perhaps the firm could have done something a bit better, or could not, it's it's a little up in the air, but decide, look, we're going to make an offer to this client. Pardon the the sort of stump, the the the wording, but make make make them go away. You know, where does Leo sort of stand on should firms be making offers like that or should they be standing their ground and saying, no, do you know what? We've done everything by the book, and you know, we don't feel as though there's a there's a case to be answered here, but risk that case fee, risk that escalation to Leo and a case fee.

SPEAKER_02 23:51

I think the short answer is we understand that some service providers want to make commercial offers to resolve things, but our view very much is we don't encourage service providers just to throw money at that something to make it go away where their service has been reasonable. We can and do, through our early resolution process, dismiss complaints that we don't think have prospects of success. And that will include complaints where we can see really clearly that the service provider's service has been reasonable. There are lots of complaints that we don't uphold, and we've already talked a little bit around customer expectations, and we see complaints being escalated in part because the customer doesn't understand what's happened or why there's been a delay. That may well mean there is there has been a communication problem, but in terms of remedies, absolutely, it's entirely fair and reasonable for a service provider to say, I've done everything I should have done, and therefore not make an offer. And where they can can evidence and support their position, it's entirely possible that we would then also not take that all the way through our process because we can say, Yeah, absolutely, we can see that you've done everything that you should have done, that any issues that exist weren't down to you. A quick example of that actually is a case that I dealt with not so long ago related to a potential delay in a service provider's conveyance. But actually, it the issue had arisen because there'd been a cyber attack, case handling system had gone down, service provider had done everything they could do to keep the customers informed about what had happened. So the service provider were not responsible for the delay the customer experienced, and their communication around that had been absolutely reasonable. So the complainant obviously said, Well, my completion was delayed, but that wasn't the service provider's fault because the cyber attack that happened and the issues with their case management system were not down to anything that they had done. So we wouldn't, in that circumstance, uphold a complaint, and we were able to resolve that one by explaining to the customer that that wasn't something we would we would hold the service provider responsible for.

SPEAKER_01 25:58

And equally, if the service provider has made what you would regard as a reasonable offer, you'd uphold that.

SPEAKER_02 26:03

Potentially, yes. Any final responses that have got offers in will be considered by our early resolution team and we'll look at the reasonableness of that offer. Um, importantly, our remedies guidance is available on our website and it gives lots of information about the kinds of remedies that we would offer in different situations. So it covers remedies for impact, it covers cost-based remedies, and it also covers remedies for financial loss. I would encourage service providers very much to look at that remedies guidance, but also potentially to share it with customers because in being able to say we're offering you a remedy of£100 because we think that's in line with what the legal ombudsman would offer. And here's the legal ombudsman's guidance that we've used in deciding how much to offer you. Again, it's much more likely that will be accepted at first tier. And certainly, if that then came to us, as long as we were satisfied that offer was reasonable, we would also dismiss that through our early resolution process. Case would be closed and there wouldn't be a case fee associated with it.

SPEAKER_01 27:05

We are fast moving towards the end of the time that we have for the discussion. And I want to uh finish off on uh a topic that I know when I've talked about uh the legal ombudsman with people that that they've kind of struggled with a little bit, which is what might be described or what you describe as distress payments. So, as part of the compensation, there's an allowance for anguish or or inconvenience, whatever you kind of want to describe it as. It feels you'll put me right on this, I'm sure, but it feels as though there have been more decisions more recently that include these distress payments. But I might be wrong.

SPEAKER_02 27:43

Distress payments for distress or impact or inconvenience are something that we've we've always done. They've always been a significant part of any remedies that we've considered. And and sometimes they are the only remedy that's appropriate. So, for example, particularly in the conveyancing space, a lot of customers, when they complain, will will ask for costs, reductions, or refunds, and they'll say, I'm I'm I'm unhappy, I want my money back. But actually, if the the transaction is completed, the service provider has done the work that they should have done and they're entitled to be paid for that. But if there has been a service issue within that transaction, say for example, there's been some poor communication, a small recognition of the impact of that poor communication on the complainant is the kind of remedy that we'd be looking at. Remedies for impact are really considering was the complainant worried? Did they think they weren't going to be able to buy their dream house? Did they think they were going to have to pay some extra costs that they weren't previously aware of? Were they put to a particular inconvenience? Did they have to spend lots of time on the phone? Those are the kinds of things that those remedies are there to recognise. Um and we have three tiers of distress-based remedies in our remedies guidance. The vast majority of remedies that we direct in that space are what we call our modest awards, and that's up to£250. And those commonly are for short-lived distress or upset. We do obviously have a have a siding scale, and there are larger bands where that impact has been more serious and more significant. For example, in a case where a service provider has inadvertently shared an address with an ex-partner that they shouldn't have done, that will obviously generate a more significant level of payment because the impact coming from that is much more significant on the individual than a couple of days of worry of I don't know what's happening.

SPEAKER_01 29:41

Expertly navigated. Thanks very much indeed, Claire. Well, look, we we are really sort of out of time for the discussion. We've really meandered our way through the legal ombudsman. I'm very appreciative of uh your time. I mean, clearly there's a huge amount going on, both from a regulatory standpoint, as you say, from the LSB's point of view and its expectations of view, but also quite a bit of stuff that you're doing internally as an organisation as well.

SPEAKER_02 30:08

We are committed to sharing our insights with the sector, and we really want to do everything that we can do to take what we know and what we've learned and give that back to the sector to allow the sector to either improve or simply to change the way they communicate to, as I said, manage those customer expectations better. I've already touched briefly on our technical advice desk and the model compliance resolution procedure that we're developing, but we're also doing lots of other things. We've published a number of recent insight reports sharing our data. We've also started publishing a range of uh what we're calling our spotlight articles, which focus on particular issues that we're seeing and share case studies, again, with a view to showing the sector how we would consider particular issues. We are also in the process of putting together a new learning platform, uh, which is a platform for service providers to have access to a wide range of training and resources and access to webinars, and that's due to launch in 2026. So there's lots of things that we can do. And I would also uh give a final plug for that technical advice test that I mentioned before. There is information on how to use that available on our website, uh and that's a free service directly for service providers to ask us any questions about complaints handling, and that could be about Leo's process, or it could be about I've got a complaint and I don't know what to do. Can you help?

SPEAKER_01 31:35

Thank you very much indeed for being on the podcast, Claire. Massively appreciated. And hopefully, uh listeners have taken away something from today as well. So thanks very much indeed for sharing your insight.

SPEAKER_02 31:49

Thank you.

SPEAKER_01 31:50

The Today's Conveyancer podcast is available on your preferred podcast provider. It's also available on today'sconveyancer.co.uk. My thanks to Claire. Thank you as ever for listening, and we'll see you again soon.

SPEAKER_00 32:02

You're listening to the Today's Conveyancer Podcast, the leading source of information for residential property lawyers in England and Wales. Don't forget to subscribe and sign up to our free newsletter at today'sconveyancer.co.uk. You can also follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter.