Customer service - survey results

Advice and assistance survey results

First published March 2003 in The Recorder issue 36

We undertook a survey of civil advice and assistance users in December 2002. The purpose of this was to give us more information about what users of advice and assistance wanted, and how the outcome of the help they obtained under advice and assistance, and the service they received from their solicitors and the Board, matched up to their expectations.

The survey was issued to 2,750 people who had received civil advice and assistance or civil ABWOR between 1 January and 30 August 2002. 407 people returned their completed questionnaires by the deadline, in line with what we were hoping for, particularly given the fact that 303 surveys were eventually returned as ‘undeliverable’ by the Royal Mail.

Introductory meeting with solicitor

Generally, respondents were satisfied with the amount of information on various aspects that they were given at their introductory meeting with the solicitor. However, there were small pockets of dissatisfaction, where respondents felt that they were supplied with ‘too little’ information on:

• what would and would not be provided under advice and assistance (19%);

• how much the case might end up costing them (19%);

• their financial eligibility (14%);

• the process of applying for advice and assistance (10%).

18 people, (4%) felt they were provided with ‘too little’ information on all four aspects.

Financial issues

Respondents were asked a number of questions about financial issues, including the contribution. Respondents were asked whether their solicitor had collected any contribution –15% (58 people) replied ‘yes’. It should be noted that this was in fact the smallest group; 65% of respondents had not had any contribution collected by the solicitor, whilst a sizeable 21% did not know or could not remember. Although there is no information regarding this, the surprisingly large size of this group may reflect confusion about other payments (for instance, for civil legal aid, for work ineligible for legal aid undertaken privately or other reasons).

Fourteen respondents who were recorded as having not been assessed with a contribution stated that their solicitor had collected a contribution. Although it was specified in the question that this did not include any contribution paid towards civil legal aid it is impossible to say whether or not respondents had become confused by this, or by payment from property recovered or preserved. Twelve of these 14 respondents were satisfied with their overall experience of advice and assistance.

Satisfaction with advice and assistance

Respondents were asked what they had originally hoped to achieve by seeing a solicitor. ‘Obtaining information about legal rights’, ‘having someone to help solve the problem’ and ‘obtaining advice about ways to solve the problem’ were almost equally important. In each case around 50% of respondents selected these options (respondents were allowed to select more than one option). ‘Finding someone to solve the problem on my behalf’ was seen as less important, only 36% had hoped to achieve this.

In terms of outcome, the majority of respondents felt they had achieved what they had hoped to in terms of their broad aim(s) above. Those who wanted to obtain information about their legal rights were most successful (83% felt they had achieved this), compared with 66% who felt they had found someone to help them solve the problem. However, not achieving the original aim does not mean that nothing was achieved – for instance 61% of those who had originally wanted to find someone to help them solve the problem felt that they had obtained information about their legal rights, and 57% thought they had obtained advice about ways to solve the problem. It should be noted that these may well also have been their original aims. Despite this, a small proportion of respondents did feel that their experience of advice and assistance had not achieved anything. This may indicate a failure of some stage of the process, although it should be recalled that if their case is still actively on-going their perceptions of what was achieved may alter in the future.

87% of respondents stated that advice and assistance had had a positive impact on their understanding of legal and other solutions to problems (they understood a ‘little’ or a ‘lot’ more).

A total of 71% felt that receiving advice and assistance had made their problem a ‘lot’ or a ‘little’ better, although 6% (22 respondents) stated that it had made it a ‘lot’ or a ‘little’ worse. The majority of these (18 respondents) had cases that were not felt to be concluded, either because the solicitor had applied for civil legal aid or because the respondent had not yet taken further action. Overall, satisfaction with advice and assistance is relatively high; over half (57%) described themselves as ‘very satisfied’ with their experience of receiving advice and assistance and a further 26% were ‘fairly satisfied’. However 8% described themselves as being ‘fairly’ or ‘very’ dissatisfied.

There were a total of 108 suggestions for improving the advice and assistance service. The two most common were: ‘it could take less time’ (21 responses) and ‘to have been treated better / the same as those who pay for it themselves’ (18). There were also many comments relating to aspects of information provision:

• pre-advice and assistance, respondents felt they would like ‘more information on how to get a good solicitor’;

• in terms of initial information, 8 felt they would have liked more information on costs, 3 on eligibility and 6 would have liked less complex forms or provision of leaflets to explain the forms;

• throughout the case, there were 13 requests for regular contact / updates / case reviews from solicitors, and 12 relating to a need for increased openness / support.

Conclusion

Overall, satisfaction with the experience of civil advice and assistance is high, with the majority of people achieving their aim(s). There are some issues regarding lack of information or lack of awareness. Whilst the majority of respondents felt well-informed there were various aspects of information that they felt could have been improved upon. Conversely, even where respondents felt that they were well–informed, there were areas where there appeared to be some confusion, specifically in relation to financial issues.

Some of the aspects where respondents wanted to see change, such as those relating to information on costs or eligibility, could be addressed by the Board, perhaps in conjunction with those who provide the information directly to the client (solicitors, or advice agencies). Other issues such as increased contact from the solicitor cannot be addressed by the Board; they are really a matter relating to the style of the individual solicitor or firm, which may be dictated by time and cost factors. In some instances it is less clear-cut as regards what, if anything, can be done. For instance, the most common problem, that reaching a solution should ‘take less time’, may be simply a function of the legal process which neither the Board nor solicitors can influence. In this case it is important that applicants are aware of the likely time that a case may take, so that they have realistic expectations.