Ralph Mrad
We instructed Naylor Solicitors to act on a commercial property dispute with our former landlord. After many months on the matter, our experience left us disappointed enough to transfer the file to a different firm with a critical statutory deadline only days away. The positives: correspondence was generally professional in tone, and the file was eventually released when we instructed replacement solicitors. The issues: communication was slow and the work was largely reactive rather than proactive. Strategic points that should have been on the firm’s radar from day one — including historic rent deposits held by the landlord under leases granted in 2015 and 2016 — were never raised with the other side despite the length of the engagement. When a Terminal Schedule of Dilapidations arrived with a tight response deadline, the absence of any prior preparation meant we had to instruct new solicitors and a specialist surveyor at speed, simply to protect our position. Billing and file release also became sources of friction, sufficient to require a formal complaint to the firm’s complaints partner. Businesses considering Naylor for a commercial dispute on a fixed timeline should ask, upfront, who will actually be running the matter day-to-day, what the proactive workstreams will look like, and how the firm escalates when matters become urgent. We did not have satisfactory answers to those questions in practice. Two stars rather than one because the underlying capability is there. The issue was responsiveness and proactivity, not technical ability.