ELS Solicitors Ltd

“A family member who engaged ELS Solicitors Ltd in January 2025 to handle an employment tribunal matter.

The experience was a catalogue of repeated service failures, procedural mismanagement, and miscommunications that caused confusion, delay, financial stress, and significant anxiety. Initial Engagement (2 Jan 2025): Despite clear instructions and documentation, the solicitor failed to provide advice on key tribunal deadlines. Core aspects of the unfair dismissal claim were ignored, leaving the client unsure of how to proceed. January – March 2025 – Mismanaged Strategy & Unclear Guidance: Attempts to clarify legal strategy were met with conditional responses demanding additional payment before providing substantive guidance. The firm issued invoices for administrative tasks and work outside the agreed scope. A procedural strategy charged for was later found to be entirely ineffective by the tribunal. April 2025 – Complaint Handling: Following the submission of a formal complaint to the Legal Ombudsman, the firm sent over 14 communications demanding payment, some escalating in tone, and requested copies of the complaint before pausing collection. These actions added pressure and stress rather than addressing service failures. June 2025 – Misleading Court Document: The client received a document presented as a County Court claim, which contained multiple inconsistencies: no valid issue date, no court seal, invalid references, and formatting inconsistent with official court forms. When challenged, the firm did not provide clarification or validation. Post-Complaint Public and Third-Party Conduct: Online review platforms were contacted to dispute the client’s status as a customer. Public responses referenced the complaint, escalating stress and reputational concern for the client. Cumulative Impact: Over six months, the client experienced mismanaged legal advice, opaque billing, procedural missteps, conditional engagement, misleading documentation, and public escalation of complaints. The Legal Ombudsman has confirmed jurisdiction and is investigating, but the pattern demonstrates a consistent failure to provide even the most basic competent legal service. This review reflects the documented experience of a family friend, highlighting repeated service failures, billing issues, procedural errors, misleading documents, and post-complaint conduct, without speculating on intent

“25th October 2024 On what was already a stressful situation this meeting was a complete waste of £348.Vital was late for our appointment and finished our meeting early.

Because I was already well advanced in the current process I was in need of a without prejudice letter ASAP which I was told at the end of our meeting could take several weeks based on how busy they were although £1500 would be needed to move forwards. If I knew this upfront I wouldn't have bothered with this meeting. As I explained after our meeting I was none the wiser. For those in a similar position you will be charged £1848 with very little return unless you are early in your process and have zero knowledge / experience. Thankfully I received the help needed when I moved on.

• Knowledgeable