QualitySolicitors to launch 50 branches as talks with top 100 firms heat up

Readers' comments (13)

• jamie pennington | 7-Oct-2010 4:50 pm

  Hmmm.
  One wonders what the target market is for this co-labelled cohort.
  An individual would I presume, still be more influenced by individual lawyer profile/reputation/locality, and a multi-site business (who might use more than one office) would be presented with a thin-skinned brand until the franchise adopted common processes and standards.
  So what will the marketing say, and to whom?
  Interesting.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 7-Oct-2010 4:51 pm

  Be wary of using 'quality' in your company's name. Remember Quality Hotels? They were anything but!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Oct-2010 9:46 am

  Also be wary about a CMC that uses the word 'solicitor' in its title when in fact it is not one; misleading the public?

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Big Dave | 8-Oct-2010 10:06 am

  I don't think the average private client gives two hoots about the quality of the solicitor. It's all about price and, if the service comes with a brand they have some vague recollection of, so much the better.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Oct-2010 11:05 am

  If clients did not care about quality why were there 500 calls to the LeO on its first day from clients complaining about quality issues, etc, and why is the LeO expecting to handle c120,000 complaints a year?
  
  Also, why has there been such an uproar about unregulated will writers providing a shoddy service?
  
  There will be people who don't care about quality and go on price alone, but they are likely to be the ones that then go on to complain when 'paying peanuts' comes home to roost!
  
  Look at certain budget airlines where people want something for nothing and then complain when they don't get the frills!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Oct-2010 4:10 pm

  Do not mistake the QS brand for anything other than solicitors linking up on marketing - the firm's remain entirely independent and are all well established law firms. In no way are they 'claims handlers' as suggested above.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Rural bliss | 8-Oct-2010 4:30 pm

  I completely agree with the earlier comment that using the word `Quality' smacks of a desperate - and doomed - attempt to convince a sceptical public.
  Firms that genuinely do give a quality service don't need to shout about it. Clients will arrive through reputation and recommendation rather than because the firm has the word `Quality' plonked in front of the name.
  It's a bit like a car trader using the name `Honest Fred'. I would instinctively distrust anyone who feels the need to tell me what I would like to think I could safely assume.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 9-Oct-2010 8:55 am

  I agree.
  This branding exercise smells of desparation.
  The game is up for many solicitors and the real solution is for solicitors to find alternative employment.
  Flogging a dead horse comes to mind!!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 9-Oct-2010 3:48 pm

  Anon 4.10.
  It is not the law firms that are claims handlers it is QS; I bet if you looked at their statistics there would be more claims work being referred by them than other.
  QS is not only in this to make a name for itself but to make money and in order for it to do this it must attract high marketing/membership and referral fees; yes the law firms get their name about as a consequence but that is an afterthought for QS, they are not a charity.
  It is naive to think the scheme is only about solicitors linking up with their marketing, if this were the case they would not need a CMC to lead the way but a marketing agency that could establish a true 'solicitor' brand!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Richard Atkinson | 10-Oct-2010 10:42 am

  The discussion about their choice of name totally misses the point in my view. They could be called pretty much anything (and I'm with the posters above - I don't like 'QualitySolicitors' particularly) but if there's enough branches to make them visible across the country they'll undoubtedly have a huge impact. The market is so fragmented and the general public so lost when it comes to choosing a law firm that a single, national, recognisable brand (whatever it is) with branches in most towns and cities will be hugely attractive to consumers in my view. I think it will take them longer than they think to achieve the kind of recognition they desire, but this will be a major player in years to come in the legal market.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment