Foskett Marr Gadsby & Head Recenzje 5

Extremely poor service . Awful communications they are taking approximately 4-5 days to respond to simple emails . I am 6 months in to a property transaction and have still not completed. Safe to say I will NEVER ever again or recommend to anyone.

A friend recommended Tara O'Donnell (at the Epping office) as a great conveyancer who would keep house sale/purchase on track, and boy was she right! Tara and her team responded quickly and clearly to every query we had, and we had complete confidence that if anything stalled or went wrong, it most definitely would not be down to our legal team! We would unhesitatingly recommend Team Tara.

I had completed on the sale of my flat 8 months ago but I was waiting for the final accounts to be sent to me informing me of any surplus service charges during my ownership. Once received, I emailed Leila Holmes-Denton who actioned my request immediately and the remaining funds owed were sent back to me by BACS transfer which was great. Thank you for such a smooth transition. I’d highly recommend Foskett Marr Gadsby & Head, they’re excellent.

We recently engaged Gemma Ball from Foskett Marr Gadsby & Head LLP for our property purchase. Unfortunately, due to the seller dropping out, the transaction had to be aborted. While we understand that such situations can happen, our experience with this law firm was deeply frustrating, particularly regarding pricing transparency, fairness, and professional ethics.

1. Lack of Upfront Disclosure on Fees

When we were asked to sign the instruction letter, we were required to agree to the firm's terms and conditions. However, Foskett Marr Gadsby & Head LLP never provided us with a copy of these terms in their email. This meant that we had no clear understanding of how fees would be handled in the event of an aborted transaction. A reputable law firm should proactively disclose all potential costs upfront, rather than leaving clients to discover them after the fact.

2. Misleading Pricing Strategy and Lack of Transparency

Once our case was deemed abortive, Gemma Ball initially claimed that she had spent £7,084.00 worth of time on our case. However, instead of demanding this full amount, she then positioned a charge of £450.00 (excluding VAT) as a “discounted” fee, making it seem as though we were getting a significantly reduced rate.

This tactic was highly misleading. By first presenting an inflated and unverifiable figure, she created the impression that the £450.00 charge was a bargain—when in reality, we were never given a transparent breakdown of her actual hours worked or her hourly rate.

Furthermore, when we requested copies of invoices from third-party search providers, as we were being charged for these services, we were told that it was the firm’s policy not to provide such proof. This is highly concerning—if a client is expected to pay for third-party services, they should have the right to verify the charges. Refusing to provide documentation for billed expenses raises serious questions about the firm’s integrity.

3. Invoice Error and Lack of Accountability

Adding to our concerns, when we received the final invoice, Gemma Ball had completely forgotten to deduct the £400 deposit we had already paid. It was only after we carefully reviewed the invoice ourselves that we discovered the mistake. Despite this clear error on her part, she never acknowledged it or offered any apology, demonstrating a troubling lack of attention to detail and professional accountability.

4. Threatening Clients Instead of Addressing Concerns

When we challenged the lack of transparency and requested reasonable clarifications regarding the fees, Gemma Ball refused to provide any further explanation. Instead of engaging in a professional and constructive dialogue, she resorted to repeatedly threatening us with punitive actions if we did not pay the amount she demanded. These threats included:

- Referring us to a credit controller, which could negatively impact our credit record.
- Charging additional interest on the outstanding amount, despite our valid concerns regarding the legitimacy of the charges.
Rather than responding to our legitimate questions, she prioritized intimidation tactics over professional accountability, which is completely unacceptable behavior for a legal professional.

5. Despite Everything, We Paid—But We Want Others to Be Aware

Despite our serious concerns about the lack of transparency and professionalism, we ultimately paid the full amount they demanded. However, we strongly believe that clients deserve better treatment and fairer pricing policies.

We sincerely hope the firm will take this feedback seriously and make meaningful improvements to its pricing structure, communication, and overall client care. Consumers deserve fairness, transparency, and respect.

We had the pleasure of working with Dorothy Purday for the conveyancing of both the sale of our home and the purchase of our new one. Dorothy provided a superb service from start to finish—her attention to detail was immaculate, and she truly had our best interests at the forefront throughout the process. Her professionalism, expertise, and dedication made what could have been a stressful experience feel seamless. We highly recommend Dorothy to anyone in need of a reliable and diligent solicitor. Thank you for your outstanding support!