ELS SOLICITORS LTD

I got an appointment within a few days of making my initial enquiry. On visting the ELS office the staff members were warm and welcoming.
My issue was dealth with promptly and professionally; I recieved very good legal advise and concluded my legal issue within a week.

I had an initial consultation on Friday 27 February 2026. This was with Vital Ruwala.

The legal advice provided was satisfactory based on the information available at the time. However, I felt compelled to leave feedback regarding the overall experience.

The call began approximately 4–5 minutes late and concluded around 3 minutes earlier than scheduled. While there may not have been much further to discuss, when being charged £348 per hour (inclusive of VAT), and with billing calculated pro-rata in 6-minute increments, I believe punctuality and the full allocation of time are important aspects of a professional service.

More significantly, I found the interaction to feel quite cold and lacking in empathy. During what is a difficult and often stressful time for clients seeking legal support, a more understanding and reassuring approach would have been appreciated. Unfortunately, I left the consultation feeling somewhat rushed and as though I was a burden, which is not the experience one expects from a premium-priced service.

For these reasons, I have decided not to proceed and have chosen to instruct another firm where I felt a greater level of care, empathy, and attentiveness.

I hope this feedback is taken constructively, as these are areas that could meaningfully improve the client experience for future clients.

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.

I’m really pleased with the service I received from ELS Employment Solicitors and especially from Vital, who supported me throughout my case.
He was always responsive, knowledgeable, and transparent at every stage of the process. I felt well-informed and supported the whole way through.
The outcome was beyond my expectations, and Vital did an excellent job securing a very positive result. I’m very happy with how everything was handled and would definitely recommend Vital and the firm.