The Legal Ombudsman has published a new AI template to help consumers draft complaints to their lawyer, recognising that artificial intelligence is increasingly becoming part of the way people seek information, understand their rights and make complaints.

The development is particularly interesting for older people, who may find the prospect of writing a formal complaint daunting, particularly when dealing with complex legal matters such as wills, probate, conveyancing or powers of attorney.

AI can help – but it isn’t a substitute for your own voice

New research from the Legal Ombudsman found that 54% of people who had made, or considered making, a formal complaint about a regulated service in the previous year had used AI during their complaints journey.

However, the research also found a significant age gap. While 70% of under-35s had used AI when making or considering a complaint, this fell to just 16% among people aged 55–75.

The Legal Ombudsman says AI can help consumers understand their rights, build confidence and draft complaints. But it warns that AI-generated complaints can sometimes become unnecessarily long, complicated, aggressive or legalistic – potentially making it harder to resolve the underlying problem.

This is an important message for anyone using AI: a complaint does not need to sound like it was written by a lawyer to be effective.

The Legal Ombudsman’s new template is designed to steer AI towards producing a complaint that is clear, factual, calm and focused on finding a resolution.

People are first asked to provide information about:

  • when the lawyer started working for them;
  • what they instructed the lawyer to do;
  • what went wrong;
  • how the problem affected them;
  • what outcome they would like to achieve; and
  • the lawyer’s own complaints procedure, if available.

The template then gives the AI instructions to act as a neutral complaint-resolution assistant and to use only the information provided. It specifically tells the AI not to invent or exaggerate facts, use unnecessarily aggressive language or assume that someone is automatically entitled to a particular remedy.

For OPAAL, there is an important principle behind this approach.

The purpose of a complaint should be to make sure that someone’s concerns, needs and wishes are heard – not simply to produce the longest or most impressive-looking document.

AI can potentially be particularly useful for an older person who struggles with writing, has difficulty organising their thoughts, or simply lacks confidence when communicating with a professional organisation.

But the person’s own experience should remain at the centre of the complaint.

A clear explanation of what happened, what went wrong, how it affected the person and what they would like to happen next may be much more effective than pages of legal terminology.

The Legal Ombudsman has even highlighted a case where an AI-assisted complaint became lengthy and adversarial, resulting in a prolonged exchange of correspondence rather than a straightforward attempt to resolve the problem.

Protect your personal information

There is also an important warning for anyone considering using AI.

Don’t put confidential or identifying information into an AI tool unless you are satisfied that you understand how that information will be handled.

The Legal Ombudsman recommends removing information such as names, addresses, case numbers, bank details and dates of birth before putting information into an AI tool. Personal details can then be added back into the finished complaint before it is sent.

AI can also make mistakes – including inventing legal cases, quotations or references. A document that looks professional is not necessarily accurate.

Always check an AI-generated complaint carefully before sending it.

What does this mean for older people?

The Legal Ombudsman’s research raises an interesting question for advocacy. If AI is becoming another way of accessing information and seeking redress, we need to make sure that older people are not left behind.The fact that only 16% of 55–75-year-olds in the research had used AI when making or considering a complaint suggests that there remains a significant digital divide.

Independent advocacy can have an important role here. An advocate does not need to write a complaint instead of an older person. They can help the person understand their options, identify what matters to them, organise their thoughts and make sure their voice, wishes and desired outcome are properly communicated.

AI may become another useful tool in that process – but it should remain a tool, rather than replacing the person’s own voice or the human support they may need.

OPAAL’s advice

If you are helping an older person make a complaint using AI, consider these five simple principles:

1. Protect privacy
Remove personal and confidential information before using an AI tool.

2. Stick to the facts
Tell the AI what actually happened and don’t ask it to make the complaint sound more serious than it is.

3. Keep the person’s voice
The complaint should accurately reflect the older person’s experience, concerns and wishes.

4. Check everything
AI can make mistakes and can sometimes invent information. Check the final document carefully.

5. Focus on putting things right
The aim of a complaint should be to achieve a fair and practical resolution – not simply to win an argument.

A useful new resource

The Legal Ombudsman’s AI and Complaints: A Consumer Guide explains the benefits and risks of using AI when making a legal complaint and includes the new “Write a Complaint Letter to Your Lawyer” AI template.

The Legal Ombudsman also reminds consumers that they should normally complain to their legal service provider first and give them eight weeks to respond before bringing an unresolved complaint to the Ombudsman.

For OPAAL, this is another example of why independent advocacy matters: technology can help people find their voice, but everyone should have the opportunity to be heard – whether or not they are confident using technology.