CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS OF ONLINE LEGAL SERVICE

PROVIDERS
VICKI WAYE*
TIMOFEI BOGOMOLOV**
ANJA PICH***

ABSTRACT
Due to the bespoke nature of traditional legal service delivery and the credence nature
of legal services, the quality and value of legal services can be difficult to ascertain. As
a result, society has relied upon strict gatekeeper regulations to ensure that only
appropriately qualified persons are able to practice law. However, concerns remain
that the social contract between the legal profession and society does not necessarily
protect consumers from unprofessional service delivery. Access to legal services has
also been raised as a concern. Legal services are commonly viewed as too expensive
and beyond the reach of the ‘ordinary’ consumer. The advent of low-cost, high-volume
online legal services has the potential to increase the cost efficiency of legal service
delivery and improve access to justice. However, this potential will only be met if
consumer confidence in the value and quality of online legal service delivery is justified.
Notably, legal service value (whether online or otherwise) has been described as a
mystery. Indeed, many questions arise in relation to the capacity of online legal services
to deliver effective access to justice. Numerous quality indicators, such as peer review,
should be investigated; however, user experience provides an excellent starting point
for examining the quality of online legal services. Drawing on a combination of data
from online consumer review sites and literature that models service quality, this study
aims to provide a clearer picture of the factors leading to either a positive or a negative
consumer experience of online legal service delivery. The findings of this study can be
used to better inform consumers and regulators of the standards that might be applied
to discriminate between poor quality and good quality online legal services.

I INTRODUCTION

As a result of the low start-up costs and overheads, online legal services are proliferating in
1
Australia. Their growth rates are strong. In November 2019, after reporting a doubling of
revenues year on year, the online Australian law firm, Lawpath, announced a $4.4 million capital
2
raise to fund expansion into Asia. Robust growth in online legal services has also been reported
3
in the United States(‘US’), where it is expected that the percentage of legal services conducted

* Professor of Law, Law School, University of South Australia.

** Lecturer, School of Information Technology and Mathematical Sciences, University of South Australia.
*** Masters by Research candidate, Law School, University of South Australia.
1
Law Council of Australia, ‘Futures Summit’ (Background Paper, 13 September 2018) [22]–[26]; John Grimley, ‘Why the
Future Looks Bright for Online Legal Services in Asia’, Asia Law Portal (5 November 2016)
<https://asialawportal.com/2016/11/05/why-the-future-looks-bright-for-online-legal-services-in-asia/>.
2
Stephanie Palmer-Derrien, ‘“A Household Name”: Lawpath Raises $4.4 million in Quest to Bring Better Legal Services to
SMEs’ Smart Company (6 November 2019) https://www.smartcompany.com.au/startupsmart/news/lawpath-funding-legal-
advice-smes/>.
3
Dan Cook, Online Legal Services in the US (Report No OD5638, IBISWorld, June 2019) 9.
44 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

4
online will grow to 23.2% by 2024. Similarly, an increase in the use of online legal services is
5
also occurring in England and Wales. The global growth in the delivery of online legal services
has been fuelled by a convergence of factors common to many knowledge-based professions
currently undergoing digital disruption. These factors include increased demand for accessible
and affordable legal services, the development of new low-cost business models designed to
standardise and thus commoditise legal service delivery, improvements in technological
6
capabilities and market liberalisation.

Due to the growth in low-cost online legal services, many low-to-middle income and small
business consumers who formerly could not afford legal advice can now have their legal needs
7
met. In the online environment, legal services have not only become more affordable but also
more accessible and more comparable. Online legal services enhance client choice and client
control by providing the means for packaging or unbundling legal services more easily. Clients
may opt for simple automated documentation or for a range of generic or bespoke advisory
8
services generally at flat fees. The flat fee structure provides greater transparency in relation to
each component of the legal services they purchase.

Online legal services vary in the scope of services offered. Some providers, such as the
9 10 11
Australian firms, LegalVision and Virtual Legal and the Hong Kong firm, Zegal, operate as
virtual law firms and offer a catalogue of user-friendly legal information, automated legal
documentation, workflow solutions and customised legal advice across a range of property and
12
commercial matters. Using artificial intelligence, Australia-based Adieu and United Kingdom
13
(‘UK’) -based Robot Lawyer, LISA offer legal support services that help parties reach a
settlement. Other firms specialise in legally related services, such as intellectual property
14
management, conveyancing and company registration or confine their operations to generic

4
Ibid 11.
5
Law Society of England and Wales, The Future of Legal Services (Report, January 2016) 14, 17
<https://communities.lawsociety.org.uk/law-management-news/the-future-of-legal-services-report-published/5053389.article>.
6
Qian Hongdao et al, ‘Legal Technologies in Action: The Future of the Legal Market in Light of Disruptive Innovations’
(2019) 11(4) Sustainability 1015; Richard Susskind and Daniel Susskind, The Future of The Professions: How Technology will
Transform the Work of Human Experts (Oxford University Press, 2015) Ch 2; Joan C Williams, Aaron Platt and Jessica Lee,
‘Disruptive Innovation: New Models of Legal Practice’ (2015) 67(1) Hastings Law Journal 1, 59–78.
7
Benjamin H Barton and Deborah L Rhode, ‘Access to Justice and Routine Legal Services: New Technologies Meet Bar
Regulators’ (2018) 70(4) Hastings Law Journal 955, 960–2.
8
See Charlotta Kronbald, ‘Digital Innovation in Law Firms: The Dominant Logic Under Threat’ (2020) 29 (3) Creativity and
Innovation Management 515, 4.2.1; Cook (n 3) 19–20.
9
Home Page, LegalVision (Web Page, 2020) <https://legalvision.com.au/>.
10
Home Page, Virtual Legal (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.virtuallegal.com.au/>.
11
Home Page, Zegal (Web Page) <https://zegal.com/en-au/home/>.
12
Home Page, Adieu (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.adieu.ai/>.
13
Home Page, Robot Lawyer LISA (Web Page, 2019) <https://www.robotlawyerlisa.com/>.
14
See, eg, Home Page, EasyCompanies (Web Page, 2020) <https://easycompanies.com.au/>; Home Page, Myplace
Conveyancing (Web Page, 2016) <https://myplaceconveyancing.com.au>.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 45

15
advice and automated legal documentation. Some providers also run ‘on-demand’ platforms
that match independent lawyers with clients in much the same way that Uber matches drivers
16
with passengers.

This paper focuses on online firms that provide legal documentation and bespoke
advisory services, such as LegalVision in Australia, and online legal service providers, such as
17 18 19
Rocket Lawyer, LegalZoom and LegalShield in the US. Drawing on a combination of data
from online consumer review sites and literature that models service quality, this paper seeks to
outline the factors that lead to either positive or negative reviews of online legal service delivery.
In doing so, this paper seeks to identify the critical and sub-critical dimensions of service quality
for this category of online legal service provider. As the digital transformation of the legal
profession escalates, the identification of consumer perceptions of online legal service quality will
not only assist legal service providers to better respond to client requirements but will also assist
regulators to better understand how to address an increasingly commoditised legal services
market.

This paper commences by examining the current regulatory framework for legal service
delivery, including online legal service delivery, and considers how that framework relates to legal
service quality. The authors identify gaps in the framework with reference to legal service quality
and consider how consumer perceptions of legal service quality might be used to address that
gap. Next, the authors outline the methods that they used to conduct a content analysis of
consumer reviews of online legal service providers in the US and Australia. The results from the
analysis are presented and discussed. Service quality dimensions are then identified and ranked
in terms of their importance. The authors also examine the relationship between consumer
perceptions of quality with consumer perceptions of value. Finally, the authors discuss the
implications of their findings for online legal service providers and regulators.

See, eg, Home Page, Ausdocs Online (Web Page, 2020) <https://ausdocsonline.com/>; Home Page, Lawlive (Web Page,
15

2020) <https://lawlive.com.au/>.
See, eg, Home Page, Contact Law (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.contactlaw.co.uk/>; Home Page, Compare Legal Costs
16

(Web Page, 2014) <http://www.comparelegalcosts.co.uk/>; Home Page, Avvo (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.avvo.com/>;
Home Page, Lawpath (Web Page, 2020) <https://lawpath.com.au/>. See further Nicole Billett, ‘The Gig Lawyer in the Gig
Economy’, Lawyers Weekly (7 December 2017) <https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/sme-law/22395-the-gig-lawyer-in-the-gig-
economy>.
Home Page, Rocket Lawyer (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.rocketlawyer.com/>.
17

Home Page, LegalZoom (Web Page) <https://www.legalzoom.com>.

18

Home Page, LegalShield (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.legalshield.com>.

19

September 2020
46 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

II THE REGULATION AND QUALITY OF LEGAL SERVICES

Economic theorists have identified two major sources of market failure in the delivery of legal
20
professional services: 1) information asymmetry and; 2) adverse selection. Information
asymmetry relates to clients’ inability to benchmark the quality of the law firm that they approach
ex ante and their inability to measure the quality and value of the legal advice and representation
that they receive ex post. This derives from clients’ limited access to comparative information
about law firm performance and the nature of the legal services market. Clients are similarly
hampered by their lack of technical legal knowledge. Many clients regard the law and its
21
processes as an unknowable ‘black box’, which makes it impossible to determine whether their
interaction with a legal service provider has led to an optimal legal outcome. Information
asymmetry also arises due to the heterogenous nature of many legal problems, the array of
strategies and practices that law firms may adopt in relation to similar legal issues and the
significance of the role played by clients in providing information and instructions to law firms.
No one legal matter is likely to be resolved in precisely the same way by different law firms or by
22
the same firm representing different clients; thus, it is difficult to compare the quality of legal
service providers.

Information asymmetry creates moral hazard and adverse selection problems. Due to
the inability of clients to assess the quality of the legal services that they receive, lawyers may
behave opportunistically and over-service their clients or cut corners and over-charge clients for
23
poor quality services. Opportunistic lawyers, in turn, enjoy an unfair competitive advantage over
diligent lawyers whose corresponding quality of work cannot be ascertained and whose hard work
cannot be observed. Consumers may be able to shop around in relation to the price of legal
24
services; however, it is unlikely that they will be able to map the price paid against the value

20
Camille Chaserant and Sophie Harnay, ‘The Regulation of Quality in the Market for Legal Services: Taking the
Heterogeneity of Legal Services Seriously’ (2013) 10(2) European Journal of Comparative Economics 267.
21
Solicitors Regulation Authority, Research on Consumers’ Attitudes towards the Purchase of Legal Services (Research Report,
October 2010).
22
George N Kenyon and Kabir C Sen, The Perception of Quality Mapping Product and Service Quality to Consumer
Perceptions (Springer, 2016) 215. For more on the potential of third parties who may be in dispute with a client to also affect
the nature and scope of the legal services, which in turn may also lead to heterogeneity see: Heather M Stewart, Christine A
Hope and Alan P Muhlemann, ‘Service Quality in the Legal Profession: a Review’ (2000) 2(3) International Journal of
Management Reviews 261, 263.
23
Richard Moorhead, ‘Precarious Professionalism: Some Empirical and Behavioural Perspectives on Lawyers’ (2014) 67
Current Legal Problems 447, 454–5, summarising three studies on the variable quality of legal services provided by lawyers.
24
Legal Services Consumer Panel, Tracker Survey 2018 Briefing Note: How Consumers are Choosing Legal Services (Briefing
note, 1 August 2018).

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 47

received. As a result, poor performing lawyers with lower costs may well drive diligent lawyers
25
out of the market, which in turn could create adverse selection problems.

In part, the potential for such market failures establishes the rationale for the regulation
26
of legal services. Other regulatory rationales include, the need to protect third parties, such as
27
the beneficiaries of a trust or a will, who might be adversely affected by poor lawyering, the need
to ensure that lawyers properly perform gatekeeping roles to discourage their clients from
28
engaging in serious wrongdoing and the need to support the rule of law (‘ROL’) and the proper
29
administration of justice. In most common law countries, the regulatory framework comprises
a system of licensure (which in some cases incorporates ongoing obligations related to
governance and risk management), the monitoring and enforcement of professional standards
30
and safeguards related to the use of client funds. Liability for legal malpractice exerts further
31
control over lawyers’ conduct.

However, the very presence of regulatory schemes may lull consumers into a false sense
of security. Many assume that licensure and the regulation of professional conduct guarantee the
32
delivery of high-quality legal services; however, this is not always the case. There is a high degree
33
of variability in the competence and professionalism of lawyers and law firms. Thus, while
licensure and the regulation of professional conduct serve to ensure basic thresholds of
competence, they cannot help consumers discriminate between levels of legal professional
34
service quality above entry-level minimums.

Additionally, it is important to note that the regulatory schemes do not provide ubiquitous
coverage of the legal services market. For example, firms in England and Wales that provide

25
Chaserant and Harnay (n 20) 270.
26
Andrew Boon (ed), International Perspectives on the Regulation of Lawyers and Legal Services (Hart Publishing, 2017) 2–3;
Noel Semple, Legal Services Regulation at the Crossroads: Justitia’s Legions (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015) 1.1.1; Benjamin
Hoorn Barton, ‘Why do we Regulate Lawyers: An Economic Analysis of the Justifications for Entry and Conduct Regulation’
(2001) 33(2) Arizona State Law Journal 429.
27
Semple (n 26) 28.
28
John C Coffee Jr, Gatekeepers: The Professions and Corporate Governance (Oxford University Press, 2006) 192.
29
Boon (n 26) 3–5.
30
Ibid 15.
31
Herbert M Kritzer, ‘Lawyers’ Professional Liability: Comparative Perspectives’ (2017) 24(2) International Journal of the Legal
Profession 73.
32
Legal Services Consumer Panel, Quality in Legal Services (Report, November 2010).
33
Moorhead (n 23) collated the findings of three studies that demonstrated that one in four clients receive substandard legal
work; Richard A Posner and Albert H Yoon, ‘What Judges Think of the Quality of Legal Representation’ (2011) 63(2)
Stanford Law Review 317, 319–20, 326 in which it was found that judges perceive substantial disparities in the quality of legal
representation in 20–40% of criminal cases. For further discussion, see Avrom Sherr, ‘The Value of Experience in Legal
Competence’ (2000) 7(2) International Journal of the Legal Profession 95, 106 that notes the variability in the ability of lawyers
to conduct an effective client interview; 22–24% of lawyers in the study failed to obtain a clear history of legal proceedings in a
client’s matter.
34
Diego d’Andria, ‘The Economics of Professional Services: Lemon Markets, Credence Goods, and C2C Information Sharing’
(2013) 7(1) Service Business 1, 8.

September 2020
48 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

35
non-reserved legal services do not need to be regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.
Reserved legal activities include appearing before a court, conducting litigation, undertaking
36
reserved instrument work, probate activities, notarisation and the administration of oaths. That
37
leaves a broad swathe of legal service activities that are regulated by other means or not regulated
at all (e.g., the provision of advice in non-litigious commercial, intellectual property and
information technology related matters and the provision of financial and estate planning advice).

The scope of non-regulated legal services in Australia and the US is far narrower.
However, professional regulatory coverage is still not universal. Both jurisdictions define the
practice of law widely and stipulate that any party practicing law must be authorised by a relevant
38 39
body such as a Bar Association or a statutory entity. In the US, unlicensed activity that
constitutes the provision of advice regarding legal rights, obligations and privileges will attract this
40 41
prohibition. Similarly, without admission to the bar, the drafting of legal documentation and
the conduct of litigation will be unlawful. However, as the provision of generic online legal forms
is unlikely to constitute the practice of law, it will not be captured by professional regulatory
42
schemes. Australian jurisprudence as to what constitutes the unauthorised practice of law is
analogous (albeit relatively more liberal). Australian courts also distinguish between the provision
43
of bespoke legal advice and generic legal information and between the drafting of legal
44
documentation and the clerical completion of pre-prepared legal templates. The provision of
legal services is thus broader than engaging in the practice of law. Consequently, not all legal

35
Legal Services Act 2007 (UK) c 29, ss 12, 13, sch 2 (‘Legal Services Act’).
36
Ibid sch 2, s 5; reserved instrument activities include the preparation of conveyancing documentation or court-related
documentation.
37
For example, barristers are regulated by the Bar Standards Board and patent attorneys are regulated by the Intellectual
Property Regulation Board.
38
In the United States (‘US’), attorneys are admitted to the bar on a state-by-state basis. Various state laws prohibit the
unauthorised practice of law. See Judiciary Law, New York, ch 30, art 15 (‘Judiciary Law’), §478; Business and Professions
Code, California Business and Professions Code, ch 4, art 7 (‘Business and Professions Code’), §§6125–6126; and Revised
Judicature Act 1961, Michigan Compiled Laws, ch 600, ch 9 (‘Revised Judicature Act 1961’), §600–916. See also, American
Bar Association, Standing Committee on the delivery of legal services, Model Rules of Professional Conduct, r 5.5.
39
In Australia, where lawyers are also admitted on a state-by-state basis, the unauthorised practice of law is a criminal offence.
See, eg, Legal Profession Uniform Law 2015 (NSW) s 10; Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) s 24; Legal Profession Act 2008
(WA) s 12; Legal Practitioners Act 1981 (SA) s 21; and Legal Profession Act 2007 (Tas) s 13(1).
40
See, eg, In re Rose, 314 BR 663 (Bankr ED Tenn, 2004) (‘In re Rose’); Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee v Jansen,
816 SW 2d 813 (Tex Ct App, 1991) (‘Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee v Jansen’).
41
See, eg, McKeage v TMBC, LLC, 847 F 3d 992 (8 Cir, 2017) (‘McKeage v TMBC, LLC’); Greenspan v Third Federal
th

Savings and Loan, 894 NE 2d 1250 (Ohio Ct App, 2009) (‘Greenspan v Third Federal Savings and Loan’); Franklin v Chavis,
640 SE 2d 873 (2007) (‘Franklin v Chavis’).
42
See, eg, Janson v LegalZoom.com Inc, 802 F Supp 2d 1053 (WD Mo, 2011) 1063 (‘Janson v LegalZoom.com Inc’).
However, it is notable that in this case the Court found that the online service provider, LegalZoom, had engaged in the
unauthorised practice of law because its interactive online forms supported by non-lawyer employee assistance went beyond
blank self-help forms.
43
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Murray (2002) 121 FCR 428, [94] (‘Australian Competition and
Consumer Commission v Murray’).
44
Legal Practice Board v Giraudo [2010] WASC 4, [12]–[13] (‘Legal Practice Board v Giraudo’); Cornall v Nagle [1995] 2 VR
188, 204–5 (‘Cornall v Nagle’).

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 49

services delivery is subject to licensure and professional conduct regulation. Conversely, research
demonstrates that consumers do not readily differentiate between regulated and non-regulated
45
legal service providers. Thus, consumers may be unaware that the non-regulated legal service
providers that they deal with do not have to abide by professional conduct rules or carry
mandatory practice insurance.

III WEB-BASED REVIEW AND RATING SERVICES

Web-based review and rating services can help to address problems associated with the lack of
transparency and comparability faced by consumers when trying to discriminate between legal
service providers. Users may anonymously post reviews to review sites about the quality of the
legal services they have received. Users can also rate their legal services based on a star-rating
scheme that aggregates users’ responses according to pre-defined criteria using a 5- or 10-point
scale. For example, consumers using US rating site Martindale-Hubbell are asked to rate their
attorneys on the following criteria: 1) communication ability; 2) responsiveness; 3) quality of
46
service; and 4) value for money. Alternately, users may use such sites to search for and vet
potential legal service providers to reduce the risk and uncertainty associated with their purchase
of legal services. Small- to medium-sized businesses typically use review sites to obtain
comparative quotations and advice on commercial matters, such as leases, data protection and
47
company formation. Review sites are also used by a growing number of in-house legal teams to
48
help manage their external law firm legal spend. Notably, the evidence indicates that while very
49
few consumers use review sites when searching for legal advisors, a small number of consumers

45
Economic Insight Ltd, Better Information in the Legal Services Market (Report, June 2018) 1.3. As a result, from
25 November 2019, regulated law firms have been required to display an SRA digital badge on their websites: Solicitors
Regulation Authority, SRA Transparency Rules (Web Page, 30 May 2018) 4.1 <https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-
regulations/transparency-rules/>.
46
A Consumer’s Guide to Peer and Client Review Ratings, Martindale (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.martindale.com/ratings-
and-reviews/consumers/>.
47
Examples include the United Kingdom’s Law Superstore: Business: Home Page (Business), Lawsuperstore (Web Page,
2020) <https://www.thelawsuperstore.co.uk/business> and the US UpCounsel: Home Page, UpCounsel (Web Page, 2020)
<https://www.upcounsel.com/>.
48
See, eg, Crowd One, Crowd and Co (Web Page) <https://crowdandco.com/mp/crowdone>, which offers rate and review
applications.
49
Legal Services Consumer Panel, Comparison Websites (Report, February 2012) 2.9. See also, American Bar Association,
Perspectives on Finding Personal Legal Services: The Results of a Public Opinion Poll (Report, February 2011) 14 in which it
was found that about 3.5% of the respondents that would use online searches to find a lawyer would refer to review and rating
sites.

September 2020
50 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

do so when searching for information on simple legal issues, such as those related to wills, estates
50
and conveyancing.

By supporting client choice, these TripAdvisor-style sites have the potential to strengthen
51
competition between law firms and drive down the price of legal services. Consequently, the
UK’s Legal Services Consumer Panel has characterised them as a useful tool for building
consumer capacity to demand more from legal service providers and for ensuring that the
benefits of market-based reforms introduced by the Legal Services Act 2007 are fully realised. 52

The support of these services in the UK mirrors other efforts to promote increased market
transparency; for example, the Solicitors Regulation Authority introduced a mandatory price and
service information provision for regulated law firms engaged in conveyancing, probate, motoring
53
offences, employment claims, immigration, debt recovery and licensing matters. Even in the
US, which has not seen the microeconomic reform of the legal services market experienced in
54
the UK and Australia, review and rating sites are viewed as an important tool to help shift the
power imbalance that often exists between law firms and clients in favour of a more empowered
55
and better informed clientele. Indeed, consumers’ rights to provide honest reviews about
products or services are now enshrined in the US Consumer Review Fairness Act, which limits 56

the ability of any business (including law firms) to prohibit or restrict consumers from providing
reviews.

Consumer feedback about service quality not only assists consumers to make better
choices, it also provides information to legal service providers to help them improve the quality
of their services. Evidence of how legal service providers use consumer ratings is limited;
however, evidence from other service sectors, such as the hospitality sector, shows that online
reviews drive managers to improve staff training, adjust staffing levels and increase or enhance
57
amenities. For similar reasons, responding to client feedback is frequently recommended as a

See, for eg, Home Page, LawSuperstore: Personal Services (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.thelawsuperstore.co.uk/>.
50

Legal Services Consumer Panel, Comparison websites (n 49) 1.5. See also, Barton and Rhode (n 7) 962.
51

Legal Services Consumer Panel, Comparison websites (n 49) 2.2.

52

Solicitors Regulation Authority, SRA Transparency Rules (n 45).

53

Noel Semple, Legal Services Regulation at the Crossroads: Justitia’s Legions (Edward Elgar, 2015), ch 4.
54

Barton and Rhode (n 7) 962.

55

15 USC § 45b (2016).

56

Edwin N Torres, Howard Adler and Carl Behnke, ‘Stars, Diamonds, and Other Shiny Things: The Use of Expert and
57

Consumer Feedback in the Hotel Industry’ (2014) 21 Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 34.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 51

58
means of retaining clients and legal practice building. Consumer reviews and ratings can also
59
provide valuable information and support to regulators.

Despite their potential to increase transparency and facilitate more dynamic competition,
concerns have been expressed that review sites for legal services do not necessarily operate in
60
consumers’ best interests. If true, this suggestion would mean that such sites may not provide
good evidence of legal service provider quality. These concerns, which undermine consumer
trust in the sites, relate to: a lack of transparency regarding commercial relationships that might
61
influence reviews and ratings; limited market coverage that results in cherry picking rather than
the meaningful comparison of law firms; misleading information regarding how the reviews are
obtained or the ratings calculated; data integrity; and misleading claims about the ratings sites
62
themselves. For example, US lawyer rating and review site, Avvo, has been subject to a number
of legal claims that reflect these concerns. In Davis v Avvo Inc a class action alleged that more
63

favourable ratings and designations were attributed to attorneys who paid Avvo for advertising
and related services compared to attorneys who did not enter into any commercial relationship
with Avvo. The suit alleged that the attorneys who paid Avvo thus falsely appeared to be more
qualified than non-paying attorneys. The suit was dismissed on the basis that Avvo’s reviews and
ratings were protected free speech and that the designations used by Avvo, including labels such
64
as ‘Pro’, constituted non-actionable puffery. Other problems with the suit related to the paucity
of evidence that any consumers had actually been misled or that the lead plaintiff had suffered
reputational harm as a result of the positive ratings received by the site’s paying attorneys. A
similar outcome arose in earlier proceedings that sought to challenge the accuracy and veracity
65
of Avvo’s numerical ratings. In that instance, the Court dismissed the suit because the ratings
constituted an abstraction of subjective reviewers’ opinions and were not presented as statements

For example, Anonymous, ‘Defining Key Competencies for Business Lawyers’ (2016) 72 (1) The Business Lawyer 101,
58

Behavioural Competencies of Business Lawyers § 10; Nancy Byerly Jones, ‘Face Your Fear of Client Feedback—and Reap the
Benefits’ Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (4 June, 2014); Nancy Byerly Jones, ‘Commentary: Progressive Lawyers Seek Client
Feedback’ Lawyers USA (30 June, 2008).
For example, the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau maintains a publicly available data base of consumer complaints
59

about financial services that are analysed by the regulator to assist its supervisory and rule-making activities: How we use
complaint data, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Web Page) <https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/data-use/>.
Legal Services Consumer Panel, Comparison Websites (n 49) 2.12. See further, Kate Mathews Hunt, ‘Gaming the System:
60

Fake Online Reviews v Consumer Law’ (2015) 31(1) Computer Law and Security Review: The International Journal of
Technology Law and Practice 3; Justin Malbon, ‘Taking Fake Online Consumer Reviews Seriously’ (2013) 36(2) Journal of
Consumer Policy 139.
See, eg, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Trivago [2020] FCA 16 in which it was found that Trivago had
61

misled consumers by promoting its best advertisers rather than providing consumers with impartial advice on accommodation
availability and pricing.
Legal Services Consumer Panel, Comparison Websites (n 49) 3.30–3.31.
62

Davis v Avvo Inc, 345 F Supp 3d 534 (SD NY, 2018) (‘Davis v Avvo Inc’). See also, Vrdolyak v Avvo Inc 206 F Supp 3d
63

1384 (ND Ill, 2016).

Davis v Avvoc Inc, 345 F Supp 3d 534, 541–542.
64

Browne v Avvo Inc, 525 F Supp 2d 1249 (WD Wash, 2007) (‘Browne v Avvo Inc’).
65

September 2020
52 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

of objective fact. Again, the claims in that case were hampered by a lack of evidence regarding
harm to the plaintiff attorneys’ reputations. Accordingly, except for cases of sites knowingly
66
publishing vociferously negative reviews amounting to defamation and harassment, it appears
that private proceedings in the US attacking the business models of legal services rating sites may
67
be difficult to successfully advance. However, the difficulties that arise in challenging the way in
which consumer reviews are collected and ratings are calculated raise questions about the
capacity of the sites to engender stronger competition.

In Australia, where free speech is not constitutionally entrenched and where businesses
68
are able to initiate proceedings for misleading and deceptive conduct, liability for promoting the
ratings of law firms that pay more for advertising than those that do not or engaging in other
forms of data manipulation is likely to be easier to establish. Thus, for example, in Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission v Trivago NV, Trivago was held liable for misleading
and deceptive conduct because, despite advertising to find consumers the best value hotel
accommodation, Trivago elevated the position of hotels in consumer internet search results
69
where those hotels had paid for clicks. Thus, in Australia, business entities that suffer detriment
as a result of platforms granting themselves or competitors an unfair commercial advantage can
seek redress. As well as misleading and deceptive conduct emanating from the platforms
themselves, this right of redress may also derive from law firms writing or importuning fake
positive reviews about their own services or writing or commissioning fake negative reviews about
their competitors’ services. However, causation and loss may remain difficult matters for
individual law firms to prove, as they would have to show that as a result of the manipulation of
ratings that clients were diverted from their firms to the firms that benefitted from the
70
manipulation. Despite the difficulties, the potential for privately initiated redress in conjunction
with the activities of regulators discussed in the paragraph below suggests that there is a reasonable
level of deterrence against fake reviews and thus there is some basis for confidence in the
assertion that such sites provide a good indication of consumer perceptions of quality.

66
See, eg, Law Society v Kordowski [2011] EWHC 3185 (‘Law Society v Kordowski’), addressing the ‘Solicitors from Hell‘
review website and in which it was found that the website should be shut down because it was libellous, constituted harassment
and breached data protection laws. See also Cheng v Lok [2020] SASC 14 (‘Cheng v Lok’) in which a lawyer subject to false
and defamatory review on the Google My Business review site was awarded damages of $750,000 for loss of business.
67
However, the Federal Trade Commission may initiate proceedings for unfair competition Federal Trade Commission Act:
15 USCA §45. However, there is no private right of action for breach of s 5: Holloway v Bristol-Myers Corporation 485 F 2d
986 (1973). The activities of regulators are considered in the next paragraph.
68
Australian Consumer Law, ss 18 and 236.
69
(2020) 142 ACSR 338.
70
Australian Consumer Law s 236 allows claimants to pursue damages where they suffer loss because of a breach of s 18. See
eg Janssen-Glag Pty Ltd v Pfizer Pty Ltd (1992) 37 FCR 526.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 53

Globally, regulators are responding to the need to ensure that review and rating websites
avoid misleading consumers. For example, the Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission (‘ACCC’) has issued guidelines for managing online reviews that require the
disclosure of commercial relationships, such as paid endorsements and include a prohibition
against omitting or selective editing of reviews and a prohibition against the use of reviews by
71
persons who have not used a product or service. Similar guidance is provided by the UK’s
72
Competition and Markets Authority (‘CMA’) and by the International Consumer Protection
73
and Enforcement Network at the international level. Further, regulators routinely publish
material to demonstrate that their guidelines are enforced. Examples include case studies
74 75
published on the ACCC website, the CMA website, and the Federal Trade Commission
76
(‘FTC’) website. The regulatory guidelines are often reflected in the published policies of rating
77
sites. Consequently, while robust verification of consumer posts may be hard to substantiate,
there is some basis for assuming that care is taken by the review and rating websites to avoid
78
fraudulent ratings and reviews.

Apart from the potential manipulation of consumers, others are concerned that the
quality of online legal services cannot be accurately portrayed by online review and rating sites
because consumers are not sufficiently placed to judge their quality. As noted above, consumers
assume that lawyers are adept and that their services are audited by regulators. Consequently, as
they lack expert knowledge of the law, consumers tend to focus on their service experience and
the price of the service rather than on whether the technical content of the legal advice they

71
‘Managing online reviews’, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (Web Page, 2013)
<https://www.accc.gov.au/business/advertising-promoting-your-business/managing-online-reviews>.
72
Competition and Markets Authority, ‘Giving a Balanced Picture: Do’s and Don’ts for Online Review Sites’, Online reviews
and endorsements: advice for businesses (Web Page, 4 March 2016) <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/online-
reviews-and-endorsements-advice-for-businesses>.
73
International Consumer Protection and Enforcement Network, ‘ICPEN ORE Guidance for Traders and Marketers’,
ICPEN: Initiatives (Web Page, 2020) <https://icpen.org/industry-guidance>.
74
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, ‘Removalist Admits Publishing False Testimonials’ (Media Release,
9 November 2011) <https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/accc-removalist-admits-publishing-false-testimonials>. See also
Citymove infringement notice: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, Citymove Pty Ltd - Infringement notice
(Web Page, 27 July 2015), <https://www.accc.gov.au/public-registers/infringement-notices/citymove-pty-ltd-infringement-notice-
2>.
75
Competition and Markets Authority, ‘CMA takes Enforcement Action Against Fake Online Reviews’ (Media Release, 4
March 2016) <https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-takes-enforcement-action-against-fake-online-reviews>. In one of the
cases, Total SEO agreed to provide the CMA with undertakings not to design or prepare fake reviews, see: CMA Online Fake
Reviews (Web Page, 8 December 2015) <https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/potential-fake-online-reviews-search-engine-
optimisation-company>.
76
Federal Trade Commission, ‘FTC Brings First Case Challenging Fake Paid Reviews on an Independent Retail Website’
(Press Release, 26 February 2019) <https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/02/ftc-brings-first-case-challenging-fake-
paid-reviews-independent>. See also Federal Trade Commission v Cure Encapsulations Inc and Naftula Jacobowitz (2019)
WL 1598135 (Eastern District New York).
77
See, eg, Trustpilot, Guidelines for Reviewers (Web Page, April 2020) <https://legal.trustpilot.com/for-reviewers/guidelines-
for-reviewers> and Sitejabber, Terms of Service (Web Page, 1 January 2020) <https://www.sitejabber.com/terms>.
78
Hunt (n 60) 4 in which it is contended that ‘present consumer protection laws, guidelines and industry codes do appropriately
regulate fake reviews, albeit enforcement actions and consumer education in the area has lagged until recently’.

September 2020
54 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

79
receive has best served their interests. This focus on service experience and price tends to mask
issue complexity and differences in law firm capacity. From a consumer’s perspective it may be
unclear whether the reviews and ratings they are perusing relate to an established commercial
firm comprised of a cadre of lawyers with high levels of specialised expertise, a micro-firm of one
80
or two generalist lawyers or a call centre staffed by large numbers of paralegals. As a result, other
than simple routine matters that lend themselves to commodification, with their emphasis on
service experience and price, online review and rating sites may actually encourage lower
81
standards of legal service.

Finally, even on the best review and rating sites, malicious individuals may post negative
reviews that do not genuinely reflect the quality of their experience. Al Muderis v Duncan (No 3) 82

exemplifies this problem. The case arose after Dr Al Muderis performed a hip arthroscopy on
one of the defendants. After the operation, the defendant complained that Dr Al Muderis had
damaged his pudendal nerves. The defendant initiated a lawsuit alleging negligence against Dr
Al Muderis and complained about his surgery to the Health Care Complaints Commission. Both
the lawsuit and the complaint were dismissed because there was no evidence of any nerve injury.
Subsequently, the defendant and another party began an online campaign against Dr Muderis,
including vitriolic posts on Facebook, YouTube and Pinterest in which they claimed among other
things that Dr Al Muderis was a ‘butcher’. As a result of the vicious and totally unfounded
campaign against him, Dr Al Muderis was awarded $480,000 in damages.
83
Fortunately, it appears that only a small percentage of online reviews are malicious.
Additionally, subject to regulatory requirements regarding the improper manipulation of online
reviews, service providers exposed to malicious or vexatious reviews can take steps to remove
84
them from the online review platform to ensure a more accurate account of their consumer
experiences.

Notwithstanding the difficulties of attributing online reviews and the quality of legal
service experience, the authors of this paper are of the view that evidence gleaned from review

79
d’Andria (n 34) 9; Legal Services Consumer Panel, Quality in Legal Services (n 32) 3.1.
80
Law Society of England and Wales, Applying the comparison web site model to legal services (Research Report, September
2011) 34.
81
London Economics and You Gov, Consumer Behaviour Research: A Report by London Economics and YouGov for the
Law Society (Research Report, November 2017) vi.
82
[2017] NSWSC 726. See also Cheng v Lok (n 66), as it is a similar case involving a lawyer (see discussion further below).
83
See Michael Luca and Georgios Zervas, ‘Fake It Till You Make It: Reputation, Competition, and Yelp Review Fraud’ (2016)
62(12) Management Science 3412, 3414 in which it was found that only 1% of Yelp reviews submitted between 2004–2012
breached Yelp’s terms of service (e.g., were reviews that contained offensive or discriminatory language), but in which it was
also noted that 16% of Yelp reviews are classified as ‘fake’.
84
Nina Hendy, ‘Negative Review? Now You Can Just Delete It’, Sydney Morning Herald (1 July 2019)
<https://www.smh.com.au/business/small-business/negative-review-now-you-can-just-delete-it-20190613-p51x8q.html>.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 55

and rating sites provides a valuable measure that forms part of and complements other measures
85
indicative of legal service quality. As Hagan emphasises, there is an inextricable link between
users’ experiences and the effectiveness of the legal services that they receive. Poor service quality
86
can deter users and hamper their ability to access or understand legal materials and advice.
Conversely, a good user experience can facilitate greater levels of user comprehension and
involvement and thus better align the legal outcomes that flow from users’ legal service
87
encounters with their wants and needs. Failing to take account of consumer reviews and ratings
is not only inconsistent with law firm and in-house counsel practice that depends on consumer
88
feedback to sustain continuous service improvement, but also contradicts general trends in
89
professional service delivery towards more client-empowered service relationships. At the very
least, resorting to consumer review and rating sites provides an indication of the factors that
consumers consider when using legal services.

By conducting a computer-assisted content analysis, our exploratory research of

consumer perceptions of online legal services aims to create a conceptual framework that marries
findings from the e-service and legal professional service quality literature with consumer
feedback about online legal services.

IV METHODOLOGY

A Background

Partly because the online delivery of legal professional advisory services has lagged behind the
growth of e-commerce in other areas, such as in retail goods, banking, insurance and travel, very
few studies have attempted to measure consumer perceptions of their quality. Hagan’s mixed-
methods study, which undertook a content analysis of consumer complaints and administered a
90
small sample user needs survey, is one of the pioneering studies in this field. Hagan’s study
focused on online legal service websites as a source of information and guidance rather than as a

Noel Semple, ‘Measuring Legal Service Value’ (2019) 52(3) University of British Columbia Law Review 943, 966–8;
85

Margaret Hagan, ‘The User Experience of the Internet as a Legal Help Service: Defining Standards for the Next Generation of
User-Friendly Online Legal Services’ (2016) 20(2) Virginia Journal of Law and Technology 394, 402–4; Legal Services
Consumer Panel, Quality in Legal Services (n 32) 3.19–3.26; Chaserant and Harnay (n 20) 283.
Nigel J Balmer et al, ‘Law—What is it Good For? How People see the Law, the Courts and Lawyers in Australia’ (Research
86

Report, 2019) 44–5, which links previous negative experiences of legal services with perceptions of access to justice.
Hagan (n 85) 403.
87

Semple (n 85) 963.

88

Richard Susskind, Tomorrow’s Lawyers: An Introduction to your Future (Oxford University Press, 2nd ed, 2017) 47.
89

Hagan (n 85).
90

September 2020
56 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

source of advisory services and developed the following constructs for the quality of users’
experiences: 1) the clarity of the value proposition, purpose and navigation; 2) the authority and
reliability of jurisdiction specific content; 3) accessibility and a lack of paywalls or upselling; 4) the
comprehensiveness and coherency of the information flow and resources; 5) the appealing
nature of the website design; and 6) the dialogue and narrative (users prefer a more informal and
anecdotal styles of information delivery).

Rather than drawing on existing quality scales set out in the information systems,
marketing and business management literature, Hagan adopted a bottom-up, primary research
91
approach to identifying her quality criteria. The advantage of Hagan’s bottom-up approach is
that it provides a clear focus on consumer interactions with law-related websites. Previously,
concerns have been raised in the literature about the merit of a one-size-fits-all approach across
different forms of online service delivery that does not distinguish between industry sectors or
92
the nature of the delivered services. Further, it has been suggested that the use of pre-existing
93
broad-based scales can bias researchers and mask important context specific considerations.
Conversely, Hagan’s study focused on website quality and was limited by its small sample of
survey respondents (35) and the use of three self-help legal information sites during the survey.
Similarly, the content analysis of consumer complaints was limited to 102 consumer reviews and
94
did not appear to use tools that facilitated the quantitative analysis of the material. Finally, as will
be gleaned from the discussion below, most of the constructs identified by Hagan in fact align
with those in pre-existing scales.

Together with their variations, the two most established scales for measuring service
95
quality and online service quality are SERVQUAL and E-SERVQUAL, respectively. The
SERVQUAL scale is designed to measure the quality of services provided to clients at the service
provider’s premises, while the E-SERVQUAL scale aims to measure the quality of the firm’s
digital services.

91
Hagan (n 85), 409–11.
92
Audrey Gilmore and Rosalind McMullan, ‘Scales in Services Marketing Research: A Critique and Way Forward’ (2009)
43(5/6) European Journal of Marketing 640, 646.
93
Prateek Kalia, ‘Service Quality Scales in Online Retail: Methodological Issues’ (2017) 37(5) International Journal of
Operations and Production Management 630, 645.
94
Standard tools for undertaking content analysis include NVivo and Leximancer. For a discussion of these tools and their uses
see, Popi Sotiriadou, Jessie Brouwers and Tuan-Anh Le, ‘Choosing a Qualitative Data Analysis Tool: A Comparison of NVivo
and Leximancer’ (2014) 17(2) Annals of Leisure Research 218.
95
B Palese and A Usai, ‘The Relative Importance of Service Quality Dimensions in e-Commerce Experiences’ (2018) 40
International Journal of Information Management 132, 134 in which it is asserted that SERVQUAL is the most used
instrument to assess service quality. See also Kalia (n 93) 645 in which it is noted that in a review of studies into online retail
service quality, 50% of the studies used SERVQUAL in its original or an adapted form.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 57

Based on findings derived from focus groups, SERVQUAL was developed in 1985 by
96 97
Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry and was subsequently tested, re-tested and refined.
SERVQUAL proceeds on the basis that service quality equates to the difference between
expected and perceived service performance. Initially, SERVQUAL comprised 10 determinants
of service quality; however, later, the dimensions were reduced to five (see Table 1).

Table 1. SERVQUAL—Dimensions of Quality

Quality Dimensions Definition
Reliability The degree to which the service is performed accurately and consistently
Assurance The level of the service provider’s expertise and its ability to convey trust and
confidence
Tangibles The service provider’s profile, including its range of services, physical facilities, tools,
equipment, personnel and clientele
Empathy Demonstrated concern for client interests and the capacity to provide individualised
attention
Responsiveness Readiness and willingness to flexibly respond to a client’s needs promptly

Subsequently, Parasuraman, Zetihaml and Malhotra developed the E-SERVQUAL scale

98
to evaluate online service quality. This scale was also widely adopted in original or adapted form
99 100
by researchers in other fields, such as internet banking, web-based university services, airline
101 102
ticketing and e-government services. With a focus on retail-oriented websites like Amazon,
Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Malhotra proposed and later validated a seven-dimension scale
broken into two parts. As Table 2 below shows, Part One is a core service dimension scale and
Part Two is a service recovery dimension scale that measures how service providers address
customer problems or requests for assistance.

96
Anantharanthan Parasuraman, Valarie A Zeithaml and Leonard L Berry, ‘A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and its
Implications for Future Research’ (1985) 49(4) Journal of Marketing 41.
97
See, eg, Ananthanarayanan Parasuraman, Valarie A Zeithaml and Leonard L Berry, ‘Servqual: A Multiple-Item scale for
Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality’ (1988) 64(1) Journal of Retailing 12; Valarie A Zeithaml et al, Delivering
Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations (Simon and Schuster, 1990) ; Arun Parasuraman, Leonard
L Berry and Valarie A Zeithaml, ‘Refinement and Reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale’ (1991) 67(4) Journal of Retailing
420; Leonard L Berry and Anantharanthan Parasuraman, Marketing services: Competing through Quality (Simon and
Schuster, 2004).
98
Ananthanarayanan Parasuraman, Valarie A Zeithaml and Arvind Malhotra, ‘ES-QUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing
Electronic Service Quality’ (2005) 7(3) Journal of Service Research 213.
99
Farnaz Beheshti Zavareh et al, ‘E-Service Quality Dimensions and their Effects on e-Customer Satisfaction in Internet
Banking Services’ (2012) 40 Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 441; Charles Dennis et al, ‘E-retailing by Banks: E-
service Quality and its Importance to Customer Satisfaction’ (2009) 43(9–10) European Journal of Marketing 1220.
Nemati Babak et al, ‘Analyzing e-Service Quality in Service-based Website by E-SERVQUAL’ (2012) 2(2) Management
100

Science Letters 727.

Naeimeh Elkhani, Sheida Soltani and Mir Hadi Moazen Jamshidi, ‘Examining a Hybrid Model for e-Satisfaction and e-
101

Loyalty to e-Ticketing on Airline Websites’ (2014) 37 Journal of Air Transport Management 36.
M Soledad Janita and F Javier Miranda, ‘Quality in e-Government Services: A Proposal of Dimensions from the Perspective
102

of Public Sector Employees’ (2018) 35(2) Telematics and Informatics 457.

September 2020
58 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

Table 2. E-SERVQUAL—Dimensions of Quality

E-SERVQUAL Core Scale
Quality Dimensions Definition
Efficiency Ease of access, speed and navigability of the organisation’s website
Fulfilment The extent to which the site delivers what is ordered
System Availability The technical reliability of the organisation’s website
Privacy The level of security afforded to client information
E-SERVQUAL Recovery Scale
Quality Dimensions Definition
Responsiveness Management of problems and complaints
Compensation The degree to which the organisation compensates clients when problems
arise
Contact Access to assistance through telephone, online help

Other studies have suggested that bifurcating between traditional service dimensions and
e-system quality does not fully reflect current business models for the delivery of professional
103
services or the holistic user experience. Modern service industries, including legal, accounting
and financial services, no longer operate as purely traditional or purely digital industries. It has
also been suggested that there are significant analogies between traditional service dimensions
104
and digital quality dimensions in any event. For example, responsiveness, which is defined as
the readiness and willingness to assist clients in the traditional scale, is replicated in the online
scale as the degree to which the digital service provider manages problems and complaints.
Similarly, privacy and assurance tend to cover similar ground, at least insofar as the security and
integrity of client data are concerned. Accordingly, successive scholars have adopted a more
105
integrated approach.

B Our Quality Dimensions

We also decided to adopt an integrated approach that combines aspects of Hagan’s quality
criteria, SERVQUAL and E-SERVQUAL. The themes we explored and their inter-relationship
with Hagan’s work, SERVQUAL and E-SERVQUAL are set out in Table 3.

Table 3. Our Research Themes

See, eg, Abhishek Vashishth and Ayon Chakraborty, ‘Measuring the Service Quality of Services: TRADONIC SERVQUAL
103

Model’ in Norman Gwangwava and Michael Mutingi (eds), E-Manufacturing and E-Service Strategies in Contemporary
Organizations (IGI Global, 2018) 219, 227; Zhilin Yang and Xiang Fang, ‘Online Service Quality Dimensions and their
Relationships with Satisfaction: A Content Analysis of Customer Reviews of Securities Brokerage Services’ (2004) 15(3)
International Journal of Service Industry Management 302, 308.
Kalia (n 93) 651.
104

See, eg, Jing Fan and Wenting Yang, ‘Study on e-Government Services Quality: The Integration of Online and Offline
105

Services’ (2015) 8 (3) Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management 693; Dennis Herhausen et al, ‘Integrating Bricks with
Clicks: Retailer-Level and Channel-Level Outcomes of Online–Offline Channel Integration’ (2015) 91 (2) Journal of Retailing
309; and Riza Casidy, ‘Brand Orientation and Service Quality in Online and Offline Environments: Empirical Examination in
Higher Education’ (2014) 35 (3) Services Marketing Quarterly 236.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 59

Our theme Hagan’s theme SERVQUAL E-SERVQUAL

Client care—identified and met N/A Empathy, Responsiveness
need; courtesy and responsiveness
responsiveness
Competence/professionalism Authority and Assurance/tangibles Fulfilment
reliability of
jurisdiction specific
information
Ease of use Clarity of value N/A Efficiency
proposition, purpose
and navigation;
accessibility;
appealing nature of
website design
Effective communication Dialogue and Empathy, Contact
narrative responsiveness
Efficiency Comprehensiveness Reliability Efficiency, fulfilment, system
and coherency of availability
information flow and
resources
Security N/A Assurance Privacy
Value for money Clarity of value N/A N/A
proposition
We also wanted to gauge the relative importance to users of price/affordability, integrity,
reliability and accuracy and the overall quality of the user’s experience. In addition to the themes
above, the expression of users’ relative weightings of these factors was also analysed.

C Our Data
106
Our research used a non-participatory ‘netnography’ approach to data collection and analysis.
Netnography is a qualitative research method that uses publicly available information provided
by members of online communities. It emerged as a research method in the US during the 1990s
107
as the use of the internet became more widespread. With the advent of Web 2.0 and the
explosion of social media communications, the use of netnography research methods grew and
108
extended to fields such as education, marketing, sport and tourism. Netnography has significant
109
advantages, including its cost effectiveness and unobtrusive and non-influencing nature.
However, like any research method, netnography also has disadvantages that need to be borne
in mind, as these factors may limit the application of our study’s findings. These disadvantages

Shirin Alavi, ‘Netnography: An Internet Optimized Ethnographic Research Technique’ in Amandeep Takhar-Lail and Ali
106

Ghorbani (eds), Market Research Methodologies: Multi-method and Qualitative Approaches (IGI Global, 2015) 71; Leesa
Costello, Marie-Louise McDermott and Ruth Wallace, ‘Netnography: Range of Practices, Misperceptions, and Missed
Opportunities’ (2017) 16(1) International Journal of Qualitative Methods 1; Yang and Fang (n 103) 310.
Costello, McDermott and Wallace (n 106) 2–3; Robert v Kozinets, ‘Marketing Netnography: Prom/ot(Ulgat)ing a New
107

Research Method’ (2012) 7(1) Methodological Innovations 37, 39.

Costello, McDermott and Wallace (n 106) 3.
108

Ibid.
109

September 2020
60 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

110
include netnography’s limited focus on text supplied by self-selected online users, user
anonymity, concerns related to the reliability and integrity of the reviews and netnography’s
111
dependence on researchers to interpret and analyse user communications.

The netnography method we adopted mirrors that of Yang and Fang, who examined
online customer feedback about digital securities brokerage services from online review and
112
rating sites. Yang and Fang postulated that customers who expend time and effort voicing their
views about their online experiences were likely to reveal the service quality attributes of most
concern to them and that such feedback would thus provide insights into customers’ perceptions
113
of service quality. We agree.
114
We identified two leading consumer review sites (i.e., Sitejabber and Trustpilot
115
Australia ) as sources of data. Sitejabber is a US-based consumer review site that collects and
curates consumer reviews of over 100,000 businesses. Since its foundation in 2008, over
116
100 million consumers have accessed the site. It uses software, manual spot-checking and
community involvement to detect and minimise the risk of fake reviews. Reviewers are also
required to certify that their reviews are based on their own personal experiences. Submission of
proof of purchase is not mandatory but it is encouraged. Trustpilot Australia is part of the larger
global Trustpilot group that houses 65 million reviews of over 300,000 websites. It employs
measures similar to those employed by Sitejabber to deter fake reviews. In each instance, reviews
are voluntarily supplied for public dissemination by site users and all rights to use and publish
the reviews are assigned to the review sites.

After receiving permission from Sitejabber and Trustpilot, the researchers obtained
ethics approval to download and analyse consumer reviews related to online legal services
generated by the sites. To avoid outlier legal service providers, the downloaded material was
confined to online legal services sites that had received more than 15 reviews. In total, 2,292
reviews were downloaded from Sitejabber and 131 reviews were downloaded from Trustpilot
Australia.

Nan Hu, Paul A Pavlou and Jie Zhang, ‘On Self-Selection Biases in Online Product Review’ (2017) 41(2) MIS Quarterly
110

449.
Alavi (n 106) 75; Andukuri Raj Shravanthi and Moghana S Lavanya, ‘Netnography: A Qualitative Research Tool’ (2012) 2(6)
111

International Journal of Management Research and Reviews 903, 909.

Yang and Fang (n 103) 310.
112

See further Hagan (n 85) 422.

113

Home Page, Sitejabber (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.sitejabber.com/>.

114

Home Page, Trustpilot (Web Page, 2020) <https://au.trustpilot.com/>.

115

About Us, Sitejabber (Web Page, 2020) <https://www.sitejabber.com/about-us>.

116

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 61

The downloaded material was then subjected to manual content analysis using NVivo software
incorporating the themes and analytical factors outlined above. All reviews were downloaded into
an Excel spreadsheet in their historical order. However, due to time and resource constraints,
the researchers were not able to analyse every single review; rather, every fifth review as it
appeared in the excel spreadsheet uploaded to Nvivo was analysed, resulting in an analysis of
485 posted reviews.

D Summary

In summary, we analysed 485 randomly selected reviews of online legal service providers where
15 or more reviews had been posted to the Sitejabber or Trust Pilot Australia review sites. The
themes analysed were:

1. Client care
2. Competence/professionalism
3. Ease of use
4. Effective communication
5. Efficiency
6. Security
7. Value for money

V FINDINGS

A General
117
Consistent with other studies examining consumer reviews and rating sites, the first finding of
note is that positive reviews generally outnumbered negative reviews. Automated sentiment
118
analysis across all files uploaded to Nvivo revealed approximately 58% positive references and
42% negative references. Of the total number of positive sentiment references, 60% were rated
as moderately positive and 40% as very positive. Similarly, of the total number of negative

Hu, Pavlou and Zhang (n 110) A2; Wendy Moe and David Schweidel, ‘Positive, Negative or Not at All? What Drives
117

Consumers to Post (Accurate) Product Reviews?’ (2013) 5(2) GfK Marketing Intelligence Review 9.
Sameerchand Pudaruth et al, ‘Sentiment Analysis from Facebook Comments using Automatic Coding in NVivo 11’ (2018)
118

7(1) Advances in Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence Journal 41.

September 2020
62 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

sentiment references, 55% were rated as moderately negative and 45% were rated as very
negative. The distribution is represented in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1. Sentiment Analysis

Sentiment Analysis
35
Percentage of reviews falling in each category of

30

25

20

15
sentiment

10

0
Very Moderately Moderately
Negative Positive Very Positive
negative negative positive
Percentage of reviews 9 21 12 18 30 10
Sentiment

The distribution of sentiment in Figure 1 is inconsistent with previous studies that have
examined the relationship between consumers’ positive and negative ratings and various
dimensions of service quality. These studies have typically found proportionally more
119
polarisation resulting in either U- or J-shaped rating distribution patterns. It has been postulated
that the typical U- or J-shaped distribution of rating sentiment is due to reviewer self-selection
bias, whereby reviewers are more likely to post reviews of their extremely positive or negative
120
experiences. Reinforcing reviewer self-selection bias, it appears that review audiences find
121
polarised reviews and ratings more useful and entertaining.

It is unclear why the sentiment analysis of the reviews of online legal services selected in
our study did not match the typical patterns of distribution. However, we note that in other
research that has used sentiment analysis algorithms applied to text like those built into NVivo,

Palese and Usai (n 95) 137; Verena Schoenmueller, Oded Netzer and Florian Stahl, ‘The Drivers and Downstream
119

Consequences of the J-Shaped Distribution of Consumer Online Reviews’ (2017) 45 Advances in Consumer Research 302,
302.
Schoenmueller, Netzer and Stahl (n 119) 303; Hu, Pavlou and Zhang (n 110) 450.
120

Sangwon Park and Juan L Nicolau, ‘Asymmetric effects of online consumer reviews’ (2015) 50 Annals of Tourism Research
121

67.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 63

122
the results are less polarised than where sentiment is assessed only by reference to ratings. It
appears that the language used in the review texts is likely to be more neutral in tone and more
123
nuanced in effect than that reflected in the star rating.

Our aggregated data across each theme and node of analyses are summarised in Figures
2 and 3 below.

Figure 2. Client Data Themes

Client Data Themes

350
Number of references classified within themes

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
Competence Communicat Value for
Client Care /professional Ease of use Efficiency Security
ism ion Money
Client Data Themes 171 306 110 162 156 12 112

Themes addressed by clients

See, eg, Wu He, Zuopeng Zhang and Vasudeva Akula, ‘Comparing Consumer-produced Product Reviews Across Multiple
122

Websites with Sentiment Classification’ (2018) 28(2) Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 142.
Parisa Lak and Ozgur Turetken, ‘Star Ratings versus Sentiment Analysis —A Comparison of Explicit and Implicit Measures
123

of Opinions’ (Conference Paper, Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, January 2014) 796, 801.

September 2020
64 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

Figure 3. Importance of Factors in Client Assessments

Importance of factors
400
Number of references classified within factors

350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Importance of Importance of Importance of Importance of the
price/affordability integrity reliability & quality of client
accuracy experience
Importance of factors 73 92 238 340
Importance of factors involved in online service provision

124
Reflecting the characterisation of legal services as a form of credence good, the data
indicate that consumers rate the quality of their experience more highly than factors that require
a more objective assessment of credence attributes, such as value for money, or factors that are
not easily ascertainable such as professional integrity or data security. In other words, reviewers
are more likely to speak to the experience attributes of online legal services than the credence
125
attributes of online legal services.
126
Consistent with Yang and Fang’s study of online brokerage firms, the data also showed
that professionalism, reliability and accuracy are important factors in the minds of consumers. A
selection of both positive and negative comments related to the subset of professionalism,
reliability and accuracy (see Table 4 below) illustrates consumer sentiment on these matters.

Chaserant and Harnay (n 20) 283–5; Frank H Stephen, ‘Regulation of the Legal Professions or Regulation of Markets for
124

Legal Services: Potential Implications of the Legal Services Act 2007’ (2008) 19(6) European Business Law Review 1129, 1130
in which it is noted that consumers of legal services are generally unable to determine whether the legal service they received
was appropriate or that they were charged an appropriate fee. Thus, legal services are ‘credence’ services, as their quality is not
verifiable.
Palese and Usai (n 95) 136; Shannon Lantzy, Katherine Stewart and Rebecca Hamilton, ‘Naive or Savvy: How Credible are
125

Online Reviews for Credence Services?’ (2013) 41 Advances in Consumer Research 117, 118.
Yang and Fang (n 103) 315.
126

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 65

Table 4. Select Positive and Negative Sentiments

Positive Negative
• 'Very professional and problem solving orientated. • This is a clear rip-off but they don’t seem to care.
Customer driving quality service and fast results. A supposed legal firm is deserving of a class action
Highly recommended. lawsuit through sheer negligence
• Professional, very efficient, concise and • [W]as the worst answer ever, the guy didn’t
professional assistance concerning my request for understand anything I was asking, which I partly
printing a document. blame on their limit of 700 characters and partly
• She responded quickly and professionally, and on the fact that the guy didn’t seem like he really
resolved my issue to my satisfaction, going above even read the whole thing. This company is awful,
and beyond to do so. don't waste your time.
• Wonderful & very professional & high level of • Templates that don´t apply to everyone!, My
listening skill even though it’s through chatroom experience was NEGATIVE.
• He was professional and knowledgeable and a • Very slow and not responsible service.
pleasure to work with. • They promise you something, give you misleading
• Their process is so straight forward and information, and NEVER take accountability of
exceptionally good value for money. their mistakes.

To better understand the relationship between service quality and consumer satisfaction,
we cross-tabulated the sentiment analysis outlined in Figure 1 across our themes and analysis
factors to determine which aspects of service quality that consumers rated as either positive or
negative in relation to their online legal service experiences. The results of these analyses are set
out in Tables 5 and 6.

Table 5. Sentiment and Theme

Sentiment Client Competence/ Ease Effective Efficiency Security Value
Care professionalism of communication for
use money
Positive 130 217 101 114 127 6 73
Very positive 75 115 67 63 69 4 38
Moderately 83 133 58 67 66 5 44
positive
Negative 58 119 13 63 41 8 49
Moderately 28 52 5 30 19 2 14
Negative
Very negative 26 62 6 36 21 6 29
Note: The numbers refer to the number of comments that were made on the rating sites that were positive/negative
in relation to the themes applied by the authors in classifying the online legal service delivery data.

Table 6. Sentiment and Analytical Factors

Sentiment Importance of Importance of Importance of Importance of the
price/ affordability integrity reliability and quality of the client
accuracy experience
Positive 55 38 172 256
Very positive 24 20 89 145
Moderately positive 33 25 99 146
Negative 25 66 85 114
Moderately 7 25 32 49
negative
Very negative 16 31 41 62

September 2020
66 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

Note: The numbers refer to the number of comments that were made on the rating sites that were
positive/negative in relation to the classification of the importance of factors in online legal service delivery.

These tables demonstrate that online legal service clients expressed stronger positive and
negative sentiments about the level of professionalism and competence they received and the
quality of their experience than they do about affordability and value for money. As noted above,
clients are not well placed to determine whether the advice they receive is comparable to the
amount of money they spend or even appropriate in their circumstances. Similarly, in the
absence of information about the mean or median cost of legal services, consumers are not able
to easily make cost comparisons. Reinforcing the characterisation of legal services as a credence
good, in assessing online legal services, consumers views about price and value tend to be more
neutral than their views about their service experience. However, it should not necessarily be
concluded that value for money is unimportant to consumers. When surveyed about perceptions
of lawyers and their accessibility, consumers cite value for money, complexity, the overuse of
technical language and slowness to respond as negative considerations that affect their decisions
127
about whether they will approach a law firm. Further, a majority of Australian consumers
believe that law firms should always inform them of their costs in writing irrespective of the
128
complexity of their legal problems at the commencement of the retainer.

It is also crucial to note that consumer views about service quality may be contingent
upon perceived value. Studies have suggested that despite high levels of service quality,
consumers’ overall satisfaction may be moderated if they perceive that the professional services
129
are relatively expensive. Interestingly, the moderating effect of perceived value for money varies
according to whether the service is presented to consumers as a ‘low-cost—no-frills’ model or a
‘full-service—high-touch’ model. Thus, consumers of budget airline services place less
importance on perceived quality and more importance on value for money, while consumers of
130
full-cost airline services are driven by both value for money and service quality. A study of
consumers of high-end tertiary education services also found that cost has less effect on overall
131
satisfaction than perceptions regarding the quality of the education received. Accordingly, if

Balmer et al (n 86) 37.

127

Legal Services Council, Legal Services Council Consumer Survey 2017 (Research Report, 2017) 7.
128

Albert Caruana, Arthur H Money and Pierre R Berthon, ‘Service Quality and Satisfaction—The Moderating Role of Value’
129

(2000) 34 (11–12) European Journal of Marketing 1338, 1348.

Rajesh Rajaguru, ‘Role of Value for Money and Service Quality on Behavioural Intention: A Study of Full Service and Low
130

Cost Airlines’ (2016) 53 Journal of Air Transport Management 114, 120.

SE Leonnard, ‘Perceived Service Quality, Perceived Value for Money, Satisfaction and Repurchase Intention: An Evaluation
131

on Private University Services’ (2018) 4(1) International Journal of Commerce and Finance 40.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 67

consumers expect to receive ‘full-service—high-touch’ legal services, the effect of cost on

132
perceived service quality is likely to be small and negative in effect. Thus, to some extent, we
were surprised by the findings in the present study that ‘value for money’ is not as important to
consumers when they review online legal services, as these services are typically presented as a
133
quicker, cheaper and simpler way of obtaining legal advice than traditional services. Even so,
of the negative comments that focused on value for money, most reflected that the service
received was ‘cheap and nasty’. These sentiments are summarised in the following quotations:

• ‘Caveat emptor, you get what you pay for, but in this case, you get even less!’;

• ‘He overbilled and overcharged me, all he and his legal assistant care about is taking
your money. They don't care about your outcome’;
• ‘You can do everything they say they can do by yourself, with less cost and headaches’.

B Positive Aspects of the Client Experience

Clients who rated their experience with online legal service providers positively referred to
several common aspects, including 1) the speed and responsiveness of the service received;
2) their perceptions of expertise; 3) perceived trustworthiness; and 4) courtesy, patience and
kindness. A selection of quotations from clients that illustrate these views can be found in Table
7.

Table 7. Select Positive Client Experiences.

Positive Client Experiences
‘It’s always a great experience when you have representatives that are courteous, prompt and extremely
professional.’
‘Juan helped me resolve a couple of questions and was very professional and considerate.’
‘They are knowledgeable, smart, and very courteous.’
‘Heather was very clear and very prompt in her answers and provided exactly the information I required!’
‘Perfect service, You answered my question and gave me options to resolve my issue.’
‘absolutely professional and trustworthy, I am very pleased that I have selected LegalZoom.’

The above findings align with quality indicators used by the UK’s Legal Services
Consumer Panel to assess consumer satisfaction with legal services (whether online or face-to-
face). The Panel found that of the consumers surveyed, 87% were satisfied with the outcome of

Caruana et al (n 129) 1348; Haemoon Oh, ‘Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, and Customer Value: A Holistic
132

Perspective’ (1999) 18(1) International Journal of Hospitality Management 67, 77.

Benjamin H Barton and Stephanos Bibas, Rebooting Justice: More Technology, Fewer Lawyers, and the Future of Law
133

(Encounter Books, 2017) 71–3.

September 2020
68 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

their legal matter, and that there was a positive relationship between consumer perceptions of
134
outcomes and the quality of services received. The quality indicators assessed included clarity
135
of information, clear explanation, ongoing communication and timeliness.

C Negative Aspects of the Client Experience

Common negative aspects of the client experience included: 1) a failure to provide useful answers
to the problems posed; 2) a failure to communicate promptly or at all; 3) rudeness; and
4) perceptions of dishonesty and sharp practices. Examples of these negative views are set out
below.

Table 8. Select Negative Client Experiences

Negative Client Experience
‘Customer Service was un-helpful very dismissive’,
‘Misleading scam. What ever you do, don't even think about using live chat on their site. It’s a robot survey
disguised as chat to get your contact information and offer no live assistance.’
‘This is not a professional organization by any stretch of imagination. Every interaction with these people was
painful, and utterly unproductive.’
‘They offer NO support after you pay them and even give wrong information! I don't trust them.’
‘worst customer service, long wait for documents, rude manager.’
‘Unprofessional & lacks integrity. Completely unreliable.’

The significance of these factors accords with the types of complaint made about
traditional legal service delivery to legal services regulators. Delay, failing to comply with
instructions and failing to advise are typically the most significant categories of complaint levelled
136
against legal service providers.

VI DISCUSSION

As the delivery of legal services moves online, particularly for routine consumer and small
137
business matters, online review sites will continue to grow in importance. Negative client

Legal Services Consumer Panel, Consumer Impact Report (Research Report, March 2020) 27.
134

Ibid 31.
135

See, eg, South Australia, Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner, Legal Profession Conduct Commissioner Annual Report
136

2019 (Report, October 2019) 12 in which it was noted that approximately 50% of investigations relate to poor handling,
overcharging, delay and failing to comply with instructions. See further Solicitors Regulation Authority, First Tier Complaints
Report (Report, July 2019) in which the UK Solicitors Regulation Authority notes that the most common complaints are delay,
failure to advise and excessive costs.
Cassandra Burke Robertson, ‘Online Reputation Management in Attorney Regulation’ (2016) 29 Georgetown Journal of
137

Legal Ethics 97, 104.

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 69

138
assessments will likely lead to loss of clients, as prospective clients tend to weigh negative views
more heavily than positive ones when processing information and making decisions. Prospective
clients also tend to regard negative reviews as more accurate, helpful and trustworthy. Cheng v 139

Lok illustrates the potential effects of online reviews. 140

Mr Cheng was a respected lawyer
practising in Adelaide. Most of his clients came from the Chinese community in Australia and
from overseas and were referred to his practice by word of mouth. Between 2018 and 2019, Mr
Cheng’s practice lost 80% of his clients. Mr Cheng later learned that the loss of clientele and
subsequent retrenchment of staff at his practice were due to negative reviews posted to Google
My Business in English and Chinese by a person who had never been his client. Subsequently,
Mr Cheng sued the reviewer in defamation. During the trial, evidence was adduced that the
goodwill of Mr Cheng’s practice had been damaged by 86.28% as a result of the negative reviews
originating from a single person, which led to a loss of income of $631,229. Damages were
ultimately awarded against the defendant in the sum of $750,000.

At the same time, the use of the internet as a means for client recruitment and the use of
online review sites to facilitate clients’ choices of legal service providers are also becoming
increasingly important. Approximately 90% of consumers report that online reviews directly
141
influence their purchasing decisions. The use of comparator websites for legal services is
142
currently low; however, it is anticipated that the use of such websites will increase as the price
and quality of services become more transparent due to regulatory innovations, such as
mandatory price disclosure and the growing prevalence of consumer ratings. Thus, while our
findings show that there do not appear to be many differences between client perceptions of
service quality and value for money in the online environment compared with face-to-face
delivery, we envisage that escalation in online delivery will facilitate the increasing
commoditisation of simple legal services and that value for money may become more critical to
the success of firms.

Meanwhile, the growing importance and influence of online review sites continue to pose
challenges to law firms that largely rely on the goodwill generated by their clientele’s word-of-
mouth referrals. We have argued that the electronic word of mouth provided by review and
rating sites reduces the inherent information asymmetry that exists between law firms and

Ibid 106.
138

Sai Wang, Nicole R Cunningham and Matthew S Eastin, ‘The Impact of eWOM Message Characteristics on The Perceived
139

Effectiveness Of Online Consumer Reviews’ (2015) 15(2) Journal of Interactive Advertising 151, 152.
Cheng v Lok (n 66).
140

Wang, Cunningham and Eastin (n 139) 151.

141

Legal Services Consumer Panel, Consumer Impact Report (n 134) 14.

142

September 2020
70 Australian National University Journal of Law and Technology [Vol 1(2)

consumers of legal services regarding legal service quality and empowers consumers by arming
them with the ability to provide reputational feedback. However, we also acknowledge that
consumer benefits and the salutary lessons provided to law firms that fail to focus on legal service
quality will only be attained if the review and rating sites faithfully convey that quality. Generally,
review sites, such as those for law firms, are in the business of ‘trust trading’, so they try to do
their best to ensure (or at least improve) the reliability of reviews.

However, as noted there is evidence that reviews and ratings have been manipulated in
some cases by fake or malicious reviews. This problem is compounded where the methods used
to construct the reviews and ratings employed by the review sites lack transparency. Ideally, rating
and review sites should provide users and the subjects of review with fair, accessible and easily
understood information regarding how their online reviews are solicited and processed. Reviews
should never be accepted or rejected simply because of their sentiment. Thus, one would expect
to see clear rules regarding the rejection of unlawful material such as hate speech or clearly
defamatory matter and rules preventing undue harassment. To avoid the kinds of problems
experienced in Cheng v Lok, reviews should only be published following a confirmed
engagement between a client and a law firm. Where that is not possible, reviews should only be
accepted from registered users who can be easily traced. Law firms themselves can assist in this
process by inviting their clients to write a review about their services with a unique link that
confirms that the reviewer is a genuine client. Finally, to ensure fairness, review subjects should
be provided with a right of reply that gives them the opportunity to refute biased or deceitful
143
reviews.

As noted above, where such guidelines are not followed, action may be taken to protect
consumers by regulators such as the ACCC, FTC or the CMA. Further, in Australia, at least,
individual law firms may also commence private action if they have been subjected to misleading
or defamatory reviews. We have noted the difficulties faced by individual law firms in establishing
causation and agree that regulators are not sufficiently resourced to police every infringement;
however, it is our view that the threat of regulatory and/or law firm scrutiny should be sufficient
to deter the egregious manipulation of law firm reviews. Consequently, we continue to advance
the view that consumer rating sites provide insights into consumer perceptions of legal service
quality.

See also Christoph Busch, ‘Crowdsourcing Consumer Confidence: How to Regulate Online Rating and Review Systems in
143

the Collaborative Economy’ in Alberto De Franceschi (ed) European Contract Law and the Digital Single Market: The
Implications of the Digital Revolution (Intersentia, 2016).

September 2020
2020] Consumer Perceptions of Online Legal Service Providers 71

VII CONCLUSION

For the moment, law firms should cultivate and project the same levels of professionalism, client
care and effective communication online that would be expected of them in the traditional face-
to-face setting. Clients clearly want legal services that will help them resolve their legal problems
and/or produce good legal outcomes efficiently. They expect to be treated with courtesy and will
react negatively to any suggestion that the firm is engaging in misleading practices.

September 2020