Review management for law firms and legal practices
People instructing a solicitor are usually dealing with something difficult, and they read reviews for reassurance rather than for detail about the law. What persuades them is evidence that the firm explained matters in plain language, kept to what it said about costs, and did not leave anyone waiting weeks for news.
KundPulse invites clients at the close of a matter, under your firm's name, with a direct link to your Google Business Profile. The wording stays neutral and never asks a client to characterise their outcome, so nothing in the request risks disclosing the nature of the work.
Confidentiality comes before volume
Requests contain no matter reference, no case description and no fee information, and they can be excluded entirely for practice areas where any contact would be inappropriate — sensitive family proceedings, criminal defence, or any client who has asked not to be contacted. Exclusions are set by matter type, so they hold without anyone remembering to apply them.
The AI reply assistant is bound by the same limits: draft replies thank the client and address process, never the substance of a matter, and every reply is reviewed by a fee earner before publication. Nothing is published automatically on a firm's behalf.
Costs and updates dominate the feedback
Grouped over a quarter, critical legal feedback concentrates on two operational themes rather than on legal quality: fees that grew beyond what the engagement letter led the client to expect, and long silences between substantive steps. Both are communication failures, and both are fixable without changing how the work is done.
Firms that respond with a fixed update cadence — a short note at agreed intervals even when there is nothing to report, plus a call before any estimate is exceeded — see those themes fall away, and clients start mentioning the updates in reviews as evidence of a well-run practice.
Complaint handling and the open public route
Clients who indicate dissatisfaction are routed to a private channel that reaches the person responsible for complaints, which sits naturally alongside a firm's regulatory complaints procedure and creates a documented record of when the concern arrived and how it was handled.
At no point is a client prevented, delayed or discouraged from publishing a public review. The private route exists so the firm hears the concern early enough to resolve it properly, and every client keeps the same open path to Google either way — which is what keeps the practice inside Google Business Profile policy and consumer rules.
What to measure
- Reviews from closed matters as a routine step rather than an occasional ask.
- Fee-expectation and update themes made visible and owned by a named partner.
- Sensitive matter types excluded from contact automatically.
- Per-office reporting for firms with more than one location.