Unbundled and fixed-fee legal services

Unbundled legal services are legal services in which the lawyer and the client divide the work of a case between them, instead of the lawyer taking on the whole matter from first advice to final order. The Solicitors Regulation Authority defines unbundling as “the process of dividing a set of tasks that make up a legal service between the consumer and legal service provider”.[1] In family law it takes such forms as a fixed-fee advice session, the drafting of a consent order or statement for a client who then files it, a barrister instructed directly for a single hearing, or a review of documents the client has prepared. The client remains a litigant in person on the court record throughout.[1][2]

The Court of Appeal confirmed in Minkin v Landsberg [2015] EWCA Civ 1152 that a solicitor and client “may limit duties by agreement”, so that a solicitor instructed for a defined task is not liable for failing to advise on matters outside it, and that restricting limited retainers would have “very serious consequences” for courts and litigants who cannot afford full representation.[3] Unbundled help is offered both by regulated lawyers, whose clients are protected by conduct rules, compulsory insurance and the Legal Ombudsman, and by unregulated document and McKenzie Friend services, whose clients are not.[4][5] The SRA’s 2023 research found that nearly a quarter of consumers who used an unbundled service would not otherwise have used a lawyer at all, and that 80 per cent of non-users had never heard of the model.[1]

Written by Jess Knauf, Director of Client Strategy at Mediate UK and Associate Member of Resolution. Reviewed by Belinda Atkins, Managing Director of Mediate UK. Last reviewed 6 September 2026; last updated 6 September 2026; next scheduled review March 2027.

Definition

The term comes from the idea of a full legal service as a bundle of tasks: initial advice, correspondence, drafting, disclosure, negotiation, issuing proceedings, preparing bundles, advocacy and dealing with the order. Unbundling separates them. The SRA’s description in its 2022 pilot was that “unbundling is when tasks that make up a legal service are taken on by the client rather than the law firm completing the whole process”.[6] The Legal Services Consumer Panel uses a similar formulation: “the separation of tasks within a package of legal services between the consumer and the legal service provider”.[7]

Three features distinguish an unbundled retainer from a conventional one. First, the scope is defined in advance and recorded in writing, so that both sides know which tasks are the lawyer’s and which are the client’s. Second, the lawyer does not go on the court record and does not conduct the litigation; the client issues, files, serves and attends. Third, the fee is usually fixed for the task rather than charged by the hour for the whole matter.[1][3] Fixed-fee full service, such as a solicitor handling an entire undefended divorce for a set price, is a pricing model rather than unbundling, although the two are often offered together.

Unbundling is not new; solicitors have long given one-off advice or drafted a document for a client to use. What changed after 2013 was scale and purpose. With most private family law outside legal aid, a growing number of people could afford some professional help but not full representation, and unbundling became the principal way for regulated lawyers to serve them.[8][7][1]

A solicitor’s duties arise from the retainer, the contract between solicitor and client, and from the tort of negligence. The scope of both is set by what the solicitor is instructed to do. In Minkin v Landsberg Jackson LJ summarised the principles: a solicitor must carry out the instructed task; advice reasonably incidental to that task is implicitly included; what is reasonably incidental depends on the circumstances, including the client’s experience; an experienced client is owed a narrower advisory duty than an inexperienced one; and “the solicitor and client may limit duties by agreement”.[3] Nothing in the Legal Services Act 2007 prevents a regulated lawyer from limiting the scope of work; the Act restricts who may exercise a right of audience or conduct litigation, not how much of a case a lawyer takes on.[9][10]

The client’s side of the arrangement is governed by the same law as any other consumer contract. The lawyer’s regulator requires clear information about scope and price at the outset; the SRA pilot identified the absence of “a formalised process to assess the consumer’s capability” to do their part as a gap in practice.[1][7] Where the provider is unregulated, the Competition and Markets Authority’s guidance requires it to give “the total price of the service, payable by the consumer (including taxes or payments to third-parties)” and not to “lead consumers to believe that their activities are regulated or approved by a regulator”.[5]

Minkin v Landsberg

Minkin v Landsberg (practising as Barnet Family Law) [2015] EWCA Civ 1152, decided on 17 November 2015 by Jackson, Tomlinson and King LJJ, is the leading authority on the scope of a limited retainer in family law.[3] Mrs Minkin, a chartered accountant, had negotiated a financial settlement with her former husband and instructed a solicitor, Ms Landsberg, on a limited retainer to put the agreed terms into a consent order in a form the court would approve. She later regretted the settlement and sued, arguing that the solicitor should have warned her against its terms and investigated the husband’s assets.[3]

The Court of Appeal held that the retainer was limited to drafting and did not extend to advising on the fairness of the settlement or investigating the husband’s means, matters on which the client had already received and rejected advice from previous lawyers. King LJ, a family judge, added that if solicitors could not safely accept limited instructions there would be “very serious consequences” for courts and litigants, because solicitors would refuse to offer affordable discrete services such as “drafting of the order”.[3] The decision gave regulated lawyers confidence that a properly documented limited retainer would be respected, while confirming that advice “reasonably incidental” to the task, judged by the client’s experience, remains part of the duty. The consent order process itself is described on consent order.

Forms of unbundled and fixed-fee service

Common forms of unbundled and fixed-fee family law help in England and Wales
ServiceWho provides itWhat the client doesNotes
Fixed-fee advice session (typically one hour)Solicitor, CILEX lawyer or Public Access barristerEverything elseOften the entry point; guideline solicitor rates from 1 January 2026 are £142 to £579 an hour[11]
Drafting a consent order, separation agreement or statementSolicitor or CILEX lawyer (regulated); paralegal service (unregulated)Negotiates the terms, files the document, attends any hearingThe Minkin scenario; scope of advice depends on the retainer[3]
Completing court forms (C100, Form A, Form E, D81)Regulated lawyers; unregulated form services; online document servicesProvides the information, signs and filesForm completion is not a reserved activity[9]
Document reviewAny of the abovePrepares the documentsCommon before a first hearing
Public Access barrister for a single hearingBarrister authorised for Public AccessConducts the litigation: filing, service, deadlinesThe BSB notes the client may still need to handle “sending documents to the court” and “keeping track of deadlines”[2]
Hearing preparation and attendance as a McKenzie FriendMcKenzie Friend (unregulated)Speaks for themselves in courtNo right of audience without the court’s permission[12]
Online divorce serviceUnregulated online providers; some regulated firmsCompletes the online application with guidanceCovered by the CMA’s 2026 consumer protection guidance[5]

The line between these services is the Legal Services Act 2007. Any provider may advise, draft and complete forms; only an authorised person may exercise a right of audience or conduct litigation, and doing so without authorisation is an offence under section 14.[9][13] Fixed fees are common in every form. The Law Society notes that “many solicitors charge a flat fee to complete a divorce”, and fixed prices for consent orders, financial disclosure and children applications are widely advertised by both regulated and unregulated providers.[14]

Regulated and unregulated providers

An unbundled service from a solicitor, barrister or CILEX lawyer carries the protections of regulation: the provider must follow its regulator’s conduct rules, hold professional indemnity insurance, operate a complaints procedure, and is subject to the Legal Ombudsman, which can award up to £50,000.[15][2][4][16] The same task bought from an unregulated paralegal, document or McKenzie Friend service carries none of these. The Legal Ombudsman covers only “regulated legal service providers”; Legal Choices, the regulators’ consumer site, states of McKenzie Friends that their “activities are not controlled”; and the CMA’s guidance notes that customers of unregulated providers “cannot necessarily access the same complaints processes and redress mechanisms available to consumers who purchase from regulated providers”.[4][17][5]

The distinction is not always visible to the customer. A single business may offer both regulated solicitor work and unregulated document work, and the CMA’s guidance is directed at that risk: an unregulated provider must not suggest “consumers will have the same regulatory protections” as regulated providers, and must state its regulatory status clearly.[5] The SRA’s register can be used to “check whether we regulate a law firm”, and its warning that “no results” means the firm should not be assumed to be regulated applies with particular force to online services.[15] The professions, their regulators and their registers are compared on family law professionals.

Risks and consumer protection

The research identifies risks on both sides. For the client, the SRA and the Consumer Panel record that vulnerable consumers may lack the confidence or knowledge to do their part, that clients may misunderstand the limits of what the lawyer has agreed to do, and that a task done badly by the client can prejudice the case.[1][7] For the lawyer, the SRA found that firms feared “legal action against them if a client does not do their part correctly or on time” and cited “professional indemnity insurance implications” whether or not they offered unbundling; earlier SRA research on family law reported that “80% of firms said that unbundling family law services had caused problems for cases and 52% said it had caused issues for the firm”.[1][7]

The protections are contractual and regulatory. A written scope, a capability assessment and plain-English terms are the Consumer Panel’s main recommendations, together with “stand-alone task agreement documents” and a Legal Ombudsman thematic review of unbundling complaints.[7] For unregulated providers the general law applies: section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 treats every contract to supply a service as including a term that “the trader must perform the service with reasonable care and skill”, off-premises and distance contracts ordinarily carry “the right to cancel the contract within 14 days from when the contract is concluded”, and misleading statements about regulatory status are unfair commercial practices.[18][5] The CMA’s 2020 recommendation of a mandatory register of unregulated providers with a redress requirement would close part of the gap; it had not been implemented by September 2026.[19]

Regulators, the CMA and the Legal Services Board

The Legal Services Board, “the oversight regulator of legal services in England and Wales”, and its statutory Consumer Panel commissioned the first qualitative research into unbundled services from Ipsos MORI, published on 17 September 2015, based on interviews with 35 consumers, 15 providers and six judges.[20][21][7] The Consumer Panel’s later summary records that the research “benefited consumers by increasing their access to justice” and “reduced their cost of legal services by up to two thirds”, while noting that services were “not promoted by providers either directly to consumers or through advertising”.[7] The Panel’s tracker survey found the proportion of consumers unbundling fell from 19 per cent in 2015 to 16 per cent in 2020.[7]

The Competition and Markets Authority opened its legal services market study on 13 January 2016 and reported on 15 December 2016 that “competition in legal services for individual consumers and small businesses is not working well”, demanding “greater transparency from legal service providers” on price, service and regulatory status.[22] Its review, launched on 9 September 2020 and published on 17 December 2020, found “some positive developments” but “limited impact on the intensity of competition”, repeated its call for the Ministry of Justice to review the Legal Services Act 2007, and recommended “a mandatory public register of unregulated providers, requiring them to provide appropriate redress” and a Legal Services Board review of “the activities that are reserved to certain legal services providers”.[23][19] The CMA’s consumer protection guidance for unregulated providers of will writing, online divorce and pre-paid probate services was updated on 30 January 2026.[5]

The SRA ran a six-month unbundled services pilot focused on family law from 2022, with 20 organisations in the delivery cohort and 114 firms responding to its survey, and published its final report on 15 June 2023.[6][1] Its chief executive said that “unbundling has the potential to make some legal services more affordable for those on low incomes”.[24] The report committed the SRA to seek alternative terminology, work with insurers on risk, develop guidance for firms, support technology and consumer awareness, and work with advice charities.[1] The Consumer Panel had recommended in March 2021 that regulators publish guidance with practical case studies and clear capability assessment frameworks.[7]

Litigants in person

Unbundling exists because of litigants in person. In January to March 2026, 49 per cent of private law children cases in the Family Court were disposed of with neither party represented and only 13 per cent with both represented.[25] Since 1 April 2013 legal aid for a solicitor in private family law has depended on an evidence gateway, ordinarily domestic abuse or child protection, as well as the means test, so most separating parents pay privately or act alone.[8][26] A person who buys unbundled help remains a litigant in person: the court treats them as unrepresented and they may bring a McKenzie Friend.[12] Their position, rights and the free help available from Support Through Court, Advocate and others are set out on litigant in person; a practical account of a first hearing is published by McKenzie Friend Services, an information site operated by Family Legal Ltd, the publisher of this wiki.[27]

The Consumer Panel’s work on litigants in person treats unbundling and McKenzie Friends as the two main partial substitutes for representation, and its 2014 report on fee-charging McKenzie Friends observed that “for many litigants in person, the real choice is actually between using a McKenzie Friend or being entirely unsupported”.[28] See McKenzie Friend.

A worked example

Family Law Service, a trading name of Family Legal Ltd, the publisher of this wiki, illustrates how a mixed provider presents the regulated and unregulated parts of an unbundled offer. Its own regulatory statement reads: “Family Legal Ltd t/as Family Law Service is not SRA-regulated. We do offer both SRA-regulated solicitor services (clearly marked) and unregulated legal information & document services that exclude reserved legal activities.”[29] The solicitor advice sessions it arranges are delivered by an SRA-regulated firm; its own paralegal drafting, form completion and McKenzie Friend work is unregulated; and it is not a law firm.[29] On 6 September 2026 its published fixed prices for children matters included Form C100 completion at £240, a C100 and Cafcass preparation package at £350, a position statement at £250 and a one-hour solicitor advice session at £299, all including VAT.[30]

Read against the analysis above, the example shows the two questions a customer of any mixed provider should ask of each task: who is doing it, and under whose regulation. A solicitor advice session bought through such a provider carries the solicitor’s firm’s regulation, insurance and Legal Ombudsman jurisdiction; a form completed by a paralegal or McKenzie Friend at the same provider does not, and the customer’s protection is the contract, consumer law and the provider’s own complaints process.[4][5] The same test applies to any solicitor’s firm offering fixed-fee drafting alongside full service, and to any online document service.

Statistics

Published figures on unbundled legal services and representation in England and Wales
MeasureFigureSource and period
Consumers using an unbundled service who would not otherwise have used a lawyerNearly one quarterSRA and YouGov consumer survey, June 2023[1]
Non-users who had never heard of unbundling80 per centAs above[1]
Firms responding to the SRA survey114 SRA-regulated firms; 20 organisations in the pilotSRA, June 2023[1]
Family firms reporting that unbundling had caused problems for cases80 per centSRA research cited by the Consumer Panel, March 2021[7]
Consumers unbundling some part of a legal service19 per cent (2015); 16 per cent (2020)LSCP tracker survey[7]
Cost reduction reported by consumersUp to two thirdsLSB and LSCP research, September 2015, as summarised by the Panel[7]
Private law children disposals with neither party represented49 per centFamily Court Statistics Quarterly, January to March 2026[25]
Solicitor guideline hourly rates£142 to £579Judiciary, from 1 January 2026[11]

History

Development of unbundled legal services in England and Wales
DateDevelopment
2007The Legal Services Act 2007 defines the reserved legal activities; advice and drafting remain open to any provider[9]
1 April 2013LASPO removes most private family law from legal aid; demand for partial help rises[8]
17 April 2014The Legal Services Consumer Panel reports on fee-charging McKenzie Friends and identifies unbundling as a parallel development[28]
17 September 2015The Legal Services Board and Consumer Panel publish Ipsos MORI research on unbundled services[21]
17 November 2015Minkin v Landsberg: the Court of Appeal upholds the limited retainer[3]
15 December 2016The CMA’s legal services market study finds competition not working well and calls for transparency[22]
17 December 2020The CMA’s review recommends a register of unregulated providers and a review of reserved activities[19]
March 2021The Consumer Panel publishes its discussion paper on unbundling[7]
13 September 2022The SRA reports interim findings from its family law unbundling pilot[6]
15 June 2023The SRA publishes the pilot’s final report and commits to guidance and work with insurers[1]
30 January 2026The CMA updates its consumer protection guidance for unregulated legal services including online divorce[5]

Criticism and debate

Supporters of unbundling, including the Legal Services Board, the Consumer Panel, the SRA and the Court of Appeal in Minkin, present it as the main way regulated lawyers can serve people who would otherwise have no help, and point to consumer research showing satisfaction levels no lower than for full service.[1][3][7] Critics within the profession point to the insurance and negligence risks, to the difficulty of advising on one part of a case without knowing the whole, and to the family firms who told the SRA that unbundling had caused problems in 80 per cent of cases.[7][1] Consumer bodies are concerned less by regulated unbundling than by the unregulated market that has grown beside it, where the customer may not know who is doing the work or under what protection, and the CMA’s unimplemented 2020 recommendation of a mandatory register remains the main proposed response.[19][5]

A further debate concerns take-up. Despite a decade of encouragement the Consumer Panel’s tracker recorded a fall in unbundling between 2015 and 2020, and the SRA found most consumers had never heard of it; the SRA’s own response was to look for a term the public understands better.[7][1] Whether unbundling, fixed fees and online services can materially reduce the proportion of unrepresented parties in the Family Court, or merely improve the preparation of those who remain unrepresented, is not yet answered by the published data.[25]

Finding unbundled help

See also

References

  1. Unbundled services pilot: final report. Solicitors Regulation Authority. 15 June 2023. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  2. How to hire a barrister. Bar Standards Board. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  3. Minkin v Landsberg (practising as Barnet Family Law) [2015] EWCA Civ 1152. Find Case Law, The National Archives. 17 November 2015. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  4. Frequently asked questions. Legal Ombudsman. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  5. Unregulated legal services: consumer protection law guidance. Competition and Markets Authority. updated 30 January 2026. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  6. Unbundled services: findings from our law firm pilot. Solicitors Regulation Authority. 13 September 2022. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  7. The provision of unbundling in the legal services market. Legal Services Consumer Panel. March 2021. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  8. Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, Schedule 1: Civil legal services. legislation.gov.uk. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  9. Legal Services Act 2007, section 12: Meaning of “reserved legal activity” and “legal activity”. legislation.gov.uk. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  10. Legal Services Act 2007, Schedule 2: The reserved legal activities. legislation.gov.uk. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  11. Guideline hourly rates 2026. Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. in force 1 January 2026. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  12. Practice Guidance: McKenzie Friends (Civil and Family Courts). Master of the Rolls and President of the Family Division. 12 July 2010. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  13. Legal Services Act 2007, section 14: Offence to carry on a reserved legal activity if not entitled. legislation.gov.uk. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  14. Getting a divorce. The Law Society. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  15. Solicitors Register. Solicitors Regulation Authority. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  16. Scheme Rules. Legal Ombudsman. in force 1 April 2023. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  17. McKenzie Friends: how they can help in court if you cannot afford a solicitor. Legal Choices (published by the legal regulators of England and Wales). Accessed 5 September 2026.
  18. Consumer Rights Act 2015, section 49: Service to be performed with reasonable care and skill. legislation.gov.uk. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  19. CMA publishes review of progress in legal services sector. Competition and Markets Authority. 17 December 2020. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  20. Legal Services Board. Legal Services Board. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  21. Research and reports. Legal Services Consumer Panel. Listing the Ipsos MORI qualitative research on unbundled legal services commissioned with the Legal Services Board, 17 September 2015. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  22. Legal services market study. Competition and Markets Authority. final report 15 December 2016. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  23. Review of the legal services market study in England and Wales. Competition and Markets Authority. 17 December 2020. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  24. Unbundling could improve access to legal services. Solicitors Regulation Authority. 15 June 2023. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  25. Family Court Statistics Quarterly, January to March 2026. Ministry of Justice. 25 June 2026. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  26. Legal aid: what you can get legal aid for. GOV.UK. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  27. Representing yourself in the family court: what to expect. McKenzie Friend Services (Family Legal Ltd). last checked 6 August 2026. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  28. Litigants in person. Legal Services Consumer Panel. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  29. About us. Family Law Service (Family Legal Ltd). Regulatory statement as published on 6 September 2026. Accessed 5 September 2026.
  30. Child arrangements services. Family Law Service (Family Legal Ltd). Prices as published on 6 September 2026, including VAT. Accessed 5 September 2026.

This article is part of Family Law Wiki, published by Family Legal Ltd. It is general information about the law of England and Wales, not legal advice. Last reviewed 6 September 2026. About this site and editorial policy · Report an error.