WELCOME TO OUR QLM.DIRECT LISTING
PLEASE FEEL FREE TO SCROLL DOWN THROUGH THE (6) SECTIONS BELOW.
1. GENERAL INFORMATION:
==========================
Company Name: TW Solicitors
Address: 73 Lowfield St
City: Dartford
State/Region: England
Postal Code: DA1 1HP
Country: GB
Website URL: http://www.twsolicitors.co.uk/
Phone: 01322 222205
Owner First Name:
Owner Last Name:
Year Started:
Employees:
Revenue Estimate:
Email:
Website Type: WordPress 5.7.2
Blog: didn't find
Blog URL:
2. WEBSITE PERFORMANCE AND SECURITY:
==========================
Contact Form: found
How Fast Does This Their Website Load up
Desktop Site Load Time: 3
Mobile Site Load Time: 1.5
SSL Verified: SSL verified
3. SEO AND SOCIAL MEDIA CONNECTIONS
==========================
Video On Homepage: didn't find
Microformatscitation: didn't find
Click To Call on page: found
Facebook Connection: Yes
Google+ Connection: No
Pinterest Connection: No
YouTube Connection: No
Twitter Connection: No
Instagram Connection: No
Mobile Responsive: found
Mobile Optimized Site: found
Chatbot: not using a chatbot
Citations: 0
Keyword: Lawyers Bexley, London
Ranking On The 1st Page: didn't find
Ranking On The Map: didn't find
1st Category: Legal services
Categories: Legal services
Google+ URL: https://www.google.com/maps/place/TW+Solicitors/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x9f5debfabd93cb7c
Owner Verified: Yes
4. ONLINE REPUTATION AND MARKETING SCORE
==========================
Google Reviews #: 20
Google+ Score: 4
Google My Business Videos: 0
Top Maps Company: Graham Dawson & Co
List of Competitors:
Google Bad Reviews #: 5
Google Reviewer 1, Name (Bad Review): MrHoonercat
Google Bad Review 1: I appear to have had a very different experience to other reviewers when I sold my property in September 18, maybe they have improved since.
The first contact I received from TW Solicitors was to send them a bank transfer for £100, which I did. I emailed a couple of days later to check they had received payment but got no reply. The next contact was seven days after the initial contact, asking for a further £400 to be sent to them and an invoice which was now £100 higher than the original quote, courtesy of an admin fee. I refused both, the admin fee was explained to be an error and no further mention of the £400 was made.
We were working to an 8-week turnaround from start to finish which has been agreed by TW and the buyer's solicitor. Over the following few weeks I found the communication to be very poor, emails would go unanswered or take days for a reply. On two occasions, frustrated by the lack of communication, I went to the office during opening hours only to find they were closed. My estate agent would be ringing me, asking if this or that had been done yet, and I was constantly explaining that I hadn't heard anything back from TW. It got to the point where myself and the estate agent acting on my behalf had to ‘tag-team' on all the emails which did improve communication.
As the exchange date approached, I received a phone call from TW to confirm that the buyer had paid the deposit and signed the contract. However, if I wanted the exchange to go through on the AGREED date, I would have to pay an extra £150. When I asked why, the only reason given was that the buyer hadn't signed the contract in time to leave TW seven days before exchange. There was no explanation of why this would mean an extra charge, no ref to any T&C's, no mention of any extra costs incurred, simply a statement that they didn't have seven days notice between contract and exchange. Given that we were so close to exchange, I was hardly in a position to argue so had to pay the extra £150. I brought this charge up with the estate agents who, like me, could see no reason for the extra charge and said they had never heard of it happening before.
Edit in response to owner's reply: having checked my records, initial upfront payment of £150 was made, not £100. The extra £400 was requested in the retainer info sent by post to myself and was discussed in an email exchange on 16.07.2018 as well as the extra £100 which had been added to the intial quote. And yes, I am sure it is the same firm.
Google Reviewer 2, Name (Bad Review): Caroline McGovern
Google Bad Review (2): Rang for advice and spoke with very polite and professional gentleman named Charlie. Heard nothing from the Solicitors. Really unimpressed.
Google Good Reviews #: 14
Google Reviewer Name (Good Review): Mansoor Mir
Google Good Review: I spoke with Omotayo herself over a payment issue, and I found her calm, fair and balanced. We resolved the issue amicably. Thank you.
Reviews last 30 Days: 0
Bad Review Percentage: 25%
Bad Reviews Top 10: 4
IP Bad Reviews #: 0
IP Bad Reviews:
YP Reviews #: 0
YP Bad Reviews #: 0
YP Bad Reviews:
Keywords In Homepage: 0
Website Backlinks: 0
Website Title: TW Solicitors | Dartford Solicitors | Experienced Solicitors in Dartford
Keyword In Title: did not find
City In Title: did not find
Keyword Location: Lawyers Bexley, London
Monthly Search Volume: 0
PPC Adwords Daily Budget($): 0
PPC Adwords Monthly Budget($): 0
Google Analytics: found
Google Tag Manager: didn't find
FB Retargeting Pixel: did not find
Display Ad Retargeting: didn't find
5. DEALS AND SPECIAL OFFERS
==========================
Groupon Offer:
Groupon Offer Title:
Groupon Purchases:
Groupon Offer Expiration:
6. SOCIAL MEDIA ENGAGEMENT
==========================
Twitter Page URL:
Twitter ID:
Twitter Tweets #:
Twitter Followers #:
Twitter Likes #:
Facebook Page URL:
FB Likes #:
FB Followers #:
FB Posts In Last 30 Days:
FB Last Posted Days Ago:
FB Last Post Date:
FB Last Post Text:
FB Last Post Image:
FB Desktop Cover URL:
SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT COVER
Google+ Cover URL:
Youtube Cover URL:
Twitter Cover URL:
YouTube URL:
YouTube Subscribers:
YouTube Views:
YouTube Videos:
YouTube Video Search:
Google Video Search:
Instagram URL:
Posts #:
Instagram Followers #:
Instagram ID:
Pinterest URL:
Pinterest Followers #:
Boards #:
Pins #:
Disclaimer.
The accuracy of this information was correct at the time of sourcing and may have changed online since the time of sourcing. QLM.Direct cannot guarantee that this information is currently Up-to-date and cannot be held responsible for any decisions made by the viewer on account of the information on this page.