Google’s Local Services Ads (LSAs) offer law firms an excellent opportunity to connect with potential clients by appearing at the top of relevant search results. However, recent updates to Google’s platform have made changes that impact how law firms can manage and dispute invalid leads.
Google’s Auto Crediting System for LSA Lead Disputes
Historically, lawyers could manually dispute leads that were deemed irrelevant—such as wrong numbers, calls outside their service area, or inquiries about legal services they do not offer. Google’s recent introduction of an Auto Crediting System has shifted the dispute process away from manual intervention. Now, Google’s system automatically reviews leads within 72 hours of being charged and determines their validity. If a lead is found to be low-quality, Google may issue a credit directly to the law firm’s account.
This change reduces the administrative burden of manually disputing leads, but it also transfers a great deal of control to Google’s automated systems. While automation may streamline the process, there are potential concerns about how accurately the system can flag invalid leads without manual oversight.
The Implications for Law Firms & Solo Attorneys
For law firms that rely heavily on LSAs, this shift is significant. Without the ability to manually dispute leads, they must trust Google’s automated process to accurately assess each lead. This raises questions about transparency and the firm’s ability to intervene if the system fails to properly categorize a lead as invalid.
Law firms, especially those in competitive practice areas like personal injury or criminal defense, can spend hundreds of dollars on a single lead. If the system mistakenly deems a valid lead as appropriate, there could be serious financial implications. The introduction of the Auto Crediting System highlights the need for a more robust feedback loop between lawyers and Google to ensure that the platform is delivering the highest possible quality of leads.
Importance of LSA Lead Rating For Lawyers
While law firms can no longer manually dispute leads, they can still play an active role in improving the accuracy of Google’s automated system by rating the leads they receive. This feedback helps Google refine its algorithm to better distinguish between valuable and irrelevant leads. Lead ratings fall into two categories:
- Negatively Rated Leads: Law firms can mark certain leads as low-quality, such as spam calls, inquiries for services not provided, or contacts outside the firm’s geographic area. Although negative feedback doesn’t result in an immediate credit, over time, consistent feedback on similar leads can help Google’s system learn and improve.
- Positively Rated Leads: Rating high-quality leads reinforces Google’s understanding of what types of leads are beneficial to law firms, helping to ensure the system delivers more relevant prospects in the future.
Automated Adjudication and Its Limitations
The introduction of the Auto Crediting System provides more efficient lead management, but the reliance on automation has its limitations. The system reviews leads within 72 hours, and if a lead is flagged as invalid, a credit will be applied within 30 days. However, the process is fully automated, leaving lawyers with limited ability to challenge decisions or request a human review.
This raises important concerns about the level of oversight in dispute resolution. Without manual dispute options, lawyers are left to depend entirely on the accuracy of the automated system, which may not account for all nuances in the legal field. For instance, niche practice areas or complex legal inquiries may not be as easily categorized by an automated system compared to human evaluation.
Why Timely LSA Lead Rating is Critical
Google strongly encourages law firms to rate their leads within 30 days. Timely feedback is critical for improving the system’s performance. If firms fail to provide input within this window, the opportunity to enhance the accuracy of the platform diminishes. Ultimately, lawyers must be proactive in monitoring and rating their leads, as their feedback directly influences the future quality of the platform.
What These Changes Mean for Law Firms
While the Auto Crediting System reduces the need for manual disputes, it also poses new challenges for law firms seeking more control over their lead quality. By automating the process, Google places more responsibility on law firms to rate leads and provide feedback, but removes the ability to immediately dispute unsatisfactory leads. This shift requires law firms to be vigilant about rating leads to help shape the system’s accuracy over time.
In the absence of manual dispute options, lawyers may experience frustration if the system miscategorizes leads. The ongoing success of this automated process will depend largely on how quickly and accurately Google can adapt to the feedback provided by advertisers.
Related Blog Posts:
PPC, LSA, and SEO – A Combined Approach for Law Firms