Law firm SEO services
Someone looking for a lawyer is usually dealing with the problem that same day: a crash, an arrest, a custody hearing, a refused visa. We build the practice, office and answer pages that let that person find your firm and call it, keep each page inside your bar or SRA rules, and report every month in enquiries, consultations and signed matters, for US firms and for London solicitors.
$3,500 to $4,500 a month in the US, $3,500 in London, New York City from $7,000
Choose your market
Every market gets the same order of work: measure enquiries first, then office profiles and practice pages, then reviews, answer pages and earned links. The ethics rules, the words people search with, the regulator's own requirements and the retainer change from one market to the next, so each one has its own page and its own planning model.
$4,500 a month for injury and family law, $3,500 for criminal defense and immigration
For US firms with 5+ attorneys or 2+ offices in a mid-size metro. Practice pages per office city, a Business Profile per staffed office and an intake log that follows each call to a signed case.
By proposal from $7,000 a month
For New York firms competing across the five boroughs, where more firms, links and paid placements chase the same calls. Borough office profiles, court pages and language pages backed by staff.
$3,500 a month (about GBP 2,630), ex VAT
For London solicitors with 10+ fee earners or 2+ offices. Area office profiles, court and tribunal guides, and price pages that meet the SRA Transparency Rules and answer the first question callers ask.
These pages open in later waves. Until a page is live we publish no price for that market, and work there is scoped by proposal.
Customer success journey
Choose the situation closest to your firm, replace the sample numbers with your own and step through the year: what we ship each month, what should start to show, and what stays with the firm. The charts and the pipeline draw enquiries, consultations and signed matters to scale, expected and conservative.
Injury firm paying for most of its cases. New cases come through referrals, Local Services Ads or bought leads, and directories outrank the firm's own practice pages. Visits and fee are sample numbers. Visit to enquiry is a 3.5% assumption, about half the Ruler Analytics legal organic rate, because the pages have weak calls to action. Enquiry to signed is an 8% assumption, since many injury callers do not have a viable case.
Family practice whose guides draw readers, not clients. Divorce and custody guides attract visits from many places, and most readers never call. Visits and fee are sample numbers. Visit to enquiry is a 2.5% assumption for guide-led traffic. Enquiry to signed is a 20% assumption.
Immigration practice taking calls in several languages. Callers ring as soon as a letter or a deadline arrives, often in their first language. The site converts, but too few people reach it. Visits and fee are sample numbers. Visit to enquiry uses 7.3%, the Ruler Analytics legal organic search rate (26 May 2026). Enquiry to signed is a 16% assumption.
UK solicitors with price pages written as small print. The firm publishes the cost information the SRA requires, but on one buried page that no search reaches. Visits and fee are sample numbers in US dollars. Visit to enquiry is a 5% assumption. Enquiry to new instruction is a 15% assumption.
Analytics, call tracking and every Business Profile sit in accounts the firm controls from the first day.
The test-call report and a list of fixes your intake team can work through.
A sheet of every listing with its login and the exact office details.
Page templates the firm can reuse for its next office or practice.
A written review routine your staff run without us.
A library of answers intake staff can send to callers.
The data sets and press contacts, stored in the firm's own folder.
Booking rules and forms set up in the firm's own tools.
A channel report a managing partner can read in five minutes.
A checklist for opening each new office online.
The prompt list and the monthly results.
The revised intake script.
Every page, profile, report and routine. Leaving us costs you nothing you built.
Expected and conservative use the ramps in the assumptions panel. Month 0 is your input with no change.
Non-branded, from your analytics
From organic visits a month
From enquiries by phone and form, month 0 to the month shown
Three columns follow one month of organic demand through a firm. Move the month scrubber and each column shows what the planning model gives for enquiries, consultations held and signed matters, expected and conservative next to each other. A wide gap between the first and the last column usually means unanswered phones or consultations nobody followed up.
63Conservative 63
17.8Conservative 17.8
5Conservative 5
Each filled dot stands for 5, expected case, in every column.
The first column is enquiries by phone and form and the last is signed matters, both from the model. The stages between are spaced evenly between those two numbers, which is an assumption, not a benchmark.
This planning model is built from your inputs and from public benchmarks, most of them published by agencies and software vendors. It is not a forecast, a promise or a guarantee of rankings, enquiries, consultations, signed matters or fees. Results at any other firm, including the in-house results on this page, do not guarantee a similar outcome.
| Month | Organic visits a month, cons. | Organic visits a month, exp. | Enquiries by phone and form, cons. | Enquiries by phone and form, exp. | Signed matters, cons. | Signed matters, exp. | Fee value of signed matters, cons. | Fee value of signed matters, exp. | Cumulative, cons. | Cumulative, exp. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1,800 | 1,800 | 63 | 63 | 5 | 5 | $55K | $55K | $55K | $55K |
| 1 | 1,800 | 1,800 | 63 | 63 | 5 | 5 | $55K | $55K | $111K | $111K |
| 2 | 1,800 | 1,836 | 64.3 | 66.8 | 5 | 5 | $55K | $55K | $166K | $166K |
| 3 | 1,836 | 1,890 | 66.8 | 72.1 | 5.1 | 5.3 | $57K | $59K | $223K | $225K |
| 4 | 1,872 | 1,980 | 70.1 | 79 | 5.3 | 5.8 | $59K | $63K | $282K | $289K |
| 5 | 1,944 | 2,106 | 74.2 | 87.7 | 5.6 | 6.3 | $62K | $70K | $343K | $358K |
| 6 | 2,016 | 2,268 | 78.3 | 98.4 | 5.9 | 7 | $65K | $77K | $409K | $435K |
| 7 | 2,106 | 2,448 | 83.3 | 111 | 6.3 | 7.9 | $69K | $87K | $478K | $522K |
| 8 | 2,214 | 2,646 | 89.1 | 123 | 6.7 | 8.8 | $73K | $97K | $551K | $619K |
| 9 | 2,322 | 2,862 | 95.1 | 136 | 7.1 | 9.9 | $78K | $108K | $629K | $728K |
| 10 | 2,430 | 3,096 | 101 | 150 | 7.6 | 10.9 | $84K | $120K | $713K | $847K |
| 11 | 2,520 | 3,348 | 106 | 164 | 8.1 | 12 | $89K | $132K | $802K | $979K |
| 12 | 2,610 | 3,600 | 110 | 176 | 8.5 | 13.1 | $93K | $144K | $895K | $1.12M |
For each month m from 0 to 12: Organic visits a month(m) = V0 x VisitRamp(m). Enquiries by phone and form(m) = Organic visits a month(m) x C0 x ConversionRamp(m). Signed matters(m) = Enquiries by phone and form(m minus L) x P. Fee value of signed matters(m) = Signed matters(m) x Average fee per signed matter (USD). Cumulative fee value of signed matters = sum of fee value of signed matters from month 0 to m. Before month L, signed matters come from the month 0 level of enquiries by phone and form.
Each ramp is a multiplier on month 0, one per month. Month 0 is 1.00. Every multiplier is an assumption and is editable below.
| Multiplier | M0 | M1 | M2 | M3 | M4 | M5 | M6 | M7 | M8 | M9 | M10 | M11 | M12 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visit ramp, expected | |||||||||||||
| Visit ramp, conservative | |||||||||||||
| Conversion ramp, expected | |||||||||||||
| Conversion ramp, conservative |
This planning model is built from your inputs and from public benchmarks, most of them published by agencies and software vendors. It is not a forecast, a promise or a guarantee of rankings, enquiries, consultations, signed matters or fees. Results at any other firm, including the in-house results on this page, do not guarantee a similar outcome.
| In your model | Today (month 0) | Month 12, conservative | Month 12, expected |
|---|---|---|---|
| Organic visits a month per month | 1,800 | 2,610 | 3,600 |
| Enquiries by phone and form per month | 63 | 110 | 176 |
| Signed matters per month | 5 | 8.5 | 13.1 |
| Fee value of signed matters per month | $55K | $93K | $144K |
| Cumulative fee value of signed matters, months 0 to 12 | $721K if month 0 holds | $895K | $1.12M |
| Area | Today | Month 12 |
|---|---|---|
| Source of enquiries | Intake cannot tell which calls came from search | Each call and form carries the page or office profile it came from |
| Missed calls | Unanswered calls are guessed at, not counted | Missed calls per office are counted and reviewed each month |
| Office profiles | Thin profiles and office details that differ between directories | One complete profile per staffed office, matching everywhere |
| Practice pages | One page per practice for every place the firm serves | Pages per practice and place, each approved by a named lawyer |
| Reviews | Asked for when someone remembers | A written routine after every closed matter, inside the rules |
| Channel spend | Paid and organic judged on call volume | Cost per signed matter by channel and practice |
| Ownership | Logins scattered across former vendors | Every account, page and report held in the firm's name |
Playbook
Each card is a page type matched to a moment when someone needs a lawyer, in every market we work in. The search bar under each card shows the kind of query it answers, with your details in the brackets.
People search for the problem and the place: a DUI arrest in a county, a custody dispute in a borough, a visa refusal near a London area. We write one page for each practice and place the firm genuinely covers, with the local court, time limits and fee basis, and a lawyer at the firm signs it off.
The map results show a handful of firms, chosen largely by distance and profile quality. Each office where your people work gets a full Business Profile, with the same details on every legal directory and the bar or SRA register. Virtual and shared addresses are left out, because Google's guidelines do not accept an office the firm does not staff.
In Clio's 2024 secret shopper study, 40% of 500 firms answered the phone. A ranking that rings an unanswered line signs nothing. We test-call each office, tie calls to pages and put missed calls in the same monthly report as rankings.
What will this cost and what happens next are the first two questions on most legal calls. In England and Wales the SRA requires cost information for set services such as immigration applications and uncontested probate. We build those as full pages that meet the rule and answer the search.
Google's policy bars incentives for reviews and asking only happy clients, the FTC rule bans buying or faking them, and confidentiality rules limit what a firm can say in reply. Requests go out after a matter closes, to every client, and replies never confirm who was a client.
Intake staff hear the same handful of questions all day: how long do I have, do I need a lawyer for this, will it go to court. Plain answers, approved by a lawyer, bring callers who already understand the next step and give AI answers something accurate to quote.
Proof
43x
The founder ran SEO and paid search in-house at Brain Station 23, a software development and IT services company. The method was tracking first, then the pages closest to an enquiry, then links and conversion work. It took inbound pipeline to 43x in eight months. That was SEO and paid search together for an IT company, not a law firm, so read it as proof of method, not as a legal result.
Source: Brain Station 23 internal data, founder's in-house role; published as a multiple only
S & F Consulting, a company formation, licensing and accounting consultancy and a CMBD client
Real keywords for S & F Consulting, each with its Google position and the country searched from. S & F Consulting is not a law firm; CMBD has no law firm case study yet. Positions only.
Ranked in
Source: Ahrefs organic keywords export for sfconsultingbd.com, 16 Oct 2026. Positions are Ahrefs positions on that date, shown as keyword, position and country only.
Illustration of the goal
Illustration: a Google search for your keyword, with Your brand in the first result, above Competitor 1, Competitor 2 and Competitor 3.
Illustration of the goal, not a promise and not a client result. Competitor 1 to 3 and positions 2 to 4 are placeholders and appear only in this drawing. CMBD has no law firm case study yet.
Pricing
$3,500a month for criminal defense and immigration, $4,500 for personal injury and family law
US firms with 5+ attorneys or 2+ offices in a mid-size metro
$3,500a month (about GBP 2,630), ex VAT, standard tier
London solicitors with 10+ fee earners or 2+ offices; comprehensive scope from $4,700 by proposal
From $7,000a month, by proposal
Firms competing in New York City or another major US metro, and personal injury firms in any major metro
Fit
FAQ
The one where the firm has staffed offices. US firms in mid-size metros start with the US page, New York firms with the New York City page and London solicitors with the London page. A firm in two markets gets one programme with a page and a planning model per market.
The first quarter is tracking, office profiles and page structure. Narrow searches that combine a practice and a place usually move before broad city terms. The planning model on this page shows an expected and a conservative path from your own numbers, and both are estimates, not promises.
We draft to the standard your regulator sets: in the US, the ABA Model Rules as your state has adopted them, and in England and Wales, the SRA Code and the CAP Code. A named lawyer at your firm approves every page before it goes live, because the firm carries the duty, not the agency.
Not straight away, and we do not ask you to switch them off. We report cost per signed matter for organic next to each paid source, so the firm can move budget when the numbers support it.
Yes, when someone at the firm takes calls in that language and a fluent lawyer or staff member reviews the page. A language page with no one to answer the phone loses the caller and the firm's credibility.
The firm. Every account is opened in the firm's name, and every page, listing and report stays with you if the engagement ends.
Not as a published client result. The first law firm engagement is a pilot with day 90 figures published with the firm's consent. The proof on this page is the founder's in-house method at an IT services company, shown as a multiple, and ranked keywords for S & F Consulting, a company formation, licensing and accounting consultancy and a CMBD client, not a law firm.
Pricing and conversion figures come from agency and vendor pages, cited as directional. Rules and regulator pages are cited as published.
Guide
Most people contact a lawyer only a few times in their lives, and usually because something has just gone wrong. A driver is hurt in a collision, a relative is arrested overnight, a spouse files for divorce, a visa is refused with a deadline printed on the letter. In that moment they search, they read two or three pages, and they call whichever firm looks able to help and actually picks up. Law firm SEO is the work of being that firm, and of proving afterwards how many signed matters it produced.
This guide is for managing partners, marketing leads and practice heads at firms with several lawyers or offices, working in personal injury, family, criminal defense or immigration. It explains what law firm SEO services should include, why legal search behaves differently from other local search, how the work changes between the United States, New York City and London, what it costs, how long it takes and what to ask an agency before you sign. Every figure is linked to a named source or labelled as our assumption. For one market in full, open the United States page, the New York City page or the London page.
A useful definition starts from the outcome, not the activity. The firm wants more of the right people calling, more of those calls turning into consultations, and more consultations ending in a signed engagement letter or client care letter. Rankings, traffic and links matter only to the extent that they move those three numbers, so a programme that cannot see them is working blind.
In practice the work falls into six groups, and a credible plan names all six with a month attached to each:
Several things make legal search different from searches for a plumber or a dentist, and each one changes how the work is planned.
Google describes topics that can affect a person's health, financial stability or safety as 'Your Money or Your Life' topics, and legal questions usually touch at least one of those. Its guidance on helpful content says E-E-A-T is not a specific ranking factor, but that of experience, expertise, authoritativeness and trust, trust matters most. For a firm that means pages with a named, admitted lawyer behind them, accurate local detail and no exaggeration, which also happens to be what the ethics rules require.
A practice page is a communication about the firm's services, so it falls under the same rules as a billboard. In the US, ABA Model Rule 7.1 and the state versions of it bar false or misleading statements, and many states add their own duties on top. In England and Wales the SRA Code requires publicity to be accurate and not misleading, and the CAP Code applies as well. An agency that writes as if these rules did not exist is creating risk for the firm, not traffic.
Legal searches often show Local Services Ads, search ads, the map results and directory listings before the first ordinary result. A firm therefore competes with its own directory profiles and with paid leads as much as with other firms. The work has to cover the profiles, the listings and the firm's own pages together.
Searches like personal injury lawyer plus a large city are dominated by firms that have built content and links for a long time. A newer programme starts with narrower searches that combine a practice, a place and a question, where the person searching is often closer to calling anyway. Any agency that promises a broad city term in the first six months should explain exactly how.
We work with firms large enough to answer the calls that search produces and to measure what happens to them. In the US that means 5+ attorneys or 2+ offices; in the UK, 10+ fee earners or 2+ offices. Within that, the four practices below make up most of our planning, because each has a distinct search pattern.
Injury searches are urgent and local, and many callers do not have a viable claim, so the gap between enquiries and signed cases is wide. Fees on contingency matters are often large; FindLaw puts typical contingency fees at one third to 40% of the amount recovered. That makes a single extra signed case worth a lot, and it also makes injury the most contested practice in paid and organic search. In England and Wales, lower value road traffic claims have their own route through the Official Injury Claim service, which changes the searches injury firms can usefully target.
Divorce, custody and financial settlement searches often start long before the person is ready to instruct anyone. Guide content can attract large numbers of readers, but a page that explains a process in general terms rarely produces a call. The work here is turning research traffic into consultations: local court detail, fee basis, what the first meeting involves, and a clear way to book it.
Criminal searches happen at night, at weekends and under stress, often by a family member rather than the accused. Speed of answer matters more than in almost any other practice. Pages need the right court names and charge types for the area, and the phones behind them need to be covered when the searches happen.
Immigration callers act on a deadline from a letter or a decision, and many search and call in a language other than English. Pages built in those languages work only when someone at the firm can take the call in the same language. In England and Wales, immigration applications other than asylum are among the services where the SRA requires published cost information.
Solo practitioners and boutique firms of one to three lawyers usually cannot carry a retainer at these prices or staff the phones the work produces, so we decline them. We also turn down work that depends on paid or gated reviews, invented case results, lead buying schemes the rules prohibit, or a promise that a given ranking will follow.
The order of work does not change between markets. What changes is the vocabulary people search with, the regulator, the requirements on what a firm must publish, and the price of the retainer. Each live market has its own page with its own planning model, linked from the market selector near the top of this page.
Most of our US planning assumes a firm in a mid-size metro, with practice pages per office city, a profile for each staffed office and an intake log in the firm's case management system. Copy follows Model Rule 7.1 style standards as adopted by the firm's state. Local Services Ads sit above the map results in many legal searches, so we compare them with organic on cost per signed case. The US page sets out the plan and the two retainers.
New York is priced and planned as a major metro. People search by borough, by court and in many languages, and more firms compete for the same calls. New York amended its lawyer advertising rules from 1 June 2026, under a joint order of the Appellate Division, so publishing includes pre-approval and a dated archive of each page. The New York City page covers the borough model.
London solicitors are searched for by area, by court and tribunal, and often in a first language. The SRA Transparency Rules require cost information for set services to be clear, accessible and in a prominent place on the website, along with the complaints procedure and, for authorised bodies, the SRA number and digital badge. We treat those pages as practice pages that can rank, not as small print. The London page covers the plan in British English.
The rest of the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates and Australia are planned for later waves. Until a market has its own page we publish no price for it and scope any work there by proposal.
A law firm site that wins enquiries is usually a set of specific pages, each matched to a question someone asks at a particular moment. These are the types we build first.
One page for each practice in each place the firm serves, with the court the matter will go to, the time limits that apply, how fees work and what happens after the first call. A page per city for a place the firm never visits is a thin page and a misleading one, so the list of places comes from where the firm actually works.
The map results show a few firms near the person searching. Each staffed office gets its own profile with accurate practice categories, hours and photographs from the firm's own library. Google's guidelines exclude virtual offices and addresses where the business does not have staff during business hours, so we never create a profile for an address the firm does not operate from.
Cost is the first question on many calls. In the US, a page that explains contingency fees or flat fees for a defined service saves intake time and filters out callers who were never going to instruct. In England and Wales the Transparency Rules make cost information compulsory for services such as residential conveyancing, uncontested probate, immigration applications other than asylum and summary-only motoring offences, and those pages can rank for the same price searches.
We ask the intake team for the questions they hear most and turn each into a short page approved by a lawyer: how long a person has to bring a claim in a given state, whether they need a lawyer at a first hearing, what to bring to a consultation. These pages bring callers who are better prepared, and they give AI answers accurate wording to draw from.
Each lawyer page lists admissions, the courts they appear in, the languages they speak and the practices they handle. Any certification is stated only as it is actually held; in the US, Model Rule 7.2 limits claims to be a certified specialist, and in the UK words like specialist or accredited are used only where the matching accreditation exists.
Many callers search in Spanish, Chinese, Bengali, Polish, Punjabi or another language. We write a language page only when the firm has someone who takes calls in that language and a fluent reviewer for the copy. Otherwise the page brings in calls the firm cannot handle.
The most common gap we expect to find is not in search at all. In Clio's 2024 secret shopper study of 500 firms, as summarised by the Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism, 40% of firms answered the phone and 33% replied to email. A firm that misses most of its calls will sign more cases by fixing its phones than by adding pages, and every improvement in ranking is multiplied by how well intake handles the result.
That is why the first month of our plan includes test calls to every office line during and outside business hours, and why the report carries missed calls next to rankings. Later in the year we add online consultation booking with conflict-check fields, then review call outcome tags with the intake lead and adjust the script for calls that did not book.
Ruler Analytics' 2026 benchmarks give a sense of how much of legal demand arrives by phone: in its legal data, 56.3% of conversions were calls and 43.7% forms, with a legal organic search conversion rate of 7.3%. Ruler measures its own platform's users rather than a random sample of firms, so we read these as directional and replace them with the firm's own figures as soon as the intake log has a quarter of data.
Reviews influence which firms appear in the map results and which one a person calls, and several overlapping rules shape how a firm can collect and answer them.
Google's contributed content policy prohibits offering incentives for reviews and selectively asking only clients likely to leave positive ones. In the US, the FTC announced a final rule on 14 August 2024 that bans fake reviews, buying reviews conditioned on a positive or negative sentiment, suppressing negative reviews through threats, and undisclosed reviews from company insiders. ABA Model Rule 1.6 and its UK counterpart, paragraph 6.3 of the SRA Code, protect client confidentiality, which limits what a firm can say in a reply even when a review is unfair.
Our routine follows from those rules. The firm sends a request to every client when a matter closes, with nothing offered in return. Replies thank the reviewer without confirming that the person was a client or referring to any matter. Negative reviews are answered in the same neutral way, and anything that looks like a breach of policy is reported through Google's own process rather than argued in public.
Claims on the site follow the same discipline. Results are not described in ways that create unjustified expectations, testimonials are used only where the rules in that jurisdiction allow them, and Model Rule 7.2 generally bars giving anything of value for a recommendation, apart from listed exceptions such as paying the reasonable cost of advertising. Because state rules and the SRA Code differ in detail, a named lawyer at the firm approves every page, and we keep a record of who approved what and when.
Legal directories such as Avvo, Justia, FindLaw and Martindale in the US, and the Law Society's Find a Solicitor and ReviewSolicitors in the UK, often rank for the same searches as the firm's own pages. We treat them as part of the firm's presence: complete profiles, matching office details and links back to the right practice page. That matching also helps search engines and AI tools connect the firm's name, lawyers and offices correctly.
Local Services Ads charge per lead and appear above the map results in many US legal searches. We do not run ad budgets inside the SEO retainer, but we help set the ads up, dispute leads that are not real matters and report the cost per signed case for each paid source next to organic. Some firms find organic signs matters more cheaply in one practice and paid in another, and the report is built to show that difference.
AI answers are a newer route to the same decision. People ask an assistant which firm handles a certain kind of matter in a certain place, and the answer draws on directories, reviews and the firm's own pages. From month 10 of the plan we track a set of these prompts for each practice and place, and fix inconsistencies in how the firm is described across its sources.
A proposal that looks thorough can still be built for another kind of business. These questions separate agencies that understand legal work from those that do not.
Ask to see a sample monthly report. If it stops at rankings and traffic, the agency cannot tell you whether the work is paying for itself. The report should follow enquiries to consultations and signed matters, and show cost per signed matter by channel.
The answer should name your regulator and your state or jurisdiction, and put a lawyer at your firm in the approval step. An agency that publishes without your sign-off is taking a decision that belongs to the firm.
Any mention of incentives, review gating, bought reviews or reviews written by staff is a reason to stop. So is any reply template that confirms someone was a client.
A good answer starts with tracking, test calls and a baseline. A plan that starts with dozens of blog posts or a large link purchase is skipping the steps that let you judge it later.
Only offices where your people work. Proposals to create profiles at virtual or shared addresses put the firm's real listings at risk under Google's guidelines.
Ask whether each case study is a law firm, which market it was in and what was measured. We say plainly that we have no published law firm result yet, and show our in-house method proof and ranked keywords from a non-legal client for what they are.
Published prices for legal SEO vary widely and come mostly from agencies, so they are a guide rather than a standard. On The Map Marketing puts law firm SEO at $3,000 to $15,000 a month, with around $5,000 for a competitive personal injury practice. 12AM Agency, updated in July 2026, gives $3,500 to $6,500 a month in mid-size metros and $7,000 to $12,000+ in hyper-competitive cities and for personal injury in a major metro. In the UK, Whito's figures for Q1 2026 put solicitor SEO at GBP 2,000 to 3,500 a month for standard work and GBP 3,500 to 5,000+ for comprehensive work, and note that a retainer below GBP 1,000 a month is unlikely to move the needle in legal search.
We set our prices at the market rate or up to $500 below it, never above the published bands and never at a low entry price that cannot pay for the work. In the US we charge $4,500 a month for personal injury and family law and $3,500 for criminal defense and immigration in mid-size metros; the typicals behind those two figures, $5,000 and $4,000, are our own estimates. London is $3,500 a month, about GBP 2,630 ex VAT, against a standard tier midpoint of $3,660, with comprehensive scope from $4,700 by proposal. New York City and other major metros are by proposal from $7,000 a month.
Every retainer has a three-month minimum, because the first quarter is spent on tracking, profiles and page structure that pay off later. Ad spend is billed to the firm by Google and is not part of the fee. The pricing section on this page lists what each tier includes.
Expect the first quarter to show measurement rather than growth: a baseline, a count of missed calls, complete office profiles and the first practice and place pages. If enquiries rise in that period it is usually because intake and calls to action improved, not because rankings moved.
The second quarter is when narrow searches tend to move. Reviews start to accumulate at the offices that ask consistently, answer pages begin to collect impressions and the first earned links arrive. The third quarter adds consultation booking and the first fair comparison of organic against paid sources on cost per signed matter. The fourth quarter extends the work to a second office or practice and closes with a review against month 0.
Our planning model uses an expected visit multiplier of 2.0 and a conservative one of 1.45 by month 12, both labelled as assumptions, and lets you enter your own visits, conversion rates and fees. Major metros like New York City run on a slower ramp on their own page. None of these is a promise; they exist so you can check whether the plan makes commercial sense before you start. You can walk the path month by month above.
A short report that a managing partner reads is worth more than a long one nobody opens. These are the lines we put in front of the firm each month, by office and by practice:
Start with the market page for the place where your firm has staffed offices. The services below often run alongside a law firm programme.
Law firm SEO services earn their fee when they are measured in signed matters, built on pages that answer the questions people ask at the moment they need a lawyer, and kept inside the rules that govern how lawyers advertise. The order of work is the same in every market; the regulator, the search habits and the price are not.
To see where your firm stands, choose your market or book a strategy call. In 30 minutes we look at your office profiles, your practice pages and how many enquiries from search become consultations today, and you leave with a month 0 baseline idea and a written scope if it fits.
In a 30-minute call we review your office profiles, your practice pages and how many enquiries from search reach a consultation today. You leave with a month 0 baseline idea and a written scope if the fit is right.