Compare

QuickLegalCheck, a chatbot or a solicitor?

Three reasonable ways to get a contract looked at, and each is better at some things than the others. This page sets out the differences, including where a solicitor is the right choice.

Side by side.

For a short, simple contract a chatbot might be enough, and for a high-value one you want a solicitor. QuickLegalCheck works through the whole document for your side and tells you about the problems you didn’t know to look for.

What you getQuickLegalCheckA general AI chatbotA solicitor
Asks which side you’re on before it reads anythingYes, alwaysOnly if you tell itYes
Works through every clause against a checklist for that contract typeYesAnswers what you askYes
Points out clauses that are missingYesSometimesYes
Suggests wording you can send backYesSometimesYes
Reads it under English law without being told toYesNot reliablyYes
What happens to your documentNever used to train AIDepends on the provider and your settingsKept confidential
Something you can keep and forwardPDF and online reportA chat transcriptA letter of advice
Legal advice, backed by professional indemnity insuranceNoNoYes
Cost£49 + VATFree, or a subscriptionQuoted per matter
How long it takesAbout ten minutesSecondsDepends on their diary

When a contract is high-value, unusual or heading for a dispute, the report says it should go to a solicitor.

“Uploading my contract took seconds, and the feedback I received was clear, well-structured, and actually useful… QuickLegalCheck has become a go-to service for me.”
Benjamin BlythFounder, Houz Mortgages

What you get for £49.

The table is the short version. This is what each of those rows means when you’re the one with a contract to sign.

A fixed price

£49 plus VAT (£58.80) per contract. No subscription and no hourly billing, and if the report isn’t useful you can ask for your money back within 7 days.

A look before you pay

Upload the contract and a free first look appears in about 30 seconds. The full report usually follows within about ten minutes, emailed as a PDF with a link to read it online.

Read for your side

You say which side you’re on before anything is read. The same clause can be fine for the other party and a problem for you, and the ratings reflect that.

Plain English

Risks, missing protections and next steps in everyday language. Where a legal concept matters, the report explains it rather than quoting it at you.

Your document stays yours

Your contract is used to write your report and answer your questions about it. It is never used to train AI, and the privacy policy sets out how long it’s held.

A method designed by lawyers

The review was designed by experienced UK contract lawyers. Each of the 11 contract types has its own checklist, and everything is read under English law.

Where a solicitor is the better choice.

QuickLegalCheck is not a law firm, and a report is not legal advice.

For complex or high-value matters, take independent legal advice. For routine contracts, such as employment contracts, service agreements, NDAs and supply terms, the report gives you what you need to understand the document and decide what to do. If you then speak to a solicitor, you’ll already know which clauses to raise.

When to use each.

Best for

QuickLegalCheck

A routine contract you want to understand properly before you sign, especially when you need to decide soon. It’s also a sensible first step before seeing a solicitor, because you’ll know which clauses are worth raising, and it keeps the cost down if you have several contracts to check.

Best for

A solicitor

High-value or complex agreements, anything that might end in a dispute, and any situation where you need formal legal advice. A solicitor can also negotiate for you and draft bespoke clauses, which a report can’t.

Best for

A general AI chatbot

A quick question about what a term means, or a short, low-risk document where little turns on getting it wrong. For a whole contract it answers what you ask rather than working through everything, so it’s easy to miss the problems you didn’t know to look for.