The short answer
A new website for a UK law firm is two purchases inside one quote. The build is negotiable, which is why quotes on one brief vary by a factor of five. The regulated content is not negotiable: the SRA Transparency Rules set what the site has to publish about price, service and complaints. Judge a quote on whether it has priced the second part.
Key takeaways
- Every figure published for this is an asking price set by a seller. One specialist in law firm websites publishes builds from £6,500 and £14,500.
- Across the 6,000 most recent award notices on Contracts Finder, 19 were for website work and only 5 of those bought a build. The rest bought a content management system, or hosting and support on a term.
- Rule 1.6 requires the cost information to sit in a prominent place on the firm's website. That is writing and partner sign-off, and it is the same work at £4,000 as at £40,000.
- Rule 4.1 requires an authorised body to display its SRA number and the SRA's digital badge prominently. The badge has been mandatory since 25 November 2019.
- Where firms declared their website compliant, the regulator's spot checks found as many as two thirds were not.
Four quotes came back on the same brief: £4,200, £9,800, £11,500 and £26,000. Same page count, same list of things the site had to do. The managing partner who collected them wanted to know which number was right, and everybody they could sensibly ask was somebody who sells websites.
That spread is not dishonest. It is what happens in a market with no published transaction prices, only asking prices. Search the question in the UK and the first page is agencies quoting their own rate cards. Two things help: a buyer who was obliged to publish what they paid, and the parts of a law firm website set by rule rather than by budget.
Every price published for this is an asking price
Not one figure on the first page of this search came from a completed transaction: they are rate cards published by firms that build websites for law firms. Conscious Solutions, a supplier that works with legal practices, publishes a lighter build from £6,500 and a bespoke build from £14,500, with £200 to £300 a month thereafter, all excluding VAT. Krystal Designs publishes a basic brochure site at £1,000 to £3,500 and a growth build at £10,000 to £25,000 and above.
Neither page is misleading. But a column of rate cards is not a market, which is the same reading error behind treating a column of asking prices as a market rate.
What a buyer obliged to publish the number actually paid
A public body is not allowed to write “a website” on the notice. It has to name the thing, and once somebody is made to do that the purchase stops being one purchase. Under section 87 of the Procurement Act 2023 a UK contracting authority entering a notifiable below-threshold contract has to publish a contract details notice, and the duty starts at £12,000 including VAT for central government and £30,000 for every other authority. Anyone can read the result without an account.
We read the 6,000 most recent award notices on Contracts Finder on 2 September 2026 and kept the ones whose classification or title put them in website work, discarding the internet circuits and case management systems the codes drag in. Nineteen were left, and only five bought a build. The other fourteen bought a content management system, or hosting and support on a term.
| Buyer | What the notice says was bought | Awarded value |
|---|---|---|
| HM Land Registry | Intranet hosting | £9,821 |
| Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust | Website construction and ongoing support | £40,000 |
| Peterborough City Council | A youth digital platform | £42,000 |
| Financial Conduct Authority | A static website for its Handbook | £91,332 |
| Folkestone and Hythe District Council | A content management system for the council website | £189,312 |
| Bristol City Council | Website maintenance and support | £200,000 |
So ask for four numbers with four terms rather than one number and a deposit: the build, the platform licence, the hosting, and the support once it is live. A supplier who will not separate them wants to be compared on the basis that flatters them.
Part of a law firm website is set by rule, not by taste
The SRA Transparency Rules put required content on the website itself, and none of it is a design decision. This is the half of the quote that UK agency cost guides do not price, because the agency does not know which regulator binds its reader. Rule 1.6 decides layout rather than wording: the cost information must be accessible and in a prominent place, which rules out a PDF three clicks down.
| Rule | What has to be on the website | Who can produce it |
|---|---|---|
| 1.5(a), (b), (d) and (e) | The total cost, the basis of the charges, likely disbursements and VAT, with an average or a range where a total is not practicable | The practice. No supplier can state what you charge for probate |
| 1.5(c) and (f) | What the price includes, anything a client might reasonably expect but which it does not, key stages and timescales, and the qualifications of anyone doing the work | The practice, with sign-off. It names your people |
| 2.1, complaints | The complaints procedure, and how and when to complain to the Legal Ombudsman and to the SRA | Written once by the practice, built as a page |
| 4.1, regulatory | The firm's SRA number and the SRA's digital badge, in a prominent place | A build task, but the badge is issued through software once the firm registers the web address |
Before you accept a website quote
Find out which half of it has actually been priced.
Send us the brief and the numbers. Free to your firm. The agency pays us, and only if the relationship works.
Get a recommendationWhere the money stops adding value
Once the required content exists and the site carries it properly, additional budget mostly buys presentation. Two things genuinely scale with spend.
- The number of practice areas needing original written content. This is the expensive line, because it is either fee earner hours the firm does not bill, or a writer who knows the area well enough not to create a compliance problem
- The number of systems the site connects to, such as a case management system or an online payment route. Each connection is a real engineering cost that keeps costing after launch
Everything else is presentation. A firm being quoted £26,000 should be able to say which of the two lines above the extra £20,000 is buying, and a quote that will not resolve into named people and days cannot be compared with a second quote.
When a practice should not commission a new website yet
Two conditions make this premature.
- Nobody has decided which regulated services the practice will publish prices for. Until that is settled the site cannot be scoped, and it is a partner decision rather than a supplier one
- The problem is the content rather than the build. If the site works on a phone and carries the required information, and enquiries still are not coming, a rebuild changes the wrapper around the same words
We are paid by the agency, so a page telling a managing partner to spend nothing this quarter costs us. What we assess before recommending anyone, including where we decline to introduce anybody, is on our page for professional services firms. Where the job is one bounded piece of work rather than a programme, a freelancer may be the honest answer.
Frequently asked questions
What managing partners ask us about website quotes.
How much does a law firm website cost in the UK?
Published tiers run from about £1,000 for a basic brochure site to £25,000 and above for a bespoke build, but every one of those figures is an asking price set by a supplier. What moves the number is how many regulated services the site has to publish prices for, because that content is written and signed off whatever the design costs.
What must a law firm publish on its website?
Rule 1.5 of the SRA Transparency Rules requires cost and service information for specified areas of work, covering the basis of charges, disbursements, VAT, key stages and timescales, and the qualifications of anyone doing the work. Rule 2.1 adds the complaints procedure and how to complain to the Legal Ombudsman, and rule 4.1 adds the firm's SRA number and digital badge.
Is the SRA digital badge compulsory?
Yes, for an authorised body that runs a website. It was voluntary at first and became mandatory on 25 November 2019. Rule 4.1 requires it in a prominent place alongside the firm's SRA number, and it is issued through software once the firm registers its web address, so a developer cannot paste in an image.
Does a more expensive website bring in more enquiries?
Nothing in a quote establishes that, and no supplier on this search publishes evidence for it. What genuinely scales with spend is the number of practice areas needing original content and the number of systems the site connects to.
Should the agency write our price and service information?
No. A supplier cannot state what your practice charges for probate or which fee earner carries the work, and the duty to publish it accurately sits with the firm rather than with whoever built the site. Expect an agency to build the pages. Expect a partner to write the content and sign it off.
Sources and useful reading
- Solicitors Regulation Authority, Transparency Rules, rules 1.1, 1.5, 1.6, 2.1 and 4.1.
- Solicitors Regulation Authority, year three evaluation of the Transparency Rules, published 24 October 2023.
- Solicitors Regulation Authority, the clickable logo, mandatory since 25 November 2019 and issued through mySRA.
- Contracts Finder, awarded contract notices, the 6,000 most recent read on 2 September 2026, together with the below-threshold publication duty in section 87 of the Procurement Act 2023.
- Conscious Solutions, published website pricing, cited as an asking price by a seller, not as market evidence.
- Krystal Designs, published law firm website pricing, cited as an asking price by a seller, not as market evidence.
This article is commercial decision support, not legal, regulatory, tax or investment advice. Supplier prices were recorded on 2 September 2026. An award value is the value of the contract awarded, which is not always the sum finally paid.