Original research · UK · 8 min read
UK Immigration Firm AI Visibility Index: 10-Firm Pilot
On 18 July 2026, immigration.engineer consolidated ten consecutive preliminary visibility checks from an outreach research batch. Each firm was reviewed against one client-style query combining a location and immigration service. Four firms had some observed visibility, but only three surfaced through their own website.
By Tauya Kahwema · Published 18 July 2026 · Updated 19 July 2026
3/10
Owned-domain visibility
The firm's own website surfaced for the reviewed query.
1/10
Third-party only
The firm appeared through an independent comparison rather than its own page.
6/10
Not observed
The firm was not present in the result set reviewed for that query.
Ten reviewed checks
These are directional observations from the captured result sets, not permanent rankings.
| Firm | Reviewed query | Observed result |
|---|---|---|
| Latta & Co | best immigration solicitors Glasgow asylum | Third-party only |
| M S Solicitors | immigration solicitor Glasgow family visa | Not observed |
| Farhan Solicitors | sponsor licence lawyer Glasgow | Not observed |
| Gya Williams Immigration | business immigration solicitor Bristol | Direct domain |
| Lace Law | immigration lawyer Nottingham spouse visa | Not observed |
| ACSL Solicitors | immigration solicitor Liverpool spouse visa | Not observed |
| Rashid Law | immigration solicitor Birmingham visa appeal | Not observed |
| Kataria Solicitors | immigration solicitor Birmingham indefinite leave to remain | Not observed |
| Clifford Johnston & Co | immigration solicitor Manchester family visa | Direct domain |
| MRG Solicitors | immigration solicitor Manchester visa appeal | Direct domain |
What the pilot found
Six of the ten firms were not observed for the single local service query reviewed. Three surfaced through their own domain, while one had strong third-party visibility without an owned page taking the visible position.
The result is not a league table. A firm marked not observed may rank for other prompts, locations, services, devices, or at another time. The useful signal is how much client demand can be intercepted when a firm's own service page is missing from a specific comparison moment.
Family and spouse visa searches showed the largest gap
Four of the ten checks concerned family or spouse visa searches. Only one of those four firms surfaced directly through its own domain. The other three were not observed in the reviewed result sets.
The business and sponsor-licence checks split one direct result and one absence. Appeal searches also split one direct result and one absence. The asylum check produced third-party-only visibility, while the ILR check produced no observed visibility for the sampled firm.
Clear service evidence appeared alongside direct visibility
The three owned domains that surfaced clearly described the relevant service: business immigration and sponsorship, family and partner routes, or appeals and judicial review. That is a qualitative association in this small sample, not proof of a ranking factor.
The practical implication is still useful. A broad immigration page should make each priority service easy to understand, and high-value services may need focused pages that answer eligibility, evidence, process, timing, fee, and location questions in plain language.
Methodology and limitations
The sample contains the first ten consecutive firms from a reserve outreach batch, rather than firms selected after seeing the outcomes. Each firm received one preliminary client-style visibility check on 18 July 2026. The checks used public web evidence available through an AI-assisted search workflow.
This pilot has only ten observations and one query per firm. It cannot establish causation, market share, statistical correlation, or a permanent ranking. Results can vary by wording, location, device, personalisation, index changes, and time. A future edition should test a fixed prompt set across at least 100 firms and repeat the study quarterly.