The SRA's vision for the future

Last year was a period of change, competition, and consultations, and based on announcements made by both the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and the government, I'm sure we can be guaranteed more of the same this year.

First, the SRA has outlined its 'vision for the future' and has set out plans to push ahead with a shift away from prescriptive rules in favour of setting out the principles that solicitors should follow. The aim is to give firms the freedom to run their businesses as they see fit while
at the same time still ensuring clients are protected. It is hoped that such changes will provide the flexibility to help firms adapt to the ever-changing legal market.

The paper discusses the possibility of removing non-mandatory guidance and providing 'useful, relevant, and supportive online resources, including case studies and toolkits'. I remember all too well the concerns that many people had when outcomes-focused regulation was introduced about the lack of rules and guidance from their regulator, and the proposed changes should
bring those concerns to the
fore once again.

That is not to say that reducing the size of the handbook would be a bad thing, but the SRA
will need to do a lot of work internally to provide meaningful case studies to give firms guidance on what the SRA expects from them, and make
its enforcement strategy and procedures much more transparent.

Unauthorised businesses

The SRA will also be looking at allowing solicitors to practise in unauthorised businesses. Currently, the rules say that solicitors in firms not authorised by the SRA or another legal services regulator cannot
deliver legal services to the public (except in limited circumstances). Under the proposals, solicitors would be free to practise in the wider legal market, delivering non-reserved legal services outside law firms.

This means the SRA needs to look at regulating the solicitor as an individual on the basis of the services they provide (and to whom) rather than on the type of organisation or entity they work in. How this will affect the solicitor brand is no doubt something people will have strong feelings about. The SRA's view is that it would not be diluted - on the contrary, such changes would, in its view, strengthen the solicitor brand. Again, your views will be sought when the consultation opens.

Regulatory perspective

From a regulatory perspective, any firms affected by the government's proposals regarding personal injury (PI)whiplash claims and the increase in the small claims limit will need to keep a close eye on developments and start to think about contingency plans and their firm's financial stability.

Paul Philip, the SRA director, has also announced the SRA will be carrying out research on the 'competence' of PI lawyers to gain an understanding of the profile of firms and entities providing legal services to claimants and discover the
main changes firms have implemented in response to
the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Given the previous thematic risk project when LASPO was introduced and the number of alternative business structure applications involving PI firms, it's an interesting admission on the SRA's part that it still needs to understand the PI market.

On to more positive news: the SRA has published a new report on regulation for small firms, which summarises the relevant changes it has made and includes tailored risk management information and case studies.

For solicitors who offer unbundled services, there is some good news from the Court of Appeal. Minkin v Landsberg [2015] EWCA Civ 1152 has held that solicitors instructed on a limited retainer do not have a broader duty of care to their clients, thus asserting the importance of ensuring that lawyers can offer unbundled services. However, offering such services does not come without risk, and there is a clear need to ensure that your supporting client care letters and formal written retainers are drafted to reflect the client's specific instructions.

Name and shame

Finally, the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) has announced that complaints about firms are projected to fall 22 per cent in four years. It is not entirely clear why this is, but LeO has identified a number of possibilities, including 'silent sufferers' (who will tolerate poor service without complaining), more clients acting as litigants in person or using unregulated providers and so having no redress from LeO, and - here's the positive bit - solicitors getting better at responding to complaints during the first-tier process.

Watch out, though, if you are one of the firms that behave poorly because LeO is looking at the possibility of using its name and shame powers to greater effect.

Michelle Garlick is a partner at Weightmans @Weightmans www.weightmans.com