header-logo header-logo

153 firms left without cover

31 October 2013
Issue: 7583 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

SRA confirms large number of firms have failed to secure PII

A total of 153 firms have failed to secure new professional indemnity insurance cover, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has confirmed.

The 153 have now gone into the second, 60-day stage of the extended policy period (EPP). The first 30-day stage ended yesterday.

Firms can carry on as normal during the first stage, but can only deal with existing instructions during the second stage. If the firms have not found insurance by 29 December, they will have to close.

The SRA had been notified of 226 firms that needed to go into the EPP, but 73 of those have since secured cover.

Frank Maher, partner at Legal Risk solicitors, says: “The numbers are quite small when compared with the number in practice, but that doesn’t reveal the scale of human misery with people facing bankruptcy, not to mention the effect on their staff and families.”

The 1,300 firms who were insured with Latvian insurer Balva also face uncertainty, given the six-year run-off period. The Latvian authorities withdrew Balva’s operating licence in June. 

Maher says he is dealing with some firms who were insured with Ukrainian insurer Lemma, which went into liquidation two years ago. The Financial Services Authority protection scheme covers 90% of claims where the firm has a turnover of less than £1m.

“Most firms who were with Lemma will qualify for the scheme, some don’t in which case they are personally liable,” he says. 

Maher says he knows of three top 100 firms that had problems with renewal this year, which showed that that indemnity insurance is a profession-wide issue.

“I think it’s high time the profession explored what consumer protection we can offer going forward,” he says.

“We should have a conference of the profession about this, with representatives of the consumer interest invited to participate so they can understand that it’s not possible to provide complete protection when that protection may be illusory. It would be better to have less protection from insurers who can deliver than complete insurance from insurers who may not—the wider the cover the more it forces firms to obtain insurance from insurers who can’t offer peace of mind."

 

Issue: 7583 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll