header-logo header-logo

13 November 2014 / Philip McCormack
Issue: 7630 / Categories: Opinion , Profession
printer mail-detail

Groundhog Day?

mccormack_0

Proposals for the SRA’s compensation fund to meet uninsured firms’ negligence claims seem oddly familiar, says Philip McCormack

Midnight, 31 August 2000. Tony Blair was yet to complete his first term in 10 Downing Street. The millennium bug hangover had not fully worn off. And the legal profession was on the brink of parting ways with its Solicitors Indemnity Fund (SIF). As many will recall, the Solicitors Indemnity Rules stipulated that all firms make contributions to the SIF. They were to do so at varying levels, according to their turnover and claims history. In return, they were entitled to up to £1m of cover. A deficit of more than £450m, accelerated by discounted contributions failing to meet liabilities, precipitated the SIF’s demise.

Then came demutualisation and, with it, the birth of the Assigned Risks Pool (ARP). This new fund of last resort facilitated cover for firms which were unable to obtain it on the open market, and provided run-off cover for those firms whose insurers had gone insolvent. The open market initially provided a seemingly

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll