header-logo header-logo

Lawyers’ regulators fail report card

02 April 2025
Issue: 8111 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory , Legal services
printer mail-detail
Both the Bar and solicitors’ regulators have failed to meet required standards in their annual Legal Services Board (LSB) performance assessment.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) was criticised for not publishing pass-rate data for the Solicitors Qualifying Examination, leaving aspiring solicitors in the dark about which training provider to choose. The LSB gave it until the autumn to produce this information. The LSB also criticised failures in its supervision of high-risk firms and protection of client funds—revealed after the closure of law firm Axiom Ince in 2023 with about £66m client money missing.

A spokesperson for the SRA said: ‘We will be discussing with our Board and agreeing an action plan.’

The Bar Standards Board (BSB) came in for criticism for being too slow to improve, despite restructuring in December 2024 as part of a ‘reform programme’ agreed with the LSB.

It also takes too long to investigate misconduct complaints against barristers, with only 67% of investigations—the benchmark is 80%—decided within 38 weeks. The LSB found that, while the quality of decisions was high, ‘the significant delays in reaching these decisions is of serious concern, not least because this is an issue that has been present for some years now’. Moreover, the LSB has asked the BSB to explain why it reduced its targets in September 2024 from 80% of investigations completed within 25 weeks to 80% within 38 weeks.

A BSB spokesperson said: ‘We have been in continual dialogue and have provided detailed evidence to respond to the challenges and the concerns the LSB have raised about the pace of change.’ The BSB is due to consult in the summer on changes to its enforcement regulations.

Craig Westwood, the LSB’s chief executive, said there were ‘some concerning shortfalls in regulatory performance, particularly from the two largest regulators’. 

Law Society chief executive Ian Jeffery said: ‘While the events leading to the collapse of Axiom Ince were happening, the SRA was focused on increasing its fining powers and proposing regulatory expansion. Instead, it should have been tackling the known risks from accumulator-style firms and ensuring its operations were joined up and laser focused on protecting consumers.’

Issue: 8111 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory , Legal services
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll