header-logo header-logo

Solicitors’ regulator sanctioned for failures

22 October 2025
Issue: 8136 / Categories: Legal News , Regulatory , Legal services , Consumer , Litigation funding
printer mail-detail
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) must overhaul its complaints and risk assessment processes to fix ‘systemic shortcomings’, the Legal Services Consumer Panel has said

The panel called for ‘clear safeguards’ for clients involved in ‘high-risk legal arrangements, including litigation funding’ this week, in its response to Legal Services Board (LSB) moves to sanction the SRA for failing to protect thousands of clients affected by the collapse of law firm SSB Group.

An LSB-commissioned independent review by Northern Ireland firm Carson McDowell, published last week, found the SRA did not act effectively or efficiently in the five years leading to the collapse of the Sheffield firm despite receiving more than 100 reports.

It found the SRA did not take all the steps it could have taken, which meant it failed adequately to protect consumers, the public interest and professional standards.

The LSB will impose two sanctions on the SRA—a public censure and performance targets and monitoring.

SSB Group, which acted for thousands of clients in high-volume civil litigation claims, mainly relating to cavity wall insulation, went into administration in January 2024 owing £200m to litigation funders and other creditors. Many of its clients were subsequently pursued for adverse legal costs, despite having been assured their claims were ‘no win no fee’.

Catherine Brown, interim chair of the LSB, said: ‘The former clients of SSB have suffered profound emotional and financial harm.’

Law Society president Mark Evans said: ‘The report lays bare a lack of leadership and oversight of regulatory procedures and processes at the SRA.

‘This is despite knowing the risks posed by bulk cavity wall insulation cases, the previous failure of Pure Legal from which the SRA transferred clients to SSB, and multiple reports from MPs, other lawyers, industry and the victims themselves. A key concern must be the treatment of vulnerable victims by the SRA.

‘This cannot just be about improving systems and processes but requires culture change and focused leadership.’

Anna Bradley, chair of the SRA, said: ‘We are sorry that we did not act more quickly in relation to SSB… We fully accept the recommendations of this review.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
back-to-top-scroll