header-logo header-logo

27 April 2007
Issue: 7270 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Regulatory , Profession
printer mail-detail

Solicitors told to steer clear of unregulated claims managers

Solicitors dealing with unregulated claims referral companies or claims management companies could face disciplinary sanctions or even prosecution from this week.

Regulation of claims management services—which was brought in by the Compensation Act 2006 and is backed by criminal sanctions—came into force on Monday.

Solicitors have been warned by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) to check the status of any claims management company which provides their firm with regulated claims management services.

SRA chair Peter Williamson says: “We expect solicitors to take care that they are only using companies which are properly regulated. These are important measures designed to protect the public from claims farmers who have been using unscrupulous tactics and aggressive selling techniques.”

Claims management companies must comply with new rules of conduct covering advertising, marketing and soliciting of business. For example, clients must be given certain information before they sign a contract and there is a duty to have a complaints procedure.

Mark Boleat, head of claims management regulation at the Department for Constitutional Affairs, says: “We will be closely managing the activities of claims management businesses and will not hesitate to take regulatory action where necessary.”

Issue: 7270 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Regulatory , Profession
printer mail-details

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