Existing directions and performance targets will remain in place. The SRA will be required to produce a ‘single, consolidated implementation plan’ showing how it will improve and meet its targets. The LSB will also need ‘more frequent independent assurance to provide evidence’ reforms are delivering the required outcome.
Announcing its toughened stance last week, the LSB said it was ‘disappointed’ by the standard of leadership and accountability at the SRA. It noted a combined total of about £100m client money associated with Axiom Ince and PM Law Group has been lost.
The LSB reviewed two independent reports into SRA failings. It found the Jenner & Block review (see here) identified weaknesses in the SRA’s approach to PM Law Group, which collapsed in February, that were similar to those seen in the Axiom Ince scandal. The Berkeley Partnership report into the SRA’s progress in meeting the LSB’s ‘directions’ for improvement, issued after the Axiom Ince collapse in 2023, found some progress but insufficient evidence these reforms had improved consumer protection. Consequently, the LSB found the SRA had failed to fulfil its ‘directions’ by the June 2026 deadline.
It had imposed performance targets on the SRA and issued a public censure after the collapse of SSB Law in January 2024.
The LSB also approved the SRA’s proposal to hike the practising fee for 2026–27 by £25m, raising it 17% to £382 for individuals.
Law Society president Mark Evans said: ‘Solicitors are already dealing with higher costs and heavy regulatory burdens, and they will now have to pay the price of huge increases in the practising certificate fee, because of the SRA’s own failures in carrying out its core regulatory function.
‘The profession needs to be confident that the huge funding increases are justified and will deliver the necessary improvements not just for them, but also for consumers. The SRA needs to prioritise high-risk issues more rigorously, ensuring resources are focused on areas posing the greatest risk to the public.’
