Jeffery:
Both the Law Society and Bar Council have criticised their regulatory arms over the Legal Services Board’s assessment that their performance was inadequate and needed urgent improvement.
As we reported yesterday, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and Bar Standards Board (BSB) were the only two regulators to receive red ratings in the LSB’s traffic-light assessment of the three key pillars of their work.
The BSB received two and the SRA one, with amber for the others.
Law Society chief executive Ian Jeffery said: “The SRA has been found to be lacking in its performance. Only urgent action from SRA’s leadership which focuses on the organisation’s performance and accepts that it has to do much better from top to bottom, will start the process of regaining the trust of the sector, our members and consumers.
“Effective regulatory oversight is the cornerstone of consumer confidence. However, 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.”
He urged the SRA to refocus on its core responsibilities and “significantly improve its approach to risk management”, following the failings identified in the Axiom Ince review.
Mr Jeffrey also agreed with the LSB’s comments that the SRA needed to improve transparency in the performance of Solicitors Qualifying Examination providers to help aspiring solicitors make an informed choice when choosing a training supplier.
An SRA spokesman said: “We will be discussing [the assessment] with our board and agreeing an action plan.”
Stephen Kenny KC, chair of the Bar Council’s regulation panel, said it shared some of the concerns raised by the oversight regulator.
“The BSB needs to focus more on delivering its critical regulatory activities at greater pace, such as undertaking and completing disciplinary investigations and authorisation applications. Persistent delays are damaging to barristers, complainants, and confidence in the system.
“The LSB has suggested more stretching targets for timeliness in the future which we support. We remain convinced the BSB should be focusing its resources on key regulatory activity rather than expanding its programme of activities.”
In a statement, the BSB said: “The LSB support our aims and objectives. 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. We will continue to do so as the programme progresses.”
It insisted that the BSB was “changing and changing fast”, hitting the targets for the quality of decisions.
“We have re-organised to provide unified accountability for our end-to-end enforcement process and will in May 2025 have completed the re-design of the enforcement process, paving the way for a consultation on changes to our enforcement regulations in the summer.”
The BSB said it recognised, however, that there was more to do and shared the LSB’s view that “change needs to happen at pace”.
“Colleagues are working diligently and tirelessly to both run the BSB alongside progressing the reforms that will generate greater efficiencies and consistent performance.
“Getting this balance right remains a key focus and we look forward to continuing to work with the LSB to give them the assurance they seek.”
Leave a Comment