Westwood: Concerning shortfalls in regulatory performance
The two largest legal regulators – the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and Bar Standards Board (BSB) – are the only ones to fail their performance assessments over the past year, the Legal Services Board (LSB) revealed today.
The LSB uses a traffic light system to assess each regulator against three standards – well-led (which relates to resources and capability), effective approach to regulation, and operational delivery – and the SRA and BSB both scored red on the latter, with the BSB also getting a red for the first.
Red ratings mean the LSB has serious concerns which need immediate action to address. Amber does not necessarily mean serious concerns, only that there are areas that require improvement.
As last year, the Costs Lawyer Standards Board was the sole regulator to get three greens, while the Intellectual Property Regulation Board and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales – only for its regulation of probate work – each scored two, with one amber.
The concerns about the SRA primarily related to the effectiveness of its authorisation, supervision and enforcement processes in the wake of the LSB’s Axiom Ince report.
This identified “a number of failures in these areas including a failure to put in place proper mechanisms to supervise firms which pose a higher risk to consumers, and a failure to properly protect client funds”.
Though the LSB recognised the SRA’s efforts “to regulate in the public interest, to support technological innovation for the benefit of consumers and to engage effectively with the public”, other areas of its operational performance sparked concern.
“In particular, we are concerned about the SRA’s failure to publish provider pass-rate data for Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) training providers, as well as other concerns about SQE including affordability, design and quality.
“The SRA’s failure to publish provider pass-rate data, despite it making a commitment to do so, means that SQE candidates do not have all the information they need to make informed choices. We expect the SRA to remedy this situation as soon as possible and by no later than autumn of 2025.”
Following the Axiom Ince report, the LSB initiated enforcement action, but the process to set directions that would require the SRA to make specific changes remains ongoing.
The LSB also acknowledged that the SRA has sought to address some of the issues coming out of Axiom Ince through its consumer protection review.
The BSB has been undertaking a significant reform programme but the LSB has “serious concerns about the pace of reform, the effectiveness of its board in holding the executive to account for the necessary improvements, and in its ability to measure [its] success”.
As such, the LSB “cannot take assurance that the BSB is well-led with the capacity and resources to carry out its work effectively”.
It also had serious concerns about the BSB’s failure to meet its targets for the timeliness of its authorisations and investigations work, although it is meeting its quality targets.
The latter was despite the Fieldfisher review of the BSB’s enforcement system concluding that its time-based targets were achievable.
“The regulator’s failure to meet these targets means that both complainants and barristers have to wait too long for investigations into potential conduct breaches to be concluded.”
The LSB said it would now consider what further action may be necessary to ensure the BSB’s performance improved – this could mean enforcement action.
“Both the SRA and BSB have shown a recognition of the need to improve, and it is within their power to make the necessary improvements.
“They must now focus on taking effective action so that they can provide us with greater assurance that they are effective regulators which can command the trust and confidence of the public.”
Looking at the performance of the regulators overall, there was a decline in performance against the well-led standard this year, but a slight improvement in the effective approach to regulation.
LSB chief executive Craig Westwood said: “This year’s assessment reveals some concerning shortfalls in regulatory performance, particularly from the two largest regulators.
“Effective regulation is essential to protecting the public and maintaining confidence in legal services. All regulators must address the issues that we’ve highlighted and must demonstrate more clearly how their activities benefit consumers…
“The mixed performance we have seen underscores the importance of robust oversight. We are committed to supporting all regulators to reach the standards the public and profession deserve.”
Peter Rees 
It is so concerning that there is no functioning regulatory bodies in the UK and they all need to be dismantled and replaced by an independent a work force that upholds the rule of law, UK clients care and fair practices as currently it is not the case as there is a conflict of interest and these the so called regulators needs to be regulated themselves in order to safeguard the rule of law , protect the general public and the client care from vogue solicitors and barristers who are like a plague in the legal fields . It is an urgent request to the labour party , prime minister and the justice ministers .