This time next year the Solicitors Regulation Authority could be regulator of 17,000 CILEX members in addition to the 200,000 or so solicitors it already superintends. CILEX, the representative body for legal executives, last month pledged to press on with plans to ditch CILEx Regulation and transfer oversight to the SRA – seemingly in defiance of its own membership. Yesterday the SRA published its own consultation which – to no one’s surprise – backs what would constitute a big extension of its remit.

CILEX’s consultation paper was at pains to reassure legal executives that SRA oversight would provide ‘steady-state regulation of CILEX lawyers at a cost similar to, and potentially lower than, the current practising certificate fee without any cross-subsidy between solicitors and CILEX lawyers, and with the additional benefits of increased levels of consumer protection, the ability to respond to new regulatory demands and the profile of the SRA brand’.

The SRA board, meanwhile, has concluded that taking on the regulation of authorised CILEX members ‘has potential to deliver tangible benefits to consumers of legal services and the wider public’. It would ‘simplify the complex regulatory landscape, making it easier for consumers to navigate’ and ‘bring more consistent levels of protection and information’.

‘For example, firms owned and managed by CILEX members will have the same level of indemnity insurance as solicitors’ practices, and will publish the same range of information about their costs and services,’ the SRA added.

The SRA confirms the maintenance of distinct identities for authorised CILEX lawyers and solicitors. There would be a separate code of conduct for CILEX lawyers, aligned with the standards and regulations for solicitors but ‘mindful of differences in role and context’.

A distinct CILEX route to authorisation would be retained.

The costs of regulating authorised CILEX lawyers would be fully recovered from the practising certificate fees of CILEX members – there would indeed be no cross-subsidising between solicitors and CILEX lawyers.

Paul Philip, SRA chief executive, said: ‘Bringing together the regulation of solicitors and authorised CILEX lawyers has obvious benefits in terms of simplification and consistency of regulatory processes and procedures, and more consistent protection to the public. We believe the changes outlined in our consultation will enable this to happen, while also allowing for a smooth transfer of responsibilities.’

Linda Ford, CILEX chief executive, is unfazed by the fact that her members do not seem to want to swap watchdogs. When CILEx Regulation asked more than 1,000 of its members in a consultation if they considered changing the current regulatory regime a priority, 68% said ‘no’.

Ford told the Gazette in August: ‘CILEx Regulation did ask the question around whether members considered it a priority. That’s not the focus of our decision or consultation. We will make this decision based on public interest outcomes… CILEx Regulation had a very small number of responses to their consultation. We’re keen to engage with as many stakeholders as possible.’

It is already clear that the switch will not be railroaded, despite CILEX and the SRA presenting a united front. The CILEX consultation closes on 5 November. If the representative body opts not to proceed in the face of member hostility, the SRA consultation simply falls away.

CILEx Regulation certainly hopes to mend fences with its estranged sibling. Commenting on the CILEX consultation on 14 August, the regulator stressed that it has acted to allay funding and governance concerns. ‘CILEx Regulation has been operationally self-sufficient for the last five years, and its balance sheet has recently been strengthened further by CILEX agreeing to transfer to CILEx Regulation its fair share of historic practising fee surpluses,’ it said.

CILEx Regulation chair Jonathan Rees added: ‘We continue to believe that the best way forward for the regulation of CILEX members is to build on the independent system that has successfully operated over the last 15 years. We welcome that three out of four respondents to our recent consultation believed that the CILEX profession is enhanced by having its own regulator focused on the profession’s unique place in the delivery of legal services.

‘We have published comprehensive proposals which would enhance competition and consumer choice, promote high standards for all CILEX members, whether authorised or not, and deliver enhanced value for money. Above all, we commit to continuing to involve CILEX professionals in shaping the regulatory regime, education, and disciplinary requirements at all levels in our organisation.

‘In the coming months we will continue to put forward that case and hope we can reach an accommodation with the CILEX board based on the clear views of members.’

The Law Society yesterday indicated it too will oppose the SRA switch. President Lubna Shuja said: ‘While the SRA and CILEX have said they believe that the proposals will benefit consumers, our view is that there is a higher risk of causing greater confusion for when they are choosing the appropriate legal provider to meet their needs.’

She added: ‘This consultation is an important opportunity for solicitors to make their views known and have a say on what is being proposed for CILEX lawyers. Whilst we appreciate that many of our members hire, supervise and work with CILEX lawyers, we are also mindful that many do not. We will be working with all of our members to gather their views and respond to the consultation, whilst also encouraging them to submit their own responses too.’

Gazette readers will be familiar with the SRA’s empire-building and its barely concealed desire to morph into a single regulator for lawyers. Last year, its chair Anna Bradley declared that a single regulator remains a ‘live conversation’ in Whitehall and at Westminster.

Whether an incoming Labour government – if that is what we get – would devote precious parliamentary time to such an eventuality is moot. But the direction of travel is clear. Piecemeal additions to its remit serve the SRA’s ultimate goal.

‘With primary legislation to simplify the system of legal regulation in England and Wales unlikely in the foreseeable future,’ says the SRA in its consultation, ‘we consider organic, well-managed regulatory consolidation to be helpful in addressing the challenges facing the regulation of the sector.’

The SRA’s consultation runs until 22 November. A regulatory switch would need the approval of the Legal Services Board.

 

Topics