It is unfortunate that the present consultation on the assigned risks pool poses only narrow questions. The Solicitors Regulation Authority appears to have made up its mind already. We need a thorough analysis of the problems – and an open mind.

The issue of increased claim volumes and cost of cover is by no means confined to the ARP. The ARP is an intrinsic part of the insurance regime. It would be naive to assume that all the current problems could be avoided simply by scrapping the ARP.

Compulsory comprehensive insurance will never come cheap. The insurance cycle sees soft markets followed by hard markets. Changes in the wider economy, boom or bust, affect the level of claims and so, in turn, the cost of cover. This was so in the days of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund and remains so in the brave, not so new, world of qualifying insurance, minimum terms and the ARP.

What other options has the SRA considered? Is it right to treat the current high level of cover as sacrosanct? What analysis has there been to establish why firms fall into the ARP and what types of claims they face? What steps has the SRA taken to support and rehabilitate deserving firms while removing the few ‘bad apples’?

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, for example, provides a reduced level of cover for firms in their own ARP, to which admission is discretionary, and ensures that applicant firms undergo a business review programme.

This is a decision that could affect any firm, large or small – a poor claims record can be just one rogue employee away. The public interest in access to justice requires that the decision is not made in haste.

Duncan Crine, Sarah Foster, Henmans, Oxford