I am writing to respond to last week’s letter from Dawn Chapman, chairman of the Institute of Legal Cashiers and Administrators (ILCA) (see [2008] Gazette, July 17, 9).

The Solicitors Regulation Authority’s board received a number of valuable responses to all the consultations. Numerous changes were made to the draft rules and regulations in the light of the responses. Reports on the responses as considered by the board can be seen on our website.

We very much valued early input from the ILCA and it was not alone in raising concerns about the need for training for non-lawyer managers. But we had to balance those views with the equally strong views of other respondents, who did not feel that prescriptive training requirements in the rules was the right way forward.

The board’s conclusion recognises that there are many ways in which understanding and knowledge of the Accounts Rules can be gained. The ILCA’s own existence demonstrates that many firms recognise the value of specialised training even where there is no regulatory requirement and the board believes that will continue. But there is little regulatory sense in requiring, for example, those who have worked within firms and already have a detailed understanding of the accounts rules to go on a prescriptive course.

We believe the Code of Conduct, together with the changes made to the Accounting Guidelines, provide a sufficient regulatory imperative to ensure that those who need to gain a proper understanding of the Accounts Rules will do so through specialised training or other means.