Regulators should do more to ensure that disciplinary decisions on solicitors and firms are visible to potential clients - and keep decisions on serious misconduct in the public domain for longer, watchdogs have said.

Responding to the SRA’s consultation on what information should be available to the public and when, Legal Services Consumer Panel chair Sarah Chambers said there should be a presumption to publish all enforcement data where an investigation has led to a sanction.

That is generally already the case, but Chambers called for a new obligation on the SRA to provide the public with information. This could include shelving proposals to drop a three-year limit on how long decisions remain in the public domain, she said, as well as making information potentially accessible to digital comparison sites.

‘Consumers have the right to know about the shortcomings of the firms with whom they deal with, so they can protect themselves and be vigilant against unfair behaviour,’ said Chambers. ‘It would be useful for consumers to have a way to access additional detail if needed. If they are concerned that a solicitor they would like to engage or interact with has a regulatory citation, they may want to satisfy themselves that it is minor or not related to what they are asking them to do prior to going ahead with that engagement which would mean that additional detail was needed. Some consumers may even like access to the full decision where it is available.’

Chambers said the panel was concerned that where a solicitor had been suspended or their authorisation restricted for more than three years, once they were reinstated there would be no public record of what had occurred. She recommended that publication should continue for three years after the suspension or restriction has concluded.

Furthermore, where a solicitor has been struck off, removing a record of that after three years would allow them to offer legal services in the unregulated market with no ‘red flags’ in the public domain of what has happened in the past.

‘There are some regulatory decisions that should be publicly available for longer than the standard three years to allow prospective consumers to make informed decisions,’ added Chambers. ‘It seems likely that consumers would want to know about more serious breaches of compliant behaviour for longer periods of time. This would suggest it makes sense to link the severity of the regulatory decision with the length of publication.’

 

This article is now closed for comment.