The Law Society has joined calls for an immediate pause in the Solicitor Regulation Authority’s plans to insist that firms appoint separate compliance officers.

There has been a growing groundswell of opposition to the approved rule change requiring firms meeting certain thresholds to separate managers and COLPs and COFAs.

The new regulations – rubber-stamped by the Legal Services Board last month – prevent an individual with power to make ‘unilateral’ decisions from being the compliance officer of firms with a turnover more than £600,000 or which hold more than £2m in client money, with limited exceptions.

In  February this year Chancery Lane urged the SRA to rethinks its compliance officer proposals, describing them as impractical and unlikely to prevent perceived risks.

In a significant new intervention, the Society said it had met with the SRA and has demanded that the regulator now pauses its decision until it has a ‘clear evidence base’ that has been independently tested.

Read more 

The Society confirmed it will discuss members’ concerns at its annual general meeting on 14 October.

‘We do not believe the SRA’s proposed threshold-based model is the right approach because the threshold appears to be based on an existing authorisation threshold rather than evidence of risk,’ said the solicitors’ representative body.

‘A firm with a turnover of £600,001 could be treated very differently from a firm with a turnover of £599,999, despite presenting the same level of risk. Members have told us that the £2m threshold for client money is also too low, even with the proposed exemption.’

The Society said that requiring small firms and sole practices to have separate compliance and management roles would create significant costs and practical challenges, with little evidence that it would reduce risk.

There is particular concern about the SRA’s proposed phased implementation from January which means many firm owners or senior managers face a race to find suitably qualified replacements.

The SRA is understood to be willing to discuss proposed amendments to the new requirements, although it is resolute that recent law firm collapses where millions in client monies have gone missing shows that action is needed.

Last week, an SRA spokeperson said: 'We all agree on the need to better protect the public by strengthening the safeguards around client money. Understandably, given the complexities involved, there is real debate about the best way to do this.'