Last August criminal lawyers threatened to abandon the Solicitors Indemnity Fund en masse.

Judith Naylor, then the head of the Criminal Law Solicitors Association (CLSA), said she was meeting private insurance brokers and, in the meantime, she would be asking practitioners if they wanted to leave the SIF.

Ms Naylor denounced the system under which criminal solicitors paid thousands of pounds to the fund, based on a percentage of their fees, while criminal barristers could insure themselves annually for the 'princely sum' of £200.Partly in response to this pressure, the SIF last week unveiled a consultation paper containing proposals for sweeping changes to the fund, among them a reduction in contributions for those carrying out 'low risk work' of up to 80%.Other key proposals included:-- Low claims discounts and claims loading.

Practices with good claims records would receive discounts of up to 20%.

It is estimated that more than 6000 firms would benefit from this change.

Those with the worst claims records could see their contributions go up by 200%.

There are estimated to be about 40 firms in this category.

Almost 2000 practices would face smaller increases from 5% upwards.-- Penalty deductibles.

An SIF analysis of the year 1994/95 showed that claims worth £28 million arose from missed time limits.

To deal with this it is proposed to add 50% to the deductible applied to claims arising from missed time limits.

This scheme could be extended to include breach of undertakings.-- A new formula for calculating deductibles.

This would be based on the size of the firm at the date of the negligent act and not on the size of the firm notifying the SIF of the claim.

The CLSA discussed the proposed 80% discount for 'low risk' work at its meeting in York last week.Vice-chairman Frank Sinclair said the SIF consultation paper was a 'welcome opening shot and an acknowledgement that they have accepted the justice of our case'.

But he would not be drawn on whether the proposed 80% discount would go the whole way to satisfying the criminal lawyers' objectives, saying the paper provided only 'a good basis for future negotiations'.While it has been criminal lawyers who have campaigned openly on the issue, the benefits of the discount for low risk work would also extend to work carried out under the Children Act or for mental health tribunals, the collection of small debts, (worth less than £7000), welfare and immigration advice.Philip Trott, chairman of the employment and business sub-committee of the Immigration Law Practitioners Association cautiously welcomed the suggested discount.

'There are virtually no claims against immigration solicitors,' he said.

SIF chairman Andrew Kennedy pointed out that the benefits of discounts for specific 'low risk' work may be extended more generally if 'risk banding', which the SIF was considering as a further development of the discounts scheme, were introduced.Under this, different areas of work, such as conveyancing or family, would be assessed separately, and contributions based on the amount paid out of the fund on claims in this category.Paul Venton, c hairman of the Law Society's standards and guidance committee, the body which drafted the consultation paper in conjunction with the SIF, explained Chancery Lane's thinking.

'The paper is an attempt to recognise that there are some types of work which lead to a greater number of claims,' he said.

'The problem comes with a criminal solicitor who decides to produce a property lease or act in the purchase of a company.'He said the important thing was to ensure that the fund had an accurate record of exactly what percentage of a firm's work was made up of which specialism.

On this, the fund would rely on solicitors' word.

'We work on the basis that solicitors are honest which, by and large, they are,' he said.The planned new 50% uplift in penalty deductibles for claims resulting from missed time limits could apply to many different areas of work.'It could be a question of automatic striking out, or failure to issue proceedings within three years, but it could also be failure to renew a tenancy or to make a Land Registry search within the priority period.'Asked whether it was a question of the Society and the SIF taking too long to respond to the demands of the profession, particularly over discounts for low risk work, Mr Venton emphasised that change should not be divisive.'The SIF always wants to make doubly and triply sure that a change is justified in indemnity insurance terms,' he said.

'The fundamental philosophy of the SIF is that we are one profession and that all kinds of firms should be covered against all forms of risk.'The consultation paper on calculation of contributions to the Solicitors Indemnity Fund was published in [1996] Gazette, 17 January, 24-26.

The deadline for responses is 29 March 1996.

These should be sent to Andrew Darby, Professional Indemnity Section, the Law Society, Ipsley Court, Redditch, Worcestershire B98 0TD; DX 19114 Redditch.