It was with great interest that I read the article by Andrew Hopper QC and Gregory Treverton-Jones QC, authors of The Solicitor’s Handbook (see [2008] Gazette, 29 May, 14).

I am a member of the Solicitors Assistance Scheme. I represent solicitors who are subject to an enquiry by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and – all too often and in many cases unnecessarily – proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

The impression I have is that the SRA is seeking to establish its reputation. The result, whether intended or not, is that the regulator is regarded by many in the profession with fear and loathing. What is certain is that the SRA does not command respect.

The SRA’s mantra is ‘compliance’. As Andrew Hopper and Gregory Treverton-Jones said, the reality is that nearly all solicitors are trying to get it right. What the SRA fails to recognise is the difficulty of doing so in an ever-changing and more competitive environment.

Peter Williamson, chairman of the SRA board, has said that the organisation has not yet achieved the right balance between education and discipline. Of that, I am certain. There is little or no evidence of the proportionality and ‘risk-based regulation’ that the SRA professes. Sympathy or understanding for solicitors’ difficulties is absent, and any kind of dialogue or assistance is impossible.

Instead of punishing solicitors, the SRA should be placing greater emphasis on educating those who, despite their best efforts, may have got it wrong.

(see By the Book)