A year ago (13 September 2021) the Gazette carried an article by me criticising the Solicitors Regulation Authority for the time it takes to investigate complaints of improper behaviour by solicitors. That article was written because a number of my clients were at their wits’ end waiting to hear whether the SRA was proposing to take regulatory/disciplinary action against them. The delays were scandalous, and I ended the article with these words: ‘I, for one, would welcome a candid explanation in these pages from the SRA about how this situation has been allowed to develop, and what (if anything) is being done to correct it.’

Answer came there none. That is one of the problems in having a regulator which is, to all intents and purposes, completely unaccountable.

In this article, I shall relate my experience as a complainant to the SRA.  

Last year, I became concerned at the non-payment of some long-outstanding fees by a well-known firm. I had been instructed by a consultant, X, employed by the firm Y LLP. My clerks had been fobbed off with endless promises of payment by X, but years had passed without much happening. I shared my experience with an old friend, Geoffrey Williams QC, a regulatory specialist, who alleged that he had, in effect, been cheated by X. He told me that a firm of solicitors, Murdochs, may also have been cheated by X. I followed this up, as I knew the solicitors concerned.

Once we were able to pool our knowledge, it became clear that there was reason to suspect dishonesty on the part of X in respect of Williams and Murdochs, and serious question marks over his conduct towards me. We were also concerned about the way that Y LLP had dealt with the issues, which had apparently left X free to continue to practise unrestrained in any respect, and interact with the public, after the firm had become aware of X’s conduct. We therefore felt that the matter should be reported to the SRA. I wrote a detailed report on behalf of all three of us, cross-referencing the complaint to a paginated bundle of documents which accompanied the report. Though I hate to admit it, between the three of us, we have more than one hundred years of experience of professional conduct issues. Each of us likes to think that we can recognise professional misconduct when we see it. And we believe that we explained our concerns to the SRA in simple language.

I emailed the report and supporting documents to the SRA on 31 October 2021.  On 3 November, I was informed that the SRA was going to investigate.

On 14 March 2022, the case-worker wrote ‘we have continued to investigate the matter, but we have not reached a conclusion’. On 21 March I wrote to the case-worker: ‘The three of us are concerned at the lack of progress. In particular, we note that X is still employed as a consultant by Y LLP, and so apparently free to practise without any form of restraint. Our fundamental concern in reporting the matter to you (apart from the individual behaviour of X), was the apparent failure of Y LLP to take proper responsibility for what is done in its name by those whom it employs and the risks to the public that this creates.’

Since then? We were told that Y LLP was to be investigated on site by the end of April, but otherwise no noticeable progress has been made. We regularly receive emails from the SRA stating that the matter is still under investigation, and promising to update us by a particular date. When that date arrives, we are simply told again that the investigation proceeds and a further update will be provided by a particular date. And so it goes on. On 20 July we were told that we would be contacted in August. We were not. It is now getting on for a year since the matter was reported to the SRA. Yet nothing has happened so far as we know. It appears from Y LLP’s website that X is no longer with the firm, but beyond that, we know nothing.

How can it take the SRA the best part of a year to investigate concerns of dishonesty?  I can only repeat what I wrote in my first article: ‘I, for one, would welcome a candid explanation in these pages from the SRA about how this situation has been allowed to develop, and what (if anything) is being done to correct it.’

Over to you, Mr Philip.

Topics