Report comment

The SRA Handbook is as it is because post Clementi/Legal Services Act 2007 the SRA realised that it should construct a regulatory framework which would cover all permutations of the practice of law. This was not a bad idea: philosophically it made sense for all lawyers to be subject to the same regulatory requirements and although the sector remained (and remains) diversified, the logic was that it should all come together under one regulatory umbrella.

In practice however this hasn't happened, and there is little indication that it will happen anytime soon. Meanwhile the SRA continue the logic of their existence, which is to regulate all lawyers, in whatever field, in the event that the government settles on a single independent regulator.

The trouble is that the government hasn't really thought through what this all may mean. Thus the consumer is left with regulatory choices (which will probably feature low on a consumer's priority list), and regulatory confusion reigns. There may be sound reasons why (for example) the Licensed Conveyancers have a different regulatory regime with different overheads resulting, but it doesn't obviously lead to a fair and transparent market.

What is required (on the Government's case) is (a) a redefining of 'reserved legal activities' (b) clarity as to the minimum standards in these reserved legal activities, including ethical conduct) of the entities engaged in this sector, and equal treatment for the entities competing in this space.

This could mean personal sanctions such as solicitors suffer for non lawyer directors of legal service providers.

As it is, the present regime is a mess: inconsistent, unfair, and anti-competitive.