Report comment

'The tribunal asked why the SRA had not investigated matters sooner: the regulator said the delay was ‘regrettable’ but could not give a definitive answer'

Doesn't that speak volumes about the quality of this profession's regulator? Furthermore it does not reflect well on the SDT which should have told the SRA advocate to be back before it on the following day with the head of the SRA in to to give the 'definitive answer'. Maybe the relationship between the two is a little too cosy? And furthermore, the foregoing also demonstrates the adherence of the SRA to the principle that what's good for the regulated goose absolutely is not good for the regulator gander!