Report comment

Possible motivations for the SRA's total disregard for consumer protection in relation to permitting freelance solicitors to operate in unregulated firms with no minimum PII requirement could be :-

1. The SRA's total contempt towards consumer / public protection, despite it being their remit under the Legal Services Act 2007. This contempt has been most prevalent throughout their dealings with the Ecohouse fraud case.

2. A wish to further lower the burden on struggling insurance firms (my heart bleeds for them) in the face of increasing indemnity claims due to the incidence of fraud and misappropriation in the profession.

3. A wish to deregulate the solicitor profession supposedly on the recommendation of the Competition and Markets Authority in order to open up market competition.

4. To reduce the burden of solicitors that the SRA has to regulate, which they are clearly having difficulty coping with judging by their lack of conviction towards solicitors who inflict loss and devastation on their clients.

5. To avoid any need to compensate victims of freelance solicitor misconduct through the SRA's compensation scheme, which would not apply to unregulated firms.

The cut-off date for the consultation has elapsed now, so none of these posts can influence responses or opposition to the proposals. That said, I only hope that the Law Society, LSB and LSCP responses can halt the SRA's senseless plans before they inflict irreversible carnage and loss of confidence in the profession and its regulators.

Victims of misconduct, who are treated with contempt by the SRA after suffering financial loss due to fraud / misappropriation, can voice concerns about how the SRA has destroyed consumer protection, but ultimately, it is up to solicitors to stand up to the SRA and unite in solidarity to oppose their destruction of the profession and tarnishing of its reputation.