Exclusive: solicitors repay £1m to clients to end SRA investigations

Print This Post

By Legal Futures

10 June 2010


Miners: solicitors repaying inappropriate deductions

Solicitors have agreed to pay back to clients over £1 million to end investi-gations being conducted by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), Legal Futures can reveal.

Figures obtained by this website show that the SRA has entered into 54 separate regulatory settlement agreements (RSAs) with 133 individuals since it was allowed to do so in 2008, although we understand that record-keeping in the early days of RSAs was not totally reliable. Of those, 51 have been or shortly will be published on the SRA’s website.

Sixteen of the RSAs to date have involved agreed offers to repay clients affected by, for example, inappropriate deductions of fees in miners’ compensation matters or overcharged  disbursements. The SRA estimates that pursuant to these agreements repayments of approximately  £1,003,600 have been made.

RSAs have also been used to deal by consent with appeals to the High Court in relation to practising certificate conditions and to remove solicitors immediately from the roll by consent, where, for example, they have retired or are suffering from ill health.

RSAs are not equivalent to commercial settlements; they are on the SRA’s terms, which are agreed to by the solicitor concerned.



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

The skills shortage in law firms is the biggest threat to handling cybercrime

CLC Roundtable discussion at Malmaison Hotel, Charterhouse Square

The skills shortage in our businesses is the biggest threat to our industry when looking at cybercrime. Cybercriminals are not just after money but are looking for sensitive information too, so the legal services sector is an obvious target. In the last year we have had reports of around £7m of client money being lost to such crime. This is not an IT issue and it should not be left to the IT teams to sort out. It is a high-level responsibility and a board-level issue that must be taken seriously. We suspect that we will look back on 2016 and ask why we didn’t respond quicker.

March 21st, 2017