LSB calls on consumers and indemnity insurers to help drive improvements in legal services

Print This Post

By Legal Futures

14 March 2012

Edmonds: much more can be done to help consumers make informed decisions

Regulators should empower consumers to drive improvements in the quality of legal services, while professional indemnity insurers could hand over firm-specific claims data to help target poorly performing practices, the Legal Services Board has suggested.

In a consultation issued yesterday on how regulators might prevent risks to, and improve, the quality of legal services, the LSB said consumer empowerment “has seen consumers drive change in markets through their shared commentary or feedback on services or brands such that a firm’s success depends on it engaging with empowered consumers”. Regulators could also use this information to target poorly performing practices.

It said a “truly independent reviewer” of the quality of service provided by law firms and chambers – providing consumers with ratings of lawyers – could assist with these goals.

A legal equivalent of Dr Foster – which provides comparative information on health and social care services – could be more than just a reference source for consumers, it suggested.

Error, group does not exist! Check your syntax! (ID: 14)

“A report that describes and rates the service outcomes can be instrumental in driving improvements to achieve or secure a good-quality reputation. If a trusted source, it is reasonable to suggest that this resource could become a legitimate trigger for targeted regulatory intervention.”

While recognising that various directories and websites already exist, the LSB cast doubt on the independence of some of them. “Ranking of firms by outcomes can be a powerful incentive to improve by increasing ranking to overtake competitors, but loses strength when unduly influenced by the very service providers it purports to rate.”

The LSB recognised that regulators already use a variety of methods to address some of the quality risks, including proactive entry and authorisation requirements as well as reactive investigation and enforcement. “To date, however, there has been little concerted work by regulators to reduce quality risks through better consumer empowerment – by providing consumers with data and tools to support choice, for instance.”

On PII, the LSB recognised that there may be data protection and confidentiality issues around insurers providing claims data to regulators, “but the common agenda of removing quality risks to consumers may be sufficient to prompt a debate to explore what options for data sharing and collaboration on profiling exist”.

The LSB is using the consultation to inform the development of a framework against which the regulators can identify and address quality risks in their specific market context.

LSB chairman David Edmonds said: “The importance of confidence in legal services to both individual consumers and the public interest at large makes maintaining standards of quality a compelling reason for regulation. We know that consumers expect safeguards for quality to exist, but evidence suggests that reality does not live up to those expectations.

“In setting out our approach to tackling risks to quality – as well as capturing the range of interventions that may be appropriate – we aim to ensure that this baseline is in place. It is clear that much more can be done to help consumers make informed decisions about which service is going to be best for them.”


Tags: , , ,

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

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

Legal Futures Blog

The LSB’s proposals for legislative reform: let’s be clear

Caroline Wallace LSB

The publication of the Legal Services Board’s vision for legislative reform of legal services regulation on 12 September has generated a healthy level of interest and debate. This can, on the surface, seem a somewhat dry subject. However, it has an impact not just on existing regulated practitioners, but also on providers of legal services more generally, as well as everyone who uses or benefits from an effective legal sector. And, let’s face it, that’s all of us.

October 25th, 2016