“Web sweep” of 500 firms to check prices are published


Websites: SRA to check compliance

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is to carry out randomised “web sweeps” of around 500 law firms over the next few months to check they are publishing fees for common consumer transactions.

The regulator is also alerting consumer groups and the public to its new price transparency regime, which came into force in December last year.

A snapshot survey by Legal Futures of 50 law firms on the day the new rules came into force in December showed that only 28% had complied with the new rules, which require fees to be published for conveyancing, probate, motoring offences and employment tribunals among others.

Paul Philip, chief executive of the SRA, said the regulator would take a “proportionate approach” to enforcement.

“It’s a bit like people who don’t fill in requests for information. We’re saying this is not a hugely important thing, but you’re obliged to do it, so you’re forcing us into taking disproportionate action when you should just comply and move forward.

“We come up against this type of thing time and time again. I have no doubt we will end up with a rump of people who end up in the corner saying they are just not doing it.

“At that point in time we will decide what to do. We will address it in a proportionate way but in an increasingly forceful way to ensure compliance.”

Mr Philip said the SRA would take a “standard auditing approach” to price transparency.

“We’ll take a sample and see whether we think that sample is representative of the general population. If it is, we’ll take a larger sample.”

He was speaking at a media briefing at the SRA’s London office, as the regulator launched its revised enforcement strategy, with subject-specific guides on its approach to issues like drink-driving or social media.

The SRA said in its guide on enforcing price transparency that mitigating factors included compliance in “most areas”, delays in publishing caused by “technical/practical issues” regarding marketing materials or websites, and a plan to achieve compliance.

Aggravating factors included “deliberately or recklessly” providing “vague, misleading or meaningless information” and failing to display it in a prominent place.

Along with the strategy, the SRA published the threshold test it expects solicitors to use where they believe misconduct has taken place and are considering reporting it to the regulator.

The SRA launched a consultation on how solicitors should report their concerns in August last year, and the final version of the test follows the approach backed by the Law Society in its response.

The new wording states: “You must promptly report to the SRA, or another approved regulator as appropriate, any facts or matters that you reasonably believe are capable of amounting to a serious breach of their regulatory arrangements by any person regulated by them (including you)”.

Law firms must not subject “any person making or proposing to make a report” to “detrimental treatment” for doing so, regardless of whether the SRA or other legal regulator investigates the matter.

Mr Philip said lawyers had different views on when to report an incident to the SRA but he hoped the new approach would encourage agreement.

“It’s full of words which are open to interpretation, we accept that. We think the exercise will be helpful for solicitors and firms and will hopefully lead to a better outcome in terms of understanding when you should be reporting misconduct to the regulator.”

He added the revised strategy and reporting obligations would be introduced with the SRA’s new Standards & Regulations later this year.

Mr Philip said the timing of both would be decided at the next SRA board meeting early next month. The new obligations would need to be approved by the Legal Services Board.




    Readers Comments

  • Caitlin Roxburgh says:

    This is a really interesting article. Through our own research, we’ve found that 44% of the Top 100 law firms have NOT published information in relation to Employment Tribunals – a pretty standard offering. The B2B services where prices have to be published will only increase; OMC’s growing pricing database already contains over 1,000 fixed fee activities! Law firms (and buyers) need to get their heads around pricing transparency quickly.


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

No larger firm can ignore the demands of innovation – that was the clear message from our most recent roundtable: “The law firm of the future”, sponsored by LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions. It comes in many forms, predominantly but not just technology, and is not simply a case of automating process. Expertise and process are not mutually exclusive.

Blog

20 June 2019

How to pass a client security audit

A recent study showed that 72% of law firms are seeing an increase in security audit requests from both existing and new clients, indicating a huge impact on firms’ ability to win new business.

Read More

Loading animation