LONDON (WithinTheLaw) - The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has announced a review of its continuing competence provisions after coming in for criticism about the level of information given to customers when choosing solicitors.
While doctors and teachers undergo regular checks throughout their career, the same is not true for solicitors and the Legal Services Consumer Panel (LSCP) has called for changes including spot checks and mystery shopping as part of ongoing competence checks.
The calls come in response to a call for evidence from the Legal Services Board which could lead to proposals of a formal process of reaccreditation.
The SRA said the time was right to undertake a review of its approach and it would consider whether its current competence approach is sufficient. However, they said placing the bar too high risked deterring entrants into the profession.
The review will look at ‘three key questions’ including:
- Issues with existing competence arrangements.
- Whether their current approach is effective and ‘targeted where it needs to be'
- What they can learn from elsewhere.
The SRA is facing growing criticism of its current checks. According to the LSCP, in its evidence, customers were ‘shopping blind’ with very little information about the current competence of the solicitors.
With little independent help to go on, most were relying on longevity within the profession or how good their website looked when making a decision. Instead, they called for ‘proactive and reactive’ checks throughout a professional’s career which could involve independent reviews of cases and checks such as mystery shopping.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, meanwhile, argued the SRA’s competence statement was ‘far too broad’ to be effective. They contended that the best way to ensure competence was through accreditation which should be ‘backed by a competency framework’ that allows a clear career development path and helps solicitors remain up to date with the law and develop their skills.
Personal injury work, they said, had become more specialised in recent times and there was a need for an accreditation system which recognises new realities.
The consultation continues.
(Written by Tom Cropper, Edited by Klaudia Fior)