This update from The Law Society has been provided by Liverpool Law Society’s Key Account Manager from the Law Society, Beth Quinn
SIF
We know that the potential closure of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund (SIF) is an important issue that many of our members are alarmed by.
We have been clear as an organisation that we are opposed to the potential closure of SIF and we are preparing our own response to the recent SRA consultation. Our position is that SIF and post six-year run-off cover (PSYROC) must both be retained to ensure both consumers and the integrity of the profession are protected.
We have engaged with the wider profession to develop our response to the consultation to ensure there has been ample opportunity for our members to contribute and that the final document is a proper reflection of the views of our members. We conducted a series of meetings and discussions to engage with different segments of the membership, as well as former members.
Any members who wish to feed into our consultation response are welcome to still do so and can email any thoughts to SIF@lawsociety.org.uk
• We are particularly interested in any examples that members may be able to provide of long-tail claims that arise more than 6 years after a firm has closed
• Some anonymised, real-life examples would be helpful to illustrate the kinds of consumer losses that might go uncompensated in the absence of SIF
We are strongly encouraging our members to respond to the SRA’s consultation (both individually, as firms or as local law societies) to let them know that SIF protects your clients and ensure that the views of the profession are as widespread and impactful as possible.
In mid-January we plan to share an overview of our response to help facilitate others in providing their own response. Responses to the consultation must be submitted by Tuesday 15 February 2022.
Long-awaited pay rise proposed for criminal legal aid lawyers
On 15 December 2021 a report recommending increased remuneration rates for criminal legal aid solicitors was published as part of an independent review chaired by Sir Christopher Bellamy. We’ve welcomed these proposals to increase pay for criminal legal aid solicitors as a step in the right direction, following our ongoing campaign work on behalf of members.
The last time pay rates for criminal legal aid lawyers were increased significantly was during the 1990s. Over the last 9 years, the number of criminal legal aid providers has decreased by one third.
In the review, Sir Christopher drew out evidence supporting our view that the system is not currently economically sustainable, for instance:
– Rates are about 1/3 less than they were 13 years ago
– Defence rates are around 30-55% below those considered reasonable by the Crown Prosecution Service for committals/trials in the magistrates’ court
– ‘Structural underfunding’ in the criminal justice system as a whole has contributed to difficulties, such as a backlog of cases
he key recommendation is an overall increase in funding for criminal legal aid (for litigators and advocates) as soon as possible. This would increase annual pay rates at least 15% above the present levels.
Other recommendations in the report echo our submission to the review or are what we’ve often advocated for in the past, namely:
– Applying the magistrates’ court standard fee scheme to the police station and Crown Court
– Setting up an independent advisory board to help develop a more joined-up approach to criminal legal aid, reporting regularly to the lord chancellor
– That police station work, magistrates’ court work and Crown Court work should broadly be sustainable, rather than dependent on firms relying on other work streams to subsidise their legal aid work
– Introduce a weighting system in police station work, so that experienced lawyers are rewarded for dealing with serious cases
In line with our recommendations the report rejects: competitive tendering and expanding the Public Defender Service (PDS) as the current system is “sound in concept but suffering from severe underfunding”.
After 25 years of freezes and cuts, it remains to be seen whether this will be enough to stem the exodus of firms from criminal legal aid and attract new lawyers into the sector. We are concerned how long it will take our members to benefit from these proposals and are continuing to press the MoJ to get the money to our members as soon as possible. We are glad that Sir Christopher categorised this proposed increase as the minimum necessary, and we share his view that more investment is likely to be needed.
In terms of next steps the government has also published a ministerial statement, committing to publish its response and a consultation by the end of March 2022.
> Find out more about the proposals
DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION
Gender pay gap reporting: what can we learn from the 2020 snapshot?
Our new report examines the gender pay gap reports of more than 40 of the largest law firms in England and Wales. It shows the average gap in 2020 in mean hourly pay was 20.3%, and 32.4% in median hourly pay – higher than the national average.
> Discover how you can help narrow the gender pay gap