Target problematic firms in claims market
Regulators should focus on problematic players in the claims market rather than overhauling the entire system as APIL advocates for targeted interventions
The personal injury lawyers' campaign organisation, APIL, has urged the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) to avoid a comprehensive overhaul of the high-volume claims market. Instead, it argues for a targeted approach that addresses only the ‘problem players’. John McQuater, an executive committee member of APIL, explained that imposing blanket tighter rules on the market would limit access to justice for individuals and stated, “Penalising all firms that deal with high-volume claims by introducing tougher regulations because of the actions of a few rogue players would be like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.”
The call for a nuanced approach comes in the wake of criticisms aimed at the SRA regarding its failure to protect consumers during the administration of Sheffield firm SSB Law. Clients of SSB Law, who believed their cavity wall insulation claims were secured on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis, were shocked to confront bills potentially amounting to thousands when they found out that claims were not insured.
McQuater emphasised the need for the SRA to swiftly identify and act upon these problematic players, saying, “The SRA should take a targeted approach to swiftly identify problem players and intervene early, including reacting quickly when clients raise concerns.” He added that there must be monitoring and intervention for individuals or firms who are flagged as high risk of breaching regulations.
Moreover, McQuater defended the current system of managing high-volume claims, observing, “The current system of handling high-volume claims generally works well and allows consumers access to justice in circumstances where it would not be viable for a firm to take on individual cases.” He also advocated for the introduction of standardised wording and checklists during the client onboarding process across the legal sector, positing that this would enhance transparency and reduce disputes stemming from client misunderstandings regarding success fees.
Copyright & permissions