Council News
019
It had been intended that those practising Immigration Law could do so as a freelance solicitor but a late intervention from the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) has meant that this plan has been suspended until OISC’s concerns are addressed. Digital Badge It is now a requirement for all regulated firms to display the new digital badge. The SRA have suspended the use of tracking software to allay concerns over potential data protection breaches. Such concerns are not in any event regarded by the SRA as a defence to a failure to display the digital badge. The SRA has a team dedicated to ensuring that this requirement is enforced and they will be spot checking firm’s websites.
New standard of proof at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) To avoid confusion, the SDT also made the change to its rules to permit cases to be decided on the civil standard ( more likely than not) abolishing the need to meet the criminal standard (beyond reasonable doubt). The current level of successful prosecutions brought by the SRA stands at 98%, it will be interesting to see if more cases are brought to the SDT under the new rules. In conclusion, regulatory change continues to be rapid and to present new challenges to individual solicitors and firms alike. Plans will need to be put in place not only to ensure that everyone understands and is compliant with the rules, but that firms are ready to meet the challenge of new competitors and new working practices. Thought
will need to be given to interaction with other firms who may work to different standards and drivers; and who may not have professional indemnity insurance, particularly in non-contentious work. Linda Lee Notes https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standardsregulations/code-conduct-solicitors 2 https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standardsregulations/principles 3 https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/strategy-2017-2020/ sub-strategies/sra-enforcement-strategy 4 https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standardsregulations-resources 1
Hardening Professional Indemnity Insurance Market (PII) The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Board met on 22 June 2020 and received a report on the hardening PII market.1 The SRA’s research indicates that the market has hardened and contracted for the following reasons: a). A changing claims profile including a rise in claims and a rise in higher value claims b). Increased claims in other areas of the insurer’s business impacting on their capacity to offer PII c). Poor investment returns from money received from premiums d). Some features of solicitors’ insurance requirements are unattractive to insurers, in particular the requirement that insurers must cover closing firms for six years run off even when they do not pay the premium Although some of the features of the solicitors’ PII market are unique to the legal sector, the hardening and contracting of the PII market is cross-sector. Some insurers have pulled out of the PII market completely, including two in the last year, leaving 180 firms looking for a new insurer. The insurers and brokers that remain in the market have indicated that they have less capacity and a reduced risk appetite, as a result, they are more cautious about who they choose to insure and on what terms. Insurers are generally demanding a higher level of due diligence about the risks a firm presents and how they are managing those risks, including in relation to cyber-security, before they will consider renewing existing policies or offering new business. It was reported that premiums have generally increased in the October 2019 and April 2020 renewal rounds. There are no definitive figures available yet, but some insurers and brokers are reporting average increases of around 15 – 20% for the minimum level of cover required by the SRA minimum terms and conditions (MTCs)2 . There are also
higher rate rises for any additional cover beyond that required by the MTC. However, this is not a uniform position and may depend to some degree on the perception and actuarial modelling of risk, as well as on the quality of application submitted. This emphasizes the need for firms to approach specialist brokers and to ensure that their application is well prepared and attuned to the needs of the insurers in assessing the risk they might pose. Advice is available in a Law Society practice note on obtaining PII. 3 It was reported that some firms did manage to maintain cover at a similar cost in the October and April renewal rounds, but some firms struggled to find insurance at all. This may have included higher risk firms and firms whose previous insurer has left the market. It is reported that as there is now reduced capacity, some insurers are concentrating on existing clients. It can be more difficult for insurers to get complete risk information when the previous insurer is no longer in the market, and this provides a further disincentive to look at new clients. Ultimately, only around 20 firms notified the SRA that they were unable to secure insurance in the April 2020 renewal round, the second biggest renewal point in the year. What has yet to be assessed is the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on what was already a difficult market. Insurers are expecting that they will receive increased claims across their business resulting from Covid-19, such as for business interruption. This may further reduce capacity within the insurers’ books, including for PII. The historical pattern is an increase in professional liability claims after every economic downturn. This is beginning to feed into insurers’ risk appetite and pricing. Insurers are also concerned about new risks arising, for example from increased remote working on IT security and the supervision of work. Some insurers are beginning to include additional
questions on applications about how firms are managing Covid-19 related risks. Insurers have also reported that they are concerned too about the financial viability of firms in the current economic environment. This includes the ability of firms to pay their premiums, and also, any excess on their policies. Given that insurers must provide offer run-off cover even when a firm does not pay the premium, this is of particular concern to insurers and will undoubtedly impact on the risk profiles for certain firms. The SRA report indicates that there have been specific practical issues from Covid-19 preventing some firms from renewing their insurance in good time e.g. delay in processing a government loan or if a partner is ill and unable to access the necessary information to make an application. The SRA have taken steps to help in the short-term by introducing greater flexibility for insurers and firms to agree a temporary extension, than has traditionally been allowed. THE SRA Board will receive a further analysis of the impact of Covid-19 at its next Board meeting. Post 6 year run off One good piece of news was that the SRA board announced that it would extend the use of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund (SIF) to provide post six-year run off cover for firms for another 12 months until 30 September 2021. However, the SRA rejected the Law Society’s request that post 6-year run-off cover be extended for a period of three years. The solicitors’ PII market operates on a claims made basis which means that former partners of firms that have closed must have cover in place on the date the claim was made, not the date the work was carried out. Firms can only purchase run off cover for six years after the date they close, and the threat of the removal of post 6 year run off cover has been of increasing concern for the former www.leicestershirelawsociety.org.uk
