Unlimited fines for solicitors?

Representatives accuse regulators of knee-jerk reaction to newspaper sting

When I qualified as a solicitor in 1976 — and, as readers will recall, I am no longer on the roll — self-regulation was regarded as the mark of an independent profession. That principle was widely accepted from 1825, when the Law Society was founded, until just over 15 years ago.

Now, solicitors in England and Wales have not one but two external regulators — perhaps three, if you include recent attempts by ministers to muscle in.

I am not suggesting for a moment that self-regulation was successful in preventing dishonesty. As I have recounted more than once, two solicitors in the firm where I worked during my pre-university gap year were sent to prison for their involvement in client fraud and the senior partner was acquitted on the basis that he didn’t know what was going on.

Indeed, I am perfectly prepared to believe that the current regulatory system is more effective in deterring, detecting and dealing with dishonesty than the Law Society was. But with two (or three) regulators — each trying to sound tougher than the next — solicitors and their firms are now facing the prospect of paying very much higher penalties when they are caught breaking the rules.

All this came to a head last month when the Daily Mail reported that lawyers were charging illegal immigrants thousands of pounds to submit false asylum and human rights claims.

This was based on the findings of a sting operation. As the newspaper explained,

staff at solicitors’ firms readily agreed to help an undercover Mail reporter posing as an economic migrant get refugee status.

This was despite being told he had no legitimate reason to stay in the UK after arriving on a small boat.

Events then moved with unexpected speed.