July 2022: The SRA has published new guidance about accepting instructions from vulnerable clients or third parties acting on their behalf. This following from consultation with the Law Society’s Mental Health and Disability Committee. Here’s a link to it:
https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/accepting-instructions-vulnerable-clients/
The government has decided that the Fast Track will be extended to cases valued up £100,000 and thus that Fixed Recoverable Costs will be extended accordingly. Clin Neg are excluded because they are the subject of a separate review. There are 4 categories of complexity which will determine the level of costs allowed.
In case you missed it, below is a link to the LS Gazette article which sets out some detail with the suggested figures. Also below is a link to the full Impact Assessment and Government Response, should you wish to read it.
It doesn’t say when this will be brought in, but they are at the rules-drafting stage. You’ll need to do some prep and modelling to see how this will impact your business.
Law Society Gazette article: Click here
Original Papers: Click here for access
Should you wish to explore how this might affect your firm finances feel free to contact us for a chat. One of our consultants is an expert in Law Firm Finance and Ingemar is an ex-litigator. [email protected] or 07887 524507
If nothing else, the pandemic has showed the value of good financial awareness and the value of cash in the bank. I think the economic outflow of the pandemic is still to hit us. Those businesses with a strong cash basis and good awareness of their finances will be in a stronger position to take advantage of the opportunities that arise. If you're looking for someone to talk with, we are fortunate to have as one of our consultants an expert in small and mid-tier law firm finance.
(He's already doing forecasting for some of our client firms. (He's also an expert in Benchmarking in the Legal Sector and the SRA Accounts Rules.)
If of interest contact us:
Ingemar on 07887 524507 or [email protected]
Before someone can sit an SQE assessment, you will need to create your SQE account. Registration is now open, and you’ll need to follow these steps:
For further information here is the link to the SRA page: https://sqe.sra.org.uk/registering-and-booking
For bookings here is the link: https://sqe.sra.org.uk/registering-and-booking/booking-assessments
If you're an apprentice you must create an SQE account, activate it and log in.
Then you’ll need to fill in your profile - this includes verifying your identity and letting us know about any reasonable adjustments you will need when taking the assessments.
You will need to make sure that your employer or training provider has nominated Kaplan SQE as their End Point Assessment organisation.
If you employ or train an apprentice who plans to take the SQE, you must register your apprentice by emailing the apprenticeship team at [email protected]. You will need to provide them with the name and Unique Learner Number of the apprentice. This will ensure that we record them as an apprentice in their SQE account.
General info about the SQE & QWE: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/the-new-sqe-exam-and-qualification-method/
SQE Exam Dates: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/sqe-dates-of-exams/
SQE Training Providers: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/sqe-training-providers/
We have blogged extensively about QWE and invite you to visit some of the blogs. URLs are listed below.
Should you not have a solicitor who can ‘Confirm’ your QWE then WE CAN HELP.
Here’s a link to how: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/external-qwe-certification-service-2/
For information about the SQE see here: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/the-new-sqe-exam-and-qualification-method/
Feel free to contact Ingemar on: 07887 524507 or [email protected]
I don't know what's going on, but over the last couple of months we've been contacted out of the blue by 3 solicitors firms asking us to carry out a stress test on their compliance - so they are prepared should the SRA want to visit. No advertising. Fortunately we can cover all bases: AML, Solicitors Code of Conduct, SRA Accounts Rules and Data Protection.
Our expert on all things to do with AML and the Solicitors Code of Conduct/Rules. Paul also writes our OPM.
A national expert of the SRA Accounts Rules - an accountant with specific expertise in all things to do with the finances of solicitors. Also involved in preparing benchmarking reports.
Our Data Protection Officer, expert in all things to do with Data Protection, GDPR compliance and interactions with the ICO.
Founder of HCL, solicitor and ex-partner, department head and board member - brings an understanding of how your firm works and a commercial focus as compliance has to work within the environment of the commercial reality of running a business. Ingemar will lead and co-ordinate the projects.
Ingemar on 07887 524507 or [email protected]
An Independent AML Audit for your firm is required by Regulation 21 of The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017.
Did you know this?
The SRA reviewed 74 solicitors’ firms between September 2019 to October 2020 and found that only about 20% had ever conducted an AML Audit.
The SRA have given notice that they will be increasing their programme of visits to assess AML compliance.
There is more AML legislation on the way in 2022.
Here is a link to more info & some assistance: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/independent-aml-audit/
We can carry out an
Or contact Ingemar Hunnings on 07887 524507 or [email protected]
(N.B. Remember there is also a £4,115 cost of taking SQE1 and 2 exams themselves.)
We have been asked by several Aspiring Solicitors where they can find a list of providers of training for the SQE. So, we have done a bit of spade work to bring together in this blog what we can find. Please do not regard this as the definitive source of data – but we hope it will be a helpful resource for you.
We understand that some of the larger law firms will be offering to provide the SQE training internally. We understand that some universities will be offering to cover SQE preparation in their courses. Several will be offering a separate SQE preparation course. As there are so many and they can be found from the SRA List below we have not put details here.
Some firms will avail themselves of the ability to offer Solicitor Apprenticeships, where the government will cover the SQE preparation fees and the exam costs - see here for more info: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/apprenticeships-the-sqe-how-this-can-save-you-money/
SRA List
The SRA has a list of SQE Training Providers who have registered to use the SRA trademark so far. That does not mean that they will actually provide training. The SRA wrote that details of further providers will be added in due course. Here is a link to the list. It is just a list and when we checked many of the links to websites did not work. Very few seem to have published what fees they will charge.
https://www.sra.org.uk/students/sqe/training-provider-list/
Australian. Self-Styled Disrupter
Offering on-line training at low prices. Will not be part of the Apprenticeship Scheme.
As reported in the LS Gazette in Feb 2021: “The college has designed a range of virtual programmes, a SQE1 preparation course costing £1,800 and a SQE2 preparation course costing £2,300. These are two of three core learning areas, the other comprising legal skills modules, which can be taken in isolation or grouped together as part of a Master of Laws (LLM) in Legal Practice. The SQE programmes are available as a 12-week full-time course or a 20-week part-time course.” Pricing for 2025 seems to be £4,500 - £4,900 for SQE1 & 2.
https://www.collegalpractice.com/sqe
A provider from the USA. Plan to be part of the Apprenticeship Scheme.
Were the first to enter the market. They offered the preparation training for both the SQE1 & 2 at a cost of about £6,000.
As their name suggests, they come from a background specialising in helping foreign lawyers from various countries around the world to qualify as solicitors in England and Wales (Qualified Lawyers Transfer Scheme). As the SQE exam is based to a large extent on the old QLTS scheme, this gives them many years of expertise in preparing candidates for this types of exams. They also offer free Mock Tests: FLK1, FLK2 & SQE2.
They have stated that they will prepare students, paralegals, apprentices and foreign qualified lawyers for SQE1 & 2 with a cost between £4,000 and £6,000, depending upon options chosen.
The traditional provider that for older solicitors was the College of Law. Part of the Apprenticeship Scheme.
The University of Law has developed an LLM Legal Practice course costing between £14,000 and £18,800.
https://www.law.ac.uk/study/postgraduate/sqe/courses/
A Kent based Legal Training company.
Fees for SQE1 & 2: £4,900. The provider is also offering a discount for students who have completed the Legal Practice Course or an undergraduate degree.
Recognised providers of training courses to the legal profession. SQE1 & 2 £13,400 if out of London or on-line or £15,800 if in London.
https://www.bpp.com/courses/law/postgraduate/sqe
Also provide CiLex Training. Only providing SQE1 prep for the moment (summer 2022). Cost: between £2,500 & £3,000. S
https://brightlink.org.uk/sqe/#1646675255913-3dd6e956-90f9
Previously a provider of QLTS OSCE training and now offers preparation for both the SQE1 and SQE2. They offer 1-to-1 SQE2 mock simulations with personalised feedback, priced at £120 each. Additionally, they provide SQE law and skills pre-recorded lectures at a cost of £35 each, along with revision live lectures priced at £25. These law lectures are specially designed for non-native speakers and include concise and structured notes. Option to purchase a discounted package, with the SQE1 and SQE2 package priced at £3,439. Alternatively, services can be purchased standalone.
They say they provide coaching to help candidates prepare for SQE2 in an affordable and flexible way. We cannot see pricing from the website. We were made aware of this by a candidate in Dubai who thought they focus on people in the Middle East, although there is no mention of that on the website. They seem just to focus on prep for the SQE2 exam, not SQE1.
Provides SQE training and preparation. Live SQE Prep Courses – Full coverage of SQE1 & SQE2, structured and interactive. Revision Masterclasses – Intensive weekends. Webinars – Deep dives into tricky areas like Taxation, Wills and Intestacy. Mock Exams & MCQ Practice. Led by Dr. Schatz is an experienced legal educator. Pricing: £2,397 for SQE1 course; £2,397 for SQE2 course.
https://www.sqewithdrschatz.com/
We have blogged extensively about QWE and invite you to visit some of the blogs. URLs are listed below.
Should you not have a solicitor who can 'Confirm' your QWE then WE CAN HELP.
Here’s a link to how: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/external-qwe-certification-service-2/
For information about the SQE see here: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/the-new-sqe-exam-and-qualification-method/
Here is a link to our YouTube channel. On there you will find many videos explaining about the SQE, QWE and applying for exemptions from the exams. Also full videos of webinars we have delivered with info about this & the Q&A session that follows the talk. If you think this might be helpful, might we invite you to subscribe so it reaches more people?
Fill in the form below or feel free to contact Ingemar on: 07887 524507 or [email protected]
Ingemar has interviewed a prominent broker for Legal PII with access to the whole Professional Indemnity market. This is what he said:
“Cyber security is an area that Insurers are asking more and more questions about in respect of a firms PII. With the Insurers pretty much on for any loss from the client account, then they will always have a keen eye on what measures a firm takes to protect the client account from both an internal and external perspective. The question of cyber security has been brought even more to the fore during the pandemic, as so many firms have had staff working from home. Therefore, Insurers are very keen to understand that a firm has the same security for their systems when being used remotely as when they are being used in the office.
There is one Insurer that now even goes as far to make all PII quotations subject to a cyber audit. The client pays for the audit (cost ranges from £350 plus VAT to £1,000 plus VAT dependent on the firm) within their overall premium and involves a remote penetration test being carried out on their systems. A report is issued after the test to the client and will include system improvement requirements which the client has to implement within 90 days of the report being issued.
As for Cyber Essentials and Cyber Essentials+, then there is no direct correlation between having this and the PII premium, which is the same as something like Lexcel. However, what it does demonstrate to an Insurer is that a firm is operating to a certain standard in relation to the management of a particular risk, so they have to make less assumptions on that firm and allows them to discount the rate.
It is my understanding that there are Insurers that will offer more favourable terms to firms that have Cyber Essentials but only in respect of Cyber Liability Insurance. One insurer agrees to reduce the policy excess to Nil if the firm has Cyber Essentials as one example of concessions available on Cyber Liability policies.”
HCL can assist you in obtaining cyber security accreditations: Cyber Essentials, Cyber Essentials+ and IASME. We can also assist if you suffer a Data Breach. Finally, HCL offers a DPO service where you may buy in the services of our Data Protection Officer just for the number of hours you need a week or month, or indeed for a specific review or project. Contact us on 07887 524507, [email protected] You can follow this link for our DPO service: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/dpo-service-data-protection-officer/
High Court decision from November 2020 in the case R (on the application of Aviva Insurance Ltd and Swiss Reinsurance Co Ltd) v. Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2020] EWHC 3118 (Admin).
The High Court found that defendant insurers do not have to repay to the government all of the state benefits paid to the successful Claimant.
The reason was that it was incompatible with Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, i.e. the entitlement to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions; Article 1 states that “no one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law.”
Specifically they held that the Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 was incompatible in 3 ways:
a) The requirement to repay 100% of the recoverable benefits even where the underling claimant (i.e. the person seeking compensation) is found to be contributorily negligent;
b) The requirement to repay 100% of the recoverable benefits even where the underlying claimant’s “divisible” disease is in part unconnected with the insured’s tort; and
c) The requirement to repay 100% of the recoverable benefits even where other tortfeasors would normally be liable for an indivisible disease but they or their insurer cannot be traced.
What does this mean in practice? It will become clearer when the parties make further submissions with regard to the remedies in that case.
The case was brought by insurers for the defendant in an industrial disease case. They were challenging having to pick up the tab for all state benefits even if the claimant was found to have been contributorily negligent, or certain heads of claim were not proved or there was compromise. Therefore it will have most direct force in industrial disease cases. However, I would have thought it would have strong persuasive power in all PI & Clin Neg cases. The court found that the 1997 Act was incompatible with Article 1 from the date the Human Rights Act 1998 came into force (2nd October 2000).
This adds a lot of uncertainty for the next little while until issues can be clarified. However, it raises the possibility of the insurers NOT having to pay back as much to the CRU. If they don't have to pay it back to the CRU then they shouldn't be making the corresponding reduction in damages to the Claimant. Interesting. Certainly with disease cases settled from 2nd October 2000 onwards there may be the an argument for examining them to see if the insurers can claim reimbursement for over-recouped state benefits and thus further compensation for the claimants (or their estates). Would the same go for general PI & Clin Neg? I could see a bit of an industry developing in reopening settled disease cases and challenging the settling insurer for return of 'over-recoupments', causing them to challenge the CRU for return of these sums.
Here is a link to the full judgment from 20th November 2020: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/3118.pdf
Here is a link to the follow up judgment on this case handed down on 12th January 2021: https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2021/30.html
Many firms doing PI use the Proclaim case management system. If you need help with configuring your Proclaim system, then we can help. Please feel free to contact us on [email protected] or 07887 524507. Here is a link to some information about the support we can give Proclaim users: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/proclaim-support/
The Brexit transition period ended on 31st December 2020. After that date, the UK became a Third Country in the eyes of the EU and thus transfers of personal data need to be looked at differently. Transfers of personal data from the EU to a Third Country are required under the GDPR to be protected by safeguards in order to ensure “essential equivalence” with EU data protection standards. There are various options in order to comply, as follows:
It was always unlikely that the UK would secure an adequacy decision by 31st December, and there was concern that any business offering goods or services, or monitoring the behaviour of EU individuals, would need to implement SCCs immediately after 31st December.
The good news is that under the UK-EU Trade Agreement finalised on 24th December, whilst adequacy was not awarded, the EU has allowed a grace period of 4 months from 1st January (which can potentially be increased to 6 months and most likely will be) whereby personal data can continue to flow freely from the EU to the UK without the need for further safeguards. The grace period (known in the agreement as the ‘specified period’) will end sooner if an adequacy decision is awarded within the 4/6 months. The UK government has already agreed that data can continue to flow freely from the UK to the EU.
Notwithstanding the above ‘breathing space’ there is no certainty that the EU will award the UK an adequacy decision anytime soon, as they have concerns regarding UK government access to personal data, and there is also some concern that organisations could potentially use the UK as a ‘back-door’ into the USA, thus circumventing the Schrems 2 ruling. Indeed, the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) has stated on 28th December that “As a sensible precaution, before and during this period, the ICO recommends that businesses work with EU and EEA organisations who transfer personal data to them, to put in place alternative transfer mechanisms, to safeguard against any interruption to the free flow of EU to UK personal data”. By “alternative transfer mechanisms” in most cases we can read this as SCCs.
It would therefore be sensible for any organisations that offer goods or services or monitor the behaviour of EU individuals to get SCCs in place as soon as possible. Just to clarify what is meant by “monitoring behaviour” Recital 24 of the GDPR states that “In order to determine whether a processing activity can be considered to monitor the behaviour of data subjects, it should be ascertained whether natural persons are tracked on the internet including potential subsequent use of personal data processing techniques which consist of profiling a natural person, particularly in order to take decisions concerning her or him or for analysing or predicting her or his personal preferences, behaviours and attitudes.”
Our advice for any companies meeting the above criteria is to prepare SCCs, make some minor adjustments to your documentation to reflect changes in the legislative landscape e.g., the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK GDPR so that you are well prepared and fully compliant.
[email protected] or [email protected] or 07887 524507
Written by Nick Richards, our DPO. For further info on our Data Protection Officer Service click here: https://hunningsconsultancy.co.uk/dpo-service-data-protection-officer/
