This isn’t likely to be any part of your syllabus, but for those applying for law firms questions about the future direction of the legal profession are quite common. You’ll often find yourself gazing into a crystal ball as you try to work out what challenges and opportunities might be before law firms. Plainly Brexit and Covid-19 are very large elephants in the room and offer endless scope for pontification, but perhaps you’d like to write about, or answer questions on, something else?
The Legal Services Act 2007 shook the legal world to the core, opening up the way to a range of different providers and leading to headlines like “Supermarket divorces on offer”. Over the last few years different reviews have been conducted looking at the effectiveness of the reforms, from the point of view of legal service users. The Mayson Review conducted as an independent review project set up by UCL has now been published with a range of interesting findings. It’s worth a look!
Here are some headline points:
Understandable consumer confusion arises in respect of the delivery of “non-reserved legal services” (those for which a professional qualification is not required). If these services are conducted by anyone who also carries on reserved legal services then the non-reserved services are subject to regulation. If the person carrying out the services does not also handle reserved services then the non-reserved services are not regulated. You really can forgive confusion on this can’t you?
The separation between regulation of the legal profession and representation of its interests is not sufficiently clear. Under the 2007 Act the Law Society is both the “approved regulator” and professional body – the Act doesn’t refer to the SRA.
Public confidence is also dented by persistent complaints particularly in relation to immigration and criminal representation and, to make matters worse, the Legal Ombudsman comes in for criticism for not dealing effectively with complaints.
And how might these issues be dealt with?
By creating a registration scheme covering all those providing non-reserved legal services and making those services subject to review by the Legal Ombudsman. Looking in the longer term to make these providers fully subject to regulation.
Ending the role of professional bodies in regulation.
Including Lawtech in the definition of the provision of legal services.
Creating a public register of all legal service providers making the extent of regulation clear.
Extending legal professional privilege to all providers.
How might that affect law firms? More competition! Law firms may need to look at more ways to reduce overheads as there may be an increased need to work to fixed fees. Perhaps there might be more of that working from home that we’ve all got so good at? Maybe now is not the time to invest in the provision of office services!