p17_SJMar29th_regulatory watch 25/03/2011 12:10 Page 17

regulatory watch Going overboard

When it comes to complaints, the should remember there is such a thing as too much information, says Susanna Heley

irst-tier complaints, resolved by made relevant reports to the SRA. ‘signposting’ – telling the client at every rele- solicitors’ firms internally, have may, however, be justified in harbouring con- vant opportunity how to complain and to Ftraditionally been internal matters. cerns about information sharing at this stage whom they should complain. Despite some Some complaints may have led to internal because of LeO’s relative inexperience in the skirmishes between various regulators and investigations and self reporting to the SRA, legal services field. the LSB, the message is clear: change is on its but, for the most part, minor costs complaints LeO is not and is never intended to be an way. From the profession’s point of view, and service issues will have been handled expert tribunal in any particular branch of the the potential regulatory implications of com- in house. plaints are more significant than ever. Central complaints records may Although the SRA is working towards have been shared with insurers, a new relationship with the profession visitors from the Practice Standards within the framework of outcomes Unit, or perhaps , and they focused regulation, it remains respon- would have been of interest to SRA sible for prosecuting misconduct. investigators. The SRA would not From October, it will have more routinely have expected to receive sources of intelligence than ever such data unsolicited. before. Compliance officers will have That is all about to change. The to make detailed self reports – details Legal Services Board (LSB) is keen to of complaints will be required by one ensure that first-tier complaints data or more regulators. Much of this intel- is made available to frontline regula- ligence may be relatively innocuous tors. This will mean that a solicitors and, to my mind, such disclosure may firm will have to disclose complaints be something of a double-edged details to the SRA as a matter of sword. There is such a thing as too course. Not only that, but where a “Regulators are requiring much information. firm, regulated by the SRA, employs people who are individually regulated members of the professions Act now by another frontline regulator, those to engage in ‘signposting’ – It is evident that firms need to be tak- regulators should expect to receive telling the client at every ing steps now to deal with the changes complaints data where it directly which will be coming into force later affects regulated individuals. So, relevant opportunity how to this year. Firms should be looking to according to the LSB, a complaint complain and to whom they appoint their new compliance officers, about a working in an should complain” many of which are likely to be internal SRA-regulated firm should be appointments. reported to the SRA and to profession. It has experts it can call upon as Conduct a review of existing complaints ILEX Professional Standards. necessary but it is intended to reflect the lay records and an analysis of complaints han- point of view. dling procedures. Are your complaints The ‘consumer experience’ LeO has been around for almost six months resolved quickly and simply? Do many com- This is all part of the new emphasis on the and is slowly making its mark. Reports indi- plaints progress to the LeO (or, historically, ‘consumer experience’ which lies, apparently, cate that LeO received a flurry of complaints to the Legal Complaints Service)? Perhaps at the heart of outcomes focused regulation on its first day and made its first formal deci- more importantly, is there any pattern to the which will be with us from October – assum- sion in December. In February, it threatened complaints? Is a particular fee earner or ing that all goes according to the SRA’s plan. to use its formal powers against a non-coop- department failing to manage clients well? Gathering first-tier complaints data from erative . It has consulted on whether If you are able to identify patterns from any firms and second-tier complaints data from or not it should publish its own decisions and complaints that you receive, or the progres- the (LeO) will, says the has responded to third-party consultations sion of those complaints, these may point to LSB, assist regulators to identify and manage on, for example, client financial protection. systemic failures either in client and risk risk. Such data will also enable the LSB and It seems then that LeO is working hard management or in complaints handling. frontline regulators to assess whether con- to deal with the two aspects of its brief – Take action now to identify and resolve such sumer-focused objectives are being met. to provide accessible redress for consumers problems and you may save money in the Regulators already have arrangements and to use its experience to educate and pro- longer term. in place with LeO to share second-tier com- mote good practice within the professions. plaints data. For solicitors, this is nothing Similarly, regulators are requiring mem- Susanna Heley is a solicitor at RadcliffesLeBrasseur new. The Legal Complaints Service regularly bers of the professions to engage in and a member of the solicitors regulation group

www.solicitorsjournal.com 29 March 2011 SJ 155/12 17