header-logo header-logo

End in sight for SIF saga as Law Society and SRA agree?

The Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (SRA) proposals for a new post six-year run-off cover (PSYROC) scheme have won the Law Society’s support.

While the Law Society has been critical of previous SRA suggestions on indemnity cover, it showed support for the latest consultation, Consumer protection for post six-year negligence.

The SRA proposes maintaining consumer protection for post six-year negligence as an SRA regulatory arrangement providing the same level of cover as the Solicitors Indemnity Fund (SIF), and providing this protection through an indemnity scheme operating under the direct control of the SRA so it can oversee operations, realise potential cost efficiencies and keep the costs and benefits of the scheme under review.

Responding, Law Society president Lubna Shuja said: ‘These proposals will enable consumers to claim compensation if there is a rare occasion when something goes wrong many years after a solicitor has provided legal advice.

‘Consumers trust their solicitor is adequately and appropriately insured, and that they would be compensated in the unlikely event that late-arising negligence were to be identified.’

However, Shuja said any new supplementary run-off cover arrangement must meet three key principles.

‘First, any new arrangement should continue to run as an indemnity scheme, which could be funded on an ongoing basis through a mandatory levy on firms,’ she said. ‘Expert analysis carried out on behalf of the SRA suggests that this should cost less than £240 per firm per year, which is unlikely to affect the price of legal services for consumers.

‘Second, any residual funds from the Solicitors Indemnity Fund (SIF) should be ring-fenced for the specific purpose of dealing with PSYROC claims, for the benefit of consumers and solicitors.

‘Third, any new arrangement should provide the same scope of indemnity cover that is currently provided by SIF. We believe the proposals set out by the SRA for a new PSYROC scheme, operating under their direct control, could meet these requirements and if that is achieved, we support the SRA’s proposed approach.’

Once the consultation process concludes, the SRA will need to make a rule change application to the Legal Services Board in order for the new arrangements to be in place by 1 October 2023.

However, five regional law societies, Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool and Manchester, expressed concern in their responses that other options were not considered in the consultation.

SIF is due to stop accepting new claims after September 2023―a deadline which has already been extended twice―after which solicitors and retired solicitors would have been personally liable for any new claims made if the SRA had not stepped in with a replacement scheme.

However, SRA proposals put forward previously for SIF to close with no replacement met with considerable alarm.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll