header-logo header-logo

28 June 2022
Issue: 7985 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

March of the unregulated legal sector

The for-profit unregulated legal services sector may account for up to 9% of the market for individuals and 39% of the market for SMEs, researchers have found

Its biggest market is in personal injury, conveyancing, will-writing, tax, trading, and employee issues.

The Legal Services Board (LSB) published its study, Mapping unregulated legal services, this week. As well as charting the scale of the sector, it found their services were generally cheaper, with will-writing typically charged on a fixed price basis and flight compensation claims as a percentage success fee.

However, clients of the unregulated sector were more likely to report dissatisfaction, and some case studies uncovered instances of errors in documents and unexpected costs.

Moreover, clients of unregulated providers do not have access to redress through the Legal Ombudsman or to specific regulators such as the Solicitors Regulation Authority or Bar Standards Board.

LSB chief executive Matthew Hill said: ‘We must strike the right balance between increasing access to justice and protecting consumers.

‘We will weigh the findings from the research with a range of other insights and evidence as we consider whether changes to the scope of regulations are warranted in the future.’

However, Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘This research confirms the consumer benefits of using regulated providers.

‘Reservation should be considered in a mixture of possible measures for high-risk areas where there is increased evidence of consumer harm, such as will-writing, estate administration, Lasting Powers of Attorney and trusts. With an increasingly aging population, these areas call for regulatory attention to ensure that vulnerable people – particularly those with mental incapacity – are sufficiently protected.

‘We are still concerned about the public’s confusion about the difference between regulated and unregulated providers. Consumers must be made aware of the limited redress available from unregulated providers compared to the substantial redress available from regulated providers.’
Issue: 7985 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-details

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