header-logo header-logo

12 July 2021
Categories: Legal News , Profession , Financial services litigation
printer mail-detail

SRA: Restricting fees in financial mis-selling claims

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has invited solicitors and law firm representatives to give their views on fee restrictions for financial product and services mis-selling compensation cases

It launched a discussion paper, ‘Restricting fees for some claims management services’, this week, setting out its approach and asking to what extent its rules should be aligned with the proposals of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which regulates the vast majority of this sector.

Under the Financial Guidance and Claims Act 2018, the SRA’s rules must prevent excessive fees being charged for claims management activities connected to financial products or services.

Paul Philip, SRA Chief Executive, said: ‘This is an important piece of work for consumers and the firms we regulate.

‘Fees have to be set at a level that means the cost is affordable for people seeking redress, while ensuring that this is still a viable area of work for firms that provide this service for those who need it. So although the number of law firms involved may be small, the impacts for consumers could be significant.

‘I would urge firms currentlyproviding claims management in this area, and others who may be thinking about doing so, to read the discussion paper and let us know what you think.’

View the discussion paper at bit.ly/3xvpg5N and submit your views by 29 September.

The SRA will hold a webinar on its thinking in this area, on 14 July at 12.30pm. Register here: bit.ly/3hTYz4m.

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