header-logo header-logo

31 October 2013
Issue: 7583 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

153 firms left without cover

SRA confirms large number of firms have failed to secure PII

A total of 153 firms have failed to secure new professional indemnity insurance cover, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has confirmed.

The 153 have now gone into the second, 60-day stage of the extended policy period (EPP). The first 30-day stage ended yesterday.

Firms can carry on as normal during the first stage, but can only deal with existing instructions during the second stage. If the firms have not found insurance by 29 December, they will have to close.

The SRA had been notified of 226 firms that needed to go into the EPP, but 73 of those have since secured cover.

Frank Maher, partner at Legal Risk solicitors, says: “The numbers are quite small when compared with the number in practice, but that doesn’t reveal the scale of human misery with people facing bankruptcy, not to mention the effect on their staff and families.”

The 1,300 firms who were insured with Latvian insurer Balva also face uncertainty, given the six-year run-off period. The Latvian authorities withdrew Balva’s operating licence in June. 

Maher says he is dealing with some firms who were insured with Ukrainian insurer Lemma, which went into liquidation two years ago. The Financial Services Authority protection scheme covers 90% of claims where the firm has a turnover of less than £1m.

“Most firms who were with Lemma will qualify for the scheme, some don’t in which case they are personally liable,” he says. 

Maher says he knows of three top 100 firms that had problems with renewal this year, which showed that that indemnity insurance is a profession-wide issue.

“I think it’s high time the profession explored what consumer protection we can offer going forward,” he says.

“We should have a conference of the profession about this, with representatives of the consumer interest invited to participate so they can understand that it’s not possible to provide complete protection when that protection may be illusory. It would be better to have less protection from insurers who can deliver than complete insurance from insurers who may not—the wider the cover the more it forces firms to obtain insurance from insurers who can’t offer peace of mind."

 

Issue: 7583 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll