header-logo header-logo

Client account interest money-maker provokes concerns

12 January 2026
Issue: 8145 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal services , Costs
printer mail-detail
Ministers’ proposals to raise funds by seizing interest on lawyers’ client account schemes could ‘cause firms to close’, solicitors have warned

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) consultation, 'Interest on lawyers’ client accounts scheme', published this week, proposes that law firms keep a portion of the interest while another portion is remitted to the government. The government would take 75% of interest on pooled accounts and 50% of interest on individual accounts, which tend to be used for longer-term work such as probate and cost more to administer.

Justice secretary David Lammy said: ‘We believe that unearned income could be better invested in strengthening our justice system.

‘This is a tried and tested idea, with similar schemes operating successfully for decades in countries like the United States, Canada, Australia, and France. These models have delivered measurable impact by funding access to justice and legal aid services.’

However, Law Society president Mark Evans said: ‘Firms will close, fees will rise and clients will be impacted if the MoJ goes ahead with the proposal.

‘The cost of doing business in the legal sector is already high, with recent rises to national insurance contributions meaning businesses are paying more. The proposal comes at a time when small firms will have to manage new regulatory burdens on anti-money laundering supervision and tax adviser registration. High street law firms will face a perfect storm of new bureaucracy.’

Currently, different rules apply across the legal profession. Solicitors must return a ‘fair sum’ of interest to the client, CILEX lawyers must return ‘the proper proportion’ of interest, licensed conveyancers and probate practitioners must return interest unless the client has given written consent to another arrangement, while barristers are generally prohibited from holding or managing client money.

Victoria Morrison-Hughes, vice-chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers, said: ‘Costs lawyers may sometimes have to hold client money simply to ensure that funds are available for payment of both disbursements and their own fees.

‘This is not a money-making exercise—simply a way to ensure that work is done smoothly and efficiently. The MoJ must ensure the new scheme does not disadvantage the firms that do this.’

The consultation closes on 9 February.

Issue: 8145 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal services , Costs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll