Why is everyone ignoring the obvious when it comes to ABSs? Kerry Underwood can’t hide his disbelief
In my recent NLJ series “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” I looked at the spectacular failure of alternative business structures (ABSs) (see NLJ, 8 May 2015, 15 May, 29 May, pp 22). Since then, Slater and Gordon’s share price has slumped following the well-publicised travails of Quindell. Curiously, when I click on “S and G in the News” on their website 99% of recent news about this alternative provision of legal services flagship is not there, neither can I see any obvious reference to Quindell. Can’t think why. Co-op, Stobart, Quindell: a litany of failure.
Game over surely? No, not for the flat-earthers, who include the Shadow Lord Chancellor Lord Falconer, the Legal Services Board (LSB), and the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).
Mission accomplished?
In one of its most bizarre statements—and there is plenty of competition—the LSB has now concluded that the goal of promoting innovation and diversity in the provision of legal services through the introduction of ABSs
