The Government expects motorists to be treated fairly when making insurance claims. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is the independent regulator responsible for regulating insurers and certain claims management activities. The FCA’s rules require firms’ communications and financial promotions to be clear, fair, and not misleading.

Under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA), Parliament sets the regulators’ statutory objectives, duties and accountability mechanisms, providing clear roles for government, Parliament, independent regulators and firms. The Government considers that this model gives regulators the powers and flexibility to respond to market practices and take action where firms fall short.

Where claims management activity is carried out by solicitors of law firms, this is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). The Ministry of Justice leads on matters relating to legal services regulation. The FCA works closely with other regulators, including the SRA, the Information Commissioner's Office and the Advertising Standards Authority, to tackle misleading advertising and poor practices where these fall within their respective remits.

The Ministry of Justice regularly engages with the SRA on the effective operation of the legal services regulatory framework. This has included engagement with the SRA regarding the training and qualification requirements for solicitors and how these requirements are responding to changes in the legal profession.

The Ministry of Justice has not made a specific assessment of the adequacy of support available for trainee solicitors. It is for the SRA, as the relevant independent legal services regulator, to determine its approach to these matters, with oversight from the LSB. The SRA publishes annual reports on the operation of the Solicitors Qualifying Exam, which provide assurance on the robustness of the assessment and set out improvements in delivery and candidate support. These are available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/research-publications/topic/education-training/.

The Ministry of Justice regularly engages with the SRA on the effective operation of the legal services regulatory framework. This has included engagement with the SRA regarding the training and qualification requirements for solicitors and how these requirements are responding to changes in the legal profession.

The Ministry of Justice has not made a specific assessment of the adequacy of support available for trainee solicitors. It is for the SRA, as the relevant independent legal services regulator, to determine its approach to these matters, with oversight from the LSB. The SRA publishes annual reports on the operation of the Solicitors Qualifying Exam, which provide assurance on the robustness of the assessment and set out improvements in delivery and candidate support. These are available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/research-publications/topic/education-training/.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of Government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales, with oversight from the Legal Services Board.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) regularly engages with the SRA on the operation of the legal services regulatory framework. I regularly meet the SRA and have challenged them to improve their performance in the context of law firm collapses, including Axiom Ince and SSB Law, and in the context of investigating Andrew Milne. In those discussions, I have underscored the importance of learning lessons, addressing risks to consumers, and ensuring public confidence in legal services regulation is protected.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of Government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales, with oversight from the Legal Services Board.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) regularly engages with the SRA on the operation of the legal services regulatory framework. I regularly meet the SRA and have challenged them to improve their performance in the context of law firm collapses, including Axiom Ince and SSB Law, and in the context of investigating Andrew Milne. In those discussions, I have underscored the importance of learning lessons, addressing risks to consumers, and ensuring public confidence in legal services regulation is protected.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of Government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales, with oversight from the Legal Services Board.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) regularly engages with the SRA on the operation of the legal services regulatory framework. I regularly meet the SRA and have challenged them to improve their performance in the context of law firm collapses, including Axiom Ince and SSB Law, and in the context of investigating Andrew Milne. In those discussions, I have underscored the importance of learning lessons, addressing risks to consumers, and ensuring public confidence in legal services regulation is protected.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of Government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales, with oversight from the Legal Services Board (LSB).

I meet regularly with the leadership of the LSB and SRA to hold them to account and discuss key areas of regulatory risk. Ministry of Justice (MoJ) officials regularly engage with the LSB and the SRA on the operation of the legal services regulatory framework, including matters relating to the SRA’s regulatory performance and public confidence in the regulation of solicitors and law firms. For example, there has been recent discussions relating to the failure of PM Law Limited. In those discussions, the MoJ has underscored the importance of learning lessons, addressing risks to consumers, and ensuring public confidence in legal services regulation is protected. While the MoJ has not made a separate formal assessment of the adequacy of the current regulatory structure for the professional conduct of solicitors and law firms, it keeps the effectiveness of the regulatory framework under review.

The government is cracking down on bad tax advisers and is creating a fairer tax advice system to help businesses and individuals access reliable tax advice.

As part of that, tax adviser registration establishes a baseline standard for all tax advisers who interact with HMRC, and ensures that HMRC knows that firms who interact with them on behalf of taxpayers meet this standard.

Under a passporting approach, firms would still need to provide HMRC with core information about their business and relevant individuals so that HMRC knows who is interacting with it and can manage access appropriately. HMRC would in any case need to undertake its own checks using HMRC systems, which are designed to make this process straightforward and minimise additional burden.

A new, streamlined tax adviser registration service was a top ask from HMRC’s stakeholders, and the government has invested £36m to make the registration process quick and easy to complete. HMRC will automatically perform checks in the background, and those with an existing agent services account (ASA) do not need to register again.

The Government recognises the disruption and difficulty that the collapse of a law firm has both for employees and its clients. The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitor Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and law firms in England and Wales, including the management of law firm closures.

With regards to the number of interventions the SRA has made into law firms in the last five years, the Ministry of Justice does not hold this information as this is an operational matter for the independent regulator. The SRA has advised that it publishes intervention statistics primarily through its Client Protection Annual Reports and Corporate Reports. These set out year- end figures for interventions, including numbers for the last five years. Details of firm closures (interventions) can be found by searching on the SRA’s Solicitors Register, which records regulatory actions taken against firms and individuals.

In relation to the assessment of trends of law firm collapses, this is a matter for the SRA, and work has been underway to improve how risks to consumers are handled. The SRA has been strengthening its use of data and intelligence to detect emerging risks so that it can intervene more quickly to protect consumers. Its consultation on holding client money, which closed in February 2026, will look at how to safeguard client money more effectively. The SRA is also taking forward actions in response to the LSB’s independent reviews of its regulation of Axiom Ince LTD and SSB Group LTD, and will apply any relevant lessons learned in relation to the closure of PM Law.

The Ministry of Justice continues to keep the statutory regulatory framework under review to ensure that it is working effectively. While there are no current plans to review the legislation, my officials and I will continue to engage with the regulators to ensure that actions are implemented, any other learnings are identified, and consumers are protected.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the SRA’s performance to ensure it operates effectively and in the public interest, including through performance assessments, targeted reviews and ongoing supervisory engagement. As the minister with responsibility for legal services I meet regularly with the SRA to hold it to account for its performance and am happy to rase the issue of waiting times for complaint resolutions at future meetings.

Where allegations of solicitor misconduct are raised with the SRA, it assesses the complaint to determine whether it meets the threshold for formal investigation. The SRA publishes information about its performance, including data on the timeliness of investigations and enforcement activity, through its corporate reporting and Board papers. It has reported an increase in complaints about solicitor misconduct and has taken steps to manage this, including increasing investigative resource and seeking to improve the quality and timeliness of its investigation work.

Within the framework of regulatory independence, Ministers and officials in the Ministry of Justice engage frequently with the SRA on matters relating to the regulatory framework. This has included engagement on the steps the SRA is taking to improve the timeliness of its investigations.

The Government has not held any discussions with the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) regarding its handling of complaints relating to Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). The SRA operates independently of Government, and it would therefore not be appropriate for the Government to comment on its decisions.

The SRA has taken a series of regulatory, guidance-based, and enforcement-related actions to address SLAPPs to tackle reports of related misconduct within the legal profession. This includes issuing a warning notice in 2022 setting out expectations on solicitors’ conduct in SLAPP-type cases, which was updated in 2024, and publishing accompanying guidance reminding solicitors and law firms of their wider professional obligations not to bring unmeritorious or abusive claims. However, I will raise this with the SRA to determine what additional action they might be able to take in this area.

The Government implemented the SLAPPs measures in the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 in June 2025, which provides protection against SLAPPs relating to economic crime. While this represents a positive first step, we are considering all options for reform to ensure that all types of SLAPPs are addressed comprehensively.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is the frontline regulator responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the performance of all frontline regulators, including the SRA, to ensure they operate effectively and in the public interest, including through annual performance assessments, targeted reviews and ongoing engagement with regulators on their statutory duties.

Section 44B of the Solicitors Act 1974 provides the SRA with the power to require solicitors and law firms to produce information and documents where the SRA is satisfied that it is necessary to do so (amongst other grounds) for the purpose of investigating whether there has been professional misconduct by a solicitor or a breach of its rules by a recognised body. It has a similar power under section 93 of the Legal Services Act 2007 in relation to licensed bodies. The SRA has published guidance on its approach to evidence gathering, which states that the SRA may request material where privilege is asserted, subject to safeguards and use for regulatory purposes only. This guidance is available at: SRA | How we gather evidence in our regulatory and disciplinary investigations | Solicitors Regulation Authority.

I met recently with the new Chief Executive of the SRA to raise a series of performance issues with her. Whilst this Government has not undertaken its own specific assessment of the impact of the SRA’s ability to seek material over which privilege is claimed on its effectiveness as a regulator, I will discuss this with the SRA. I am aware of the ongoing proceedings concerning the scope of its statutory powers in relation to legally privileged material, and officials have discussed the matter with the SRA as part of their routine regulatory engagement.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is the frontline regulator responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the performance of all frontline regulators, including the SRA, to ensure they operate effectively and in the public interest, including through annual performance assessments, targeted reviews and ongoing engagement with regulators on their statutory duties.

Section 44B of the Solicitors Act 1974 provides the SRA with the power to require solicitors and law firms to produce information and documents where the SRA is satisfied that it is necessary to do so (amongst other grounds) for the purpose of investigating whether there has been professional misconduct by a solicitor or a breach of its rules by a recognised body. It has a similar power under section 93 of the Legal Services Act 2007 in relation to licensed bodies. The SRA has published guidance on its approach to evidence gathering, which states that the SRA may request material where privilege is asserted, subject to safeguards and use for regulatory purposes only. This guidance is available at: SRA | How we gather evidence in our regulatory and disciplinary investigations | Solicitors Regulation Authority.

I met recently with the new Chief Executive of the SRA to raise a series of performance issues with her. Whilst this Government has not undertaken its own specific assessment of the impact of the SRA’s ability to seek material over which privilege is claimed on its effectiveness as a regulator, I will discuss this with the SRA. I am aware of the ongoing proceedings concerning the scope of its statutory powers in relation to legally privileged material, and officials have discussed the matter with the SRA as part of their routine regulatory engagement.

The Government recognises the financial loss, distress and uncertainty experienced by former clients affected by the collapse of WW&J McClure Ltd (McClure), particularly in relation to family protection trusts and wider estate planning arrangements.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. Responsibility for regulating the sector sits with approved regulators, overseen by the Legal Services Board (LSB). The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. This includes McClure, as well as Jones Whyte which took on the work in progress and certain assets of McClure when it went into administration in April 2021. The SRA regulates the firms’ activities in England and Wales, with matters relating to their Scottish offices falling under the Law Society of Scotland. Details of the SRA’s ongoing work in relation to McClure is available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/news/news/mcclure/.

With regards to asking the SRA to meet representatives of former clients of McClure, given regulatory independence, the Ministry of Justice does not direct the SRA’s stakeholder engagement. However, I have discussed the impact of the firm’s collapse with the SRA and know that the SRA is continuing to meet with various stakeholders, including those representing former clients.

Any warning signs relating to McClure prior to the firm’s collapse, and when these were identified by legal services regulators, are similarly operational matters for the independent SRA. The Ministry of Justice does not hold this information.

In relation to successor firm requirements, SRA guidance for firms is available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/closing-down-your-practice/. Under the SRA’s framework, its assessment is that Jones Whyte is not a successor practice. However, the firm must make sure it complies with a range of obligations, including those which have been set out in a compliance plan which the firm has agreed and on which the SRA is monitoring progress. This includes secure handling and storage of client papers and documents, and appropriate arrangements for file distribution and advice to impacted clients on their options.

With regard to changes to legal services regulation since the collapse of McClure, there has been continued work to strengthen how risks to consumers are identified and addressed. The SRA’s Corporate Strategy 2023-26 includes strengthening risk based and proactive regulation as a strategic priority and it has pursued action in this area. For example, in its recent Business Plan, the SRA sets out the steps it has taken to improve how it uses data and intelligence to spot risks more swiftly and take action to manage them effectively. The SRA has also indicated that it is accelerating this work, including through further investment in people and technology. In addition, the SRA is implementing changes in response to the LSB’s independent reviews of its regulation of Axiom Ince Ltd and SSB Group Ltd.

The Ministry of Justice keeps the statutory framework set by the Legal Services Act 2007 under review to ensure that it is operating effectively and protects consumers. The Government has no current plans to review the regulation of estate planning and trust-selling practices. The Department's focus is on improving the enforcement of existing rules.