(a) Solicitors Solicitor Sole Practitioners became a group of the Law Society in 1993 and its current membership is 4500. Membership is very diverse ranging from the sole practitioner working from home or in an office with no staff, to the sole practitioner with more than one office and several assistants. The range of work covers the very specialist niche practice to the more general high street practice. In addition this sector of the profession includes members whose main source of income may come from locum work and those who have a very small practice earning less than £15,000 gross fees per year.

(b) The Group has a National Executive Committee comprising representatives from regional areas in England and Wales. However, one of the main aims of the Executive is to encourage the formation of local groups as this is seen as the best means of providing sole practitioners with mutual support and giving them opportunities to network amongst local practitioners.

(c) The Executive has two Sub Committees: Practice which is concerned with professional regulation, specialist accreditation, practice management, conveyancing, legal aid and other practice areas; and Professional which is concerned with Group matters including the Group’s conference, communication with the membership, pastoral care and indemnity insurance.

(d) The Executive meets four times a year at which time Sub-Committee meetings are also held although the Sub Committees also meet on occasions in between Executive Committee meetings.

(a) Local groups arrange talks, social events, and other means by which sole practitioners can meet each other and if possible use the opportunity to gain CPD accreditation. The Group also encourages sole practitioners to meet informally without a structured event as this give practitioners the opportunity to exchange experiences, particularly about the management of their practices and provide valuable social contact.

(b) The Group has organised Annual Conferences for the last five years, which has become increasingly successful. At the last conference held in Bristol, there were over 100 delegates who all enjoyed a varied programme of training, as well as the Group’s Annual Dinner and its Annual General Meeting. Increasingly sole practitioners see the conference as a valuable event because it is devoted solely to their needs and provides CPD points at reasonable cost.

(c) The Group has published a Magazine and Newsletter entitled SOLO since 1996 and, again, sole practitioners are increasingly seeing the value of a magazine, which unlike other legal journals, is focussed on their interests. SOLO is effective in creating a sense of community amongst sole practitioners, who more than other practitioners can feel particularly isolated.

(d) The Group has its own Website where members can find lists of all the members of the Executive Committee and other information about the Group and its activities as well as items of legal interest. In addition there is a password protected Executive Committee site on the website for Executive Committee Members only.

(e) The Group has arranged for sole practitioners to receive discounted training, services and equipment.

(f) The Group aims to provide Guidance on specific aspects of practice management for members and is currently producing a leaflet advising members how to protect their practices in the event of sudden illness and after death. Other guidance will be produced on the supervision of offices and handling complaints. The Group maintains close relations with some of the key staff in the OSS and in Professional Ethics who have given the Group much support in its guidance work.

(g) Recognising that sole practitioners might be in a vulnerable position in the market place in respect to the availability of Indemnity Insurance, the Executive set out to establish a special relationship with an insurance broker to ensure that insurance would be available for all sole practitioners to access if eligible. After interviewing a number of insurance brokers, Nelson Hurst was appointed to look after the interests of members of the Group.

(h) Discrimination against sole practitioners by some lenders continues to be a problem and in 1996 the Group undertook a survey of all members of the Council of Mortgage Lenders. The information gained was of value both to the Group and to the relevant department in the Law Society. Nelson Hurst are currently investigating the availability of insurance in relation to payment delay in the Compensation Fund to remove the excuse that some lenders have for refusing to instruct sole practitioners.

(a) The Group responds to all relevant Consultation Papers issued by the Law Society, the Legal Services Commission and other interested bodies. The SPG provides an effective means for the Law Society to consult on matters affecting sole practitioners and small practices generally.

(b) Sole practitioners play their part in contributing the to well being of the profession by participating in the activities of Local Law Societies, representing geographical Constituencies on the Council, and serving on Committees and Working Groups of the Law Society.

(c) Members of the Executive Committee have also worked with the Lexcel team to ensure that there is special consideration given to the needs of sole practitioners in applying Practice Management Standards. Lexcel is seen as the important development for all practices including sole practitioners but the Group is anxious to ensure that sole practitioners are not put off by the extensive documentation in the Lexcel pack, some of which is over complicated for very small practices.

(d) The Group is able to relay through its newsletter and the website, perhaps sometimes, uncomfortable messages to members in a way that the Law Society in its regulatory/disciplinary role is unable to do. It is also possible through the Group’s newsletter and other means to explain complex Policy Issues on which Executive Committee members because of their direct involvement with the Law Society are up to date and more conversant than the average member. Sole Practitioners also respond to the experiences of other working practitioners and are encouraged if “one of their own” has adopted one or other of the Law Society initiatives.

(e) The Group Supports and Works with the Law Society in raising the standards of practitioners generally and deplores the action of the relatively few sole practitioners which results in a high level of opprobrium towards the sector as a whole. However, the Group feels that all regulation should proportionate to the means of solicitors to manage their practices, earn a living as well as provide a legal service. The image of the sole practitioner and his standing in the profession is now highly commended, directly as a result of the formation and efforts of the Group.

(f) The Group provides expertise to various committees and working groups of the Law Society. On the Council, the voice of the sole practitioner is increasingly important as SPG members have the perception that only the large practices hold sway. On various committees the contribution of a sole practitioner can be useful in reminding other members of the need to consider the circumstances of different sizes and types of practice; but on other committees it can be that the sole practitioner is valued for their expertise unrelated to size of practice.

(g) The Sole Practitioner is a manager, a businessman and a practitioner. He or she provides a unique personal service to the public. The Group’s experience is that members coming from large practices where they have had no responsibility for management can be ill prepared for the rigours of running their own business. The Group knows that it is has a great deal of support to offer these members. The experience of running a business is valuable expertise in any forum of the Law Society’s work. A sole practitioner will be immersing him or herself in all the facets of management that will confront a larger practice, as well as having to deal personally with day to day profitability of the practice, the supervision needs, complaints handling and all aspects of the legal service provided. However, the Group recognises that sole practitioners are vulnerable simply because they work on their own and the Group sees one of its most valuable services is to provide sole practitioners with pastoral and practice support where possible to ensure that all practitioners have someone to turn to in times of need.

(h) The Group feels that sole practitioners far from being a dying breed, may actually be strengthened as a sector because of the changing nature of practice. The more generalist high street practice may diminish, but there appears to be a trend towards the establishment of the niche specialist practice and increasing technology is enabling solicitors to be able to practise entirely on their own without the need of even a secretary or other support. This is a welcome trend but also underlines the need for a Group to continue to represent solicitors who practise differently from other sectors of the profession. If the Group represents one aspect of the changing nature of practice, then the experience of Group members is of inestimable value to the Law Society in formulating policy for the future needs of the profession as a whole.

(i) The sole practitioner is probably the most IT conscious member of the profession.

(a) Currently the Group’s grant of £15,700 is lower than all the other Law Society Groups apart from the Commerce and Industry Group and the Group has no contribution towards its conference administration. The Group has an administrative secretary who is shared with the Local Government Group and partly with the Commerce and Industry Group. The grant is used mainly to provide travelling expenses for members of the Executive Committee to meetings and Sub-Committee meetings. Other expenditure is used to support the publication of the Group’s newsletter although it is hoped that increased advertising revenue will lessen this burden. The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Group need expenses to travel to meetings of local groups, attend Law Society functions and the Executive Committee pays a contribution towards the Chairman’s office expenditure on Group matters. The Group is severely limited in trying to form and foster local groups, which it feels, are the lifeblood of the Group as a whole. It is only through feedback from local members, and the activity, which takes place locally that the Group can develop and thrive. It is an unfair burden to rely solely on the goodwill of a local practitioner to set up and pay any upfront costs for arranging meetings. At the moment, however, the Group does not have the resources to make any contribution towards this expenditure. Although some local law societies have been supportive in encouraging the setting up of local groups, to date they have not been able to afford any financial contribution.

(b) The Conference of the Group has always been self-funding and it is a tribute to the organisers that they have always been able to obtain sponsorship for the conference. However the conference is run in the most economical way possible to ensure that members are not overburdened by a heavy registration fee which would be beyond the means of some sole practitioners.

(a) It is known that the Group is active in many constructive ways both in the interest of its members and the Law Society membership as a whole.

(b) The loss of funding would sound the death knell of the Group and would reverberate throughout the halls of Chancery Lane.

(c) The loss to the profession would be incalculable especially at a time where the Executive seek to regain the confidence of the members of the profession as a whole.

(d) In comparative terms the amount of the annual grant as compared with the financial losses incurred by the Law Society on a variety of matters over the last few years bears no relationship as to quantum.

(e) The Executive needs to avoid any further cause of dissension within the membership of the Law Society