The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) published a thematic review of probate and estate administration services shortly before Christmas, recognising the significant risks these services pose to firms, solicitors, and clients. Engaging with these services often occurs during stressful periods for clients, requiring solicitors to handle sensitive issues, manage vulnerable individuals, and navigate complex family dynamics. Additionally, the process involves overseeing substantial amounts of client money and estate assets.
Prompted by the 2023 Annual Assessment of Continuing Competence—which identified probate and estate administration as generating the third-highest volume of reports and complaints—the SRA initiated this thematic review to understand how firms maintain competence, manage risks associated with estate monies and assets, and fulfill their obligations to clients and other parties involved.
The review encompassed 25 firms, including sole practitioners, providing probate and estate administration services. At each firm, the SRA interviewed the head of department responsible for these matters and, where applicable, a fee earner involved in probate and estate administration. The assessment included reviews of two client files per fee earner, training records, and accountant’s reports.
Findings revealed that while most heads of department (19 out of 23) were aware of the SRA’s continuing competence requirements, over half of the fee earners (6 out of 10) were not aware of their obligation to maintain competence. Furthermore, only 15 out of the 25 firms had a written continuing competence policy, and in seven of those firms, the relevant personnel were unaware of its existence.
Training practices showed that 23 heads of department and all 15 fee earners regularly engaged in formal training on probate and estate administration. However, this training predominantly focused on legal and technical aspects, often neglecting other areas of the Statement of Solicitor Competence essential for performing their roles effectively.
Supervision practices were also scrutinised. Although fee earners generally felt they had adequate supervision, only 9 out of 30 reviewed files contained evidence of such oversight. Additionally, half of the heads of department or sole practitioners received no oversight or peer review of their work, indicating potential gaps in quality assurance.
The SRA identified three instances of potential misconduct during the review: two cases involved failures to obtain or submit qualified accountant’s reports, and one pertained to non-compliance with anti-money laundering regulations. Consequently, investigations have been initiated into these three firms.
Despite these concerns, the thematic review highlighted positive practices. Firms were generally effective in meeting the needs of clients in vulnerable circumstances, ensuring matters progressed smoothly and clients were kept informed. There was also a noted sensitivity to the complex dynamics between families and co-executors during bereavement, and consistent good practice in authorising payments from client accounts.
The SRA emphasises the importance of solicitors not focusing their learning and development too narrowly on technical legal knowledge. Proper consideration should be given to developing wider knowledge and skills, including regulatory and ethical matters, to ensure comprehensive competence in their roles.
In conclusion, while the SRA’s review uncovered areas requiring improvement—particularly in awareness and implementation of continuing competence policies—it also recognised commendable practices in client service and financial management. The SRA plans to follow up with firms lacking understanding of their competence obligations and will integrate these findings into broader initiatives on continuing competence and consumer protection.