The head of the Property Lawyers Action Group (PLAG) has criticised the Law Society for “letting down” members over the TA6 form updates, condemned legal regulators’ efforts to enforce transparency as “suffocating,” and questioned the “integrity” of the sector’s representative bodies.
In a wide-ranging interview, Stephen Larcombe spoke with Eve Tawfick of Today’s Conveyancer about the current state of legal services. The bold parts are questions posed to Larcombe during the interview.
Larcombe expressed that the Law Society has “let down” its members amid the controversy over the new TA6 forms, stating that the forms should be “scrapped altogether” following the Special General Meeting (SGM) in July.
Founded in October 2023, the Property Lawyers Action Group (PLAG) describes itself as an “informal non-profit group of property lawyers increasingly concerned about the direction of the legal profession,” according to an open letter addressed to the Law Society CEO. Since its inception and subsequent social media traction with legal professionals and allies, PLAG has opposed the updated TA6 property protocol form.
Indeed PLAG pushed for a no-confidence vote in the Law Society if the form wasn’t made voluntary, forcing the Law Society to call the SGM at which Law Society CEO Ian Jeffery and President Nick Emmerson survived the vote of no confidence, with 123 votes in favour, 207 against, and 20 abstentions.
Larcombe reflected on the outcome, stating:
“After the SGM, we took the result as a mandate that lawyers wanted to see progress on the TA6 and Material Information (MI) issues. They wanted to wait and see what would happen with the TA6 consultation. We also believed it would be an open and transparent consultation. If the response to the consultation indicated that the TA6 should be scrapped, that’s what should happen. Anything less than a good-faith consultation would be deeply disappointing.”
A Law Society spokesperson at the time said it was “disappointing” that PLAG felt compelled to take such a step, but noted that transforming the homebuying process was “inevitable.”
Despite the backlash against what has been labelled a “convoluted” new form, the Law Society commented before the SGM:
“The requirement for ‘Material Information’ in the homebuying and selling process is statutory, dating back to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. This requirement has gained prominence with new guidance from National Trading Standards Estate and Letting Agency Team (NTSELAT). While there are differing views, we don’t believe this guidance overstepped NTSELAT’s authority.”
“If the Law Society claims to be listening, why did it proceed with a consultation that doesn’t include the option to scrap the TA6 form? The Law Society said in June they were postponing the consultation until January of next year to reflect on the strong feedback from members. Why go ahead with a consultation that limits options?”
“If that option isn’t included, the consultation is a sham. PLAG will attempt to modify or challenge the outcome or engage with Trading Standards to ensure feedback is heard and acted upon. From what I’ve heard, the rejection of the form is unanimous,”
Larcombe replied.
“Do you think there’s a chance the TA6 will be scrapped?”
“Based on the current consultation sessions conducted by a separate company on behalf of the Law Society, which include surveys, deep-dive webinars, and one-to-one sessions with solicitors, I have my doubts. When you consider that the public struggles to complete passport applications, they’re now being asked to fill out a document with supporting notes that’s about 54 pages long.”
“When we called for votes to trigger the SGM, we got 100 votes overnight. That support highlighted gaps in the representation of property lawyers.”
Larcombe explained
Pricing Transparency
In the last week, the LSB approved changes for CILEx Regulation to require firms to publish price and service information for legal services, a requirement previously applicable only for conveyancing, probate, and immigration services. Larcombe criticised this “obsession with regulation,” saying it “suffocates firms,” particularly small and medium-sized ones.
If CILEx’s 60 member firms fail to comply, they could face hefty fines. A recent review found that 42% of solicitor firms published all required information. First offences for non-compliance could result in £750 fines, with subsequent breaches costing £1,500. The Law Society has raised concerns about the SRA’s increasing penalties, calling the proposals “potentially unlawful.” However, the regulator states it is seeking views on issuing unlimited fines to maintain professional standards and public confidence.
Both the SRA and CILEx emphasise consumer protection as a driving force. The Law Society’s Vice President, Richard Atkinson, warned the SRA’s ambitions could have serious repercussions on the legal profession and access to justice.
PLAG’s Larcombe also demanded “evidence” to justify CILEx’s latest regulations on price lists and transparency.
Today’s Conveyancer asked about the Axiom Ince scandal and the ongoing High Court battle over TSB’s handling of “mortgage prisoners.” In the preliminary ruling, the High Court found TSB was “not in breach,” but campaigners continue to fight for justice.
“Isn’t consumerism a large part of legal services? Why is the ‘holistic approach’ preferable?”
“That’s the heart of the issue,” Larcombe replied. “We don’t see legal services as a consumer product. Even members of the Labour Party admit that the Legal Services Act is a ‘pig’s breakfast.’ Trying to frame it in terms of consumerism is ridiculous.”
Larcombe referenced To Kill a Mockingbird, emphasising the importance of being a “good lawyer,” not a mere service provider. “We serve clients by applying ethical values, something politicians don’t understand. The Labour Party’s decision to abolish the office of the Lord Chancellor was a huge mistake.”
“You speak of integrity and opposing corporate greed, but homebuying and legal services are increasingly out of reach for many younger people. Do you think there’s hope for making these services more accessible?”
“You’ve hit the nail on the head. That’s exactly what PLAG is exploring. We have many young members, and they’re very tech-savvy. We’re not opposed to technology, but we believe lawyers should decide how tech serves their needs, not the other way around. What we oppose is the obsession with digitization for its own sake.”
“Does PLAG fear that law is being commoditised and sold like a product, with legal-tech fusion confusing both consumers and practitioners?”
“You’ve got it. The challenge is making technology accessible while still protecting the client. We can’t drown clients in data, as seen in the Post Office scandal. AI is just a sophisticated data tool, and no data is ever 100% secure.”
Larcombe was asked if the stereotype of the “money-hungry lawyer” has become more prevalent and whether the profession has shifted towards consumerism to survive. He replied, “Law is a vast landscape, and as soon as you commoditize it, problems arise. Law firms used to subsidize unprofitable work with profitable cases out of goodwill.”
He further agreed with the notion that the legal profession, like the NHS, is drowning in bureaucracy, saying: “The over-regulation of law firms is suffocating. The Legal Services Act has backfired, and consumerism has damaged the public interest.”
“What are PLAG’s next steps? What do you hope to change?”
“We’re thinking about expanding into other areas and becoming more of a society than just an action group. Many legal professionals, even those involved in the Post Office scandal, have reached out to express support. We want to focus on integrity and values, representing property lawyers who aren’t currently being heard.”
Following the interview, Today’s Conveyancer contacted the Law Society for comment on the issues raised by Larcombe. A spokesperson said:
“Our consultation on the TA6 Property Information Form is underway.”
