The Solicitors Regulation Authority has published a further statement on action it has taken in the wake of PM Law’s closure last week. The Sheffield-based firm and subsidiaries suddenly closed on Monday 2nd February, with notices appearing on the front doors stating the firm was no longer able to trade “due to regulatory matters”.
An initial statement on Wednesday 4th February indicated the SRA had formally intervened and taken control of all documents, papers and monies, including client money, held by the firm.
An updated statement, published yesterday, provided an update on action taken by the regulator:
“Following the swift action taken last week to intervene in PM Law Ltd, we have continued to work quickly to support former clients of the firm and its affiliates.”
The statement goes on to detail how the regulator has now attended all 24 offices belonging to PM Law in Yorkshire, Cumbria, Berkshire and Derbyshire. All files and money (including clients’ funds) held by the firm are now with intervention agent Gordons LLP. This includes accessing PM Law’s case management systems, which has identified tens of thousands of live cases.
Over 100 urgent primarily litigation and conveyancing matters have been identified and clients contacted, and more than 50 applications to the SRA’s compensation fund received and emergency payments ongoing for those with the most urgent need. More than 100 courts across the country have been notified about the firm’s closure to raise awareness of the impact on urgent litigation matters.
Paul Hastings, SRA director of client protection, said:
“We have been working hard to protect the people impacted by the closure of PM Law. Our intervention agent has identified tens of thousands of live cases, many of which involve sensitive and important matters such as personal injury claims, house sales, and probate issues.
“We appreciate that this may be a stressful time. Clients can rest assured that our agents are diligently working through these files to identify and contact them.
“Our goal is to get to everyone as soon as possible, prioritising those in most urgent need. We have, for example, made several emergency grants to allow clients to move house when they had already exchanged contracts.”
Despite calls for greater transparency the SRA said it is “unable to disclose information about an on-going investigation but are working quickly to gather all the relevant information”.
Those with on-going matters with PM Law and its affiliates are advised to access further information and support on a dedicated part of Gordon LLP’s website. The SRA have also provided initial guidance for those impacted.
The investigation continues.
2 responses
A Profession at a Turning Point?
Over the past week, the anguish of clients caught up in the PM Law Group collapse has been impossible to ignore. Social media has shown the human cost. In that sense, the SRA’s immediate focus on firefighting—protecting the public interest, stabilising files, and preventing further harm has been both necessary and welcome.
It has also been heartening to see the profession respond with quiet solidarity: firms offering employment to displaced colleagues, practitioners cooperating across organisational boundaries to minimise disruption for vulnerable clients. At its best, this is what a profession looks like. Service before self‑interest. But the sentiment darkens quickly. There is deep anger across the legal community that, despite the SRA’s own paper last December on accumulator‑law firm risks, and despite formal rebukes from the Legal Services Board, we now face a reputational crisis. And it comes in the very year when the Post Office Inquiry is expected to deliver a damning account of institutional failure and professional silence.
For me, the root cause lies not in individual misconduct alone but in the byzantine, contradictory architecture of the Legal Services Act 2007. The Act embedded a structural flaw: multiple regulatory objectives in theory, but in practice, a single, alien principle—consumerism—has dominated. The result has been a distortion of Clementi’s vision.
The collapse of PM Law Group may prove to be a seminal moment. It forces us to confront whether the current regulatory framework is capable of regulating modern, fast‑growing legal entities at scale. On the evidence before us, it is not. A review of the Act is no longer a theoretical debate; it is an urgent practical necessity.
That review must include a clean severance of the Law Society and the SRA, the creation of a genuine defence union for solicitors, and a more democratic, slimmed‑down Law Society—one that is responsive to its members rather than its internal machinery. The profession deserves institutions that reflect its values.
The question now is whether the gold lions at Chancery Lane will recover their voice—and their authority. Because if ever there were a moment for them to roar again, it is now.
Didn’t this firm win ESTAS in the very recent past, or something at least? Just goes to show how worthless those awards are. Shame on the people who back and support them.