The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has confirmed it has formally intervened in the closure of PM Law and its subsidiary firms in a statement published yesterday on its website.
After calls for clarity from the regulator in the days following the closure of the Sheffield-based firm, a statement confirms the SRA launched an investigation on Monday which has resulted in the decision to intervene.
SRA chief executive Sarah Rapson said:
“We have acted quickly and decisively to protect the interests of clients.
“The sudden announcement from PM Law on Monday that they had closed is troubling news and I fully sympathise with the clients of the firm. Many of those involved are buying and selling a house or dealing with personal injury claims. These matters can be stressful enough without the added complication of your solicitor’s firm closing during the process.”
The SRA will now take control of all documents, papers and monies, including client money, held by the firm.
Details of the closure of PM Law and its 20-plus trading identities surfaced on Monday 2nd February after notices appeared on the doors of the firm stating the firm was no longer able to trade “due to regulatory matters”. The statement from the SRA indicates it was aware on Monday, but did not formally acknowledge the closure until a statement on Wednesday saying the firm had “closed suddenly and not in a manner we would expect.” It added it was in touch with the firm and appropriate action would be taken to protect client interests.
Full details of why the firm closed so suddenly are not yet clear. Rapson said the regulator was not in a position to disclose information about ongoing investigations, saying it was “working quickly to gather all the relevant information and provide answers to those that have raised important questions about their on-going matters with the firm.”
She concluded:
“Finally, we also recognise that this is a difficult time for the employees of the firm who have sadly lost their jobs this week.”
The conveyancing community has rallied round affected employees with extensive offers of support shared through social media. Today’s Conveyancer has launched a temporary vacancies page to support those affected and identify potential new roles. A similar page has been launched by the Society of Licensed Conveyancers. A Facebook group for those affected has gathered over 750 members (at the time of writing) with members sharing stories of their failed home moves and attempts to retrieve funds and/or move their transaction forward.
Gordons LLP has been appointed intervention agent; details of what steps affected clients might take have also been published on the SRA website.
The names of firms affected are:
PM Law Limited
Proddow Mackay Limited
3M Law Limited
Linkfield Claims Service Limited
Butterworths Solicitors LLP
Autonet Law LLP
Proddow Mackay (Conveyancing) Limited
WB Pennine Solicitors LLP
Proddow Mackay Solicitors LLP
PM Law (Specialist Claims) Limited
PM Property Lawyers Limited
Additional trading names
Abraxas Law
All Your Accidents
Angela Viney Conveyancing Services
Complete Property Deal
Barrett and Co Solicitors
BB Conveyancing
Bridgeview law
DAzur Law
Deborah J Hoban Law
GN Law
Gaddes Noble Law
Gaddes Noble Property Lawyers
Gaines & Wilkinson Ltd
HGA Conveyancing
John M Lewis & Co Ltd
JK Advokatas
KB Property Law
Lexelle Assist
Litkraft Solicitors
Litkraft Conveyancing
Lloyd Green Solicitors
PLA Law Limited
PM Legal Services
PM Property Lawyers
Proddowmackay.law
Proddow Mackay (Conveyancing) Limited
Valerie Holmes Law
Valerie Holmes Property Lawyer
Wilsons Solicitors
Today’s Conveyancer has launched a temporary recruitment page to list conveyancing roles for those affected by the closure of PM Law and its subsidiaries. We invite organisations to continue sharing their roles with us in order to keep the list as active as possible. For anyone wishing to share the vacancy please send details to press@todaysconveyancer.co.uk.
2 responses
Very weak from the SRA at the start of the week but decisive action yesterday and good information from Gordon’s.
I am hugely concerned and what impact this is going to have on the SRA compensation funds, again and whether or not that is going to be dwindled.
I hope the client account is intact but obviously there are going to be some losses with lenders not having been paid, interest to recoup, fees paid, notices to complete etc. I for one certainly hope that no one enforces a breach of contract against innocent parties.
Of course if the client account is not intact, there are going to be huge questions to ask and answer as to how we are in this situation again. The accounts of the firm on first reading do not look too clever and no doubt questions are going to be asked as to if the SRA now needs to look at things like that an anticipate firms failing rather than taking reactive steps.
I also fear that this will end up being another argument to use to allocate client accounts to third parties if it is shown that the PM Law client account is not intact which will have wide ranging implications across the industry.
Pleased to see decisive action now being taken but concerned about what will come out in the wash.
There is more to this than meets the eye, and the Compensation Fund is likely to take a big hit.
The SRA’s response is also in question – I have it on good authority that it was told by the firm of its impending closure prior to its press statement later on Monday (2 Feb), so why did it give the impression it knew nothing about it and was expecting the firm to mount an orderly closure when it couldn’t?
Knowing what it had been told, why did it leave it until Wednesday to intervene when it knew there were issues around client funds?
The SRA has some serious questions to answer:
1. When was it told about the impending collapse (30 Jan, 2 Feb, or sooner)?
2. What was it told?
3. Why didn’t it intervene as soon as it had been told what had been going on?
4. Why did it put out a press release on Monday giving the impression it was taken by surprise?
5. Why did it’s Wednesday statement contradict it’s Monday statement?