Solicitors Regulation Authority Recensioni 408

The UK system is nothing more than a racket and the SRA are complicit in defrauding the UK public of billions. They let solicitors lie and raise fees all to line their own pockets. It's a disgrace.

Months to respond and then closes the case saying that there was no evidence - that was provided and more could have been requested. Shameful and an insult to all the Solicitors who do provide a good service

Abysmal.

Paul Phillips and the gang protecting their own!

You get no justice out of the SRA!

Beware ~ take your time to Google Makin Dixon Solicitors Limited and its breaches of advertisement consent laws in the Bradford Telegraph and Argus publication.

The firm and the partner Jennifer Mary Noel have broken many of the principles solicitors and firms supposedly regulated by the SRA sign up to.

SRA ~you have a regulatory job to undertake. Do your job!

Please read about this one eyed, one sided organisation that is here to protect the public but has zero intention of. A complete waste of taxpayers money like the ICO.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority, the watchdog meant to regulate solicitors in England and Wales, finds itself under intense scrutiny amid growing allegations of failing to protect the public and instead serving the interests of the very firms it oversees. Whistleblowers, MPs, and independent reviews have exposed what appears to be a regulator in collusion with powerful law firms, routinely failing to act against misconduct, even when such actions are desperately needed. The public’s confidence in the legal system hinges on effective oversight, and the perception that the SRA is prioritising the interests of solicitors over the general public is deeply troubling. This article explores the underlying issues that have put the SRA under the spotlight, focusing on its funding model, its handling of major cases, and the broader implications for justice in the UK.
The SRA’s very structure has often been called into question due to its funding model. Funded primarily by the contributions of solicitors and law firms, the regulator has long faced accusations of having a fundamental conflict of interest. How can an entity meant to protect the public interest effectively regulate those who provide its financial lifeblood? This close financial relationship creates an inherent tension between public duty and financial dependency. Critics argue that this relationship, potentially compounded by underhand financial incentives, has led to the SRA consistently turning a blind eye to misconduct, resulting in a system where unethical behaviour goes unchecked, clients are harmed, and solicitors who breach rules or even defy court orders face no real consequences.

There are growing suspicions that this funding model not only compromises the integrity of the SRA’s decisions but also places it in a position where regulatory capture becomes almost inevitable. By allowing the solicitors it oversees to fund its operations, the SRA is essentially beholden to the very individuals and firms it must scrutinise. Such a system can hardly be expected to deliver impartial regulatory outcomes, which has led many to question the real independence of the SRA and its ability to fulfil its mandate effectively.

I have been forced to give a star to this the so called SRA that their so called investigators needs to be investigated to safeguard the rule of law, human right and client care seriously what type of society allows this wide spread corruption from a so called SRA that they also keep flagging my reviews they must be so ashamed of themselves as there is no legal nor the lawful services anymore and the SRA head to toe must be ashamed of themselves for making our society and the world so bad.

I whole heartedly agree with most of the reviews for the SRA - they are a bit of a joke. I had a firm of solicitors (note, I did not use the term legal professionals, as they are anything but) referred to the SRA by a high court judge after I took them and a number of other individuals to court. The investigation by the SRA was laughable at best, their findings being at odds with the Court and the statements of the various parties - they just took the crooked solicitors words at face value and then brushed the whole thing under the carpet.
I used the SRA's complaints process, in that I was unhappy with their investiagtion. Same thing - despite providing irrefutable proof to the contrary, I was fobbed off. I very much got the sense that they were protecting their own - both their investigator and the crooked solicitor.
As other people on this site have commented, the SRA should look to change their name to something more appropriate - there is very little to do with authority or regulation in what I have experienced with them.
The worst part about this is that the crocked soicitor has been emboldened by being let off by the SRA and their conduct has become even worse.
The whole thing really is quite despicable.

Couldn't regulate a temperature on a fridge freezer!!!!!!

I would not give any stars if I could, however, for this biased, currupt orgsnisation, are a waste of time having this body, they work on an unlevel playing field and allow rougue solicitor's to fleece people off! Part of the Mafia corporation not fit for purpose or the people! Fraud to the highest level!

The real life Traitors! UK Justice Is Broken petition
A group of campaigners and former Police Officer whistleblowers are now calling for the Government to introduce a new and truly independent Taskforce to investigate and prosecute Freemason corruption wherever it exists
The Traitors is an extremely popular TV show in which a group of people known as ‘the Faithful’ try to uncover the identity of the ‘Traitors ‘ who are hidden anonymously in their midst and banish them from the group.
The Traitors ruthlessly ‘murder’ the faithful or manipulate the faithful to banish their own, with the ultimate objective of eventually claiming the pot of gold at the end of the game. They scheme and lie with passionate determination to deceive The Faithful to avoid being identified and actually relish in the ‘murder’ or ‘banishment’ of The Faithful with a Psychopathic delight.
What the many of the millions of people watching The Traitors don’t realize is that the programme could be based on real life.
In real life The Faithful are most of the population, who go about their daily lives in an honest way trying to keep their heads above water, earn a living , provide for their families and look after each other .

The real life Traitors are actually known as ‘Freemasons’ who do their best to keep their Masonic membership secret and manipulate and deceive to place themselves in positions of power.
This may be as a Police Officer, a Judge , a Legal Professional ,a Regulator, a position in Public Office or anywhere else that enables them to hold power over others and the wider population (The Faithful)
Just like the Traitors they then use that power corruptly and dishonestly to the detriment of the wider population (The Faithful )for their own purpose or gain.
Just like the Traitors it seems to be extremely difficult to identify them or know who they are or know that their actions have been directed against individuals improperly for their own purpose or satisfaction.
Just like the Traitors the Freemasons are able to ‘murder’ people,( mostly metaphorically speaking), who have the misfortune to cross them or one of their fellow Masons in some way , even if unintentionally.
Just like the Traitors the Freemasons will attack someone for their own purpose, pleasure or gain or for the assistance of other Freemasons, who they swear an oath of allegiance to protect , regardless of what they have done, even if that was a real life ‘murder’
The Traitors is a very popular TV programme , which is just a game.
The real life version of the Traitors for The Freemasons it is also probably just a game to them as they are immune to the consequences of their actions, but it is definitely not a game for those of us on the receiving end.
It means that Freemasons in positions of power are able to decimate people’s lives with impunity.
There is gross and widespread corruption and injustice in our society because of this.
There have been many high profile case where blatant Freemason corruption has caused misery for decades.
The real life murders of Stephen Lawrence and Daniel Morgan were perpetrated or covered up by corrupt Freemason Police and others. Despite many Inquiries over many years exposing this no action has ever been taken against those responsible.
The recent revelations that the Independent Office for Police Complaints, which is a misnomer because it is not Independent, directed its investigating officers to avoid exposing senior officers in the Child Grooming scandal confirms what many ex Police whistle blowers have been saying for years; that Freemasons in the Police are mainly exempt from scrutiny or being held to account, even when they have been exposed for serious wrongdoing.
It is not just in the Police Forces throughout the UK; the same applies in the Judicial system with corrupt Freemason Judges and Legal Professionals decimating people’s lives by improperly persecuting and prosecuting them, often to cover for fellow Freemasons who then avoid being held to account.
There are not only injustices and miscarriages of Justice in the Police and Legal system ; it applies in all walks of life
It is now time for the real life game of The Traitors to be brought to an end
A group of campaigners and ex Police whistleblowers are now calling for the Government to introduce a new and truly independent Taskforce to investigate and prosecute Freemason corruption wherever it exists
The failure of the UK Justice system to comply with Human Rights conventions should be fully investigated and exposed by a new Taskforce
The Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood are both former barristers and as such must be fully aware of the failures They should take urgent action

Corrupt to the core. Supposed to protect standards but are dishonest to the core.

My experience with SRA has been nothing short of appalling. A serious complaint about solicitor firm misconduct alleging court deception and profiteering was dismissed without any meaningful investigation.

The so-called Investigation Officer, refused to consider evidence, hiding behind the claim that such issues are for the courts to decide. Worse still, they used demeaning and dismissive language throughout the process, making it clear that the SRA has no interest in fairness or accountability. What kind of regulator operates without meaningful checks? Certainly not one acting in the public interest.

The SRA exists to shield solicitors, not protect the public. Biased, self-serving, ineffective, and utterly uninterested in justice, the SRA is a joke and disgrace in dire need of reform. Don’t waste your time filing a complaint - they simply don’t care.

1. What went wrong this time?
Nothing that hasn’t already been clearly expressed by the countless other reviews here.

2. How can this company improve?
When there’s no self-recognition of its failings, meaningful change is simply not possible.

3. Be honest – what’s the legal definition of honest?
I’d suggest the SRA dedicates a staff hour each morning to reviewing the testimonies of Post Office Limited’s legal representatives being questioned at the Post Office Inquiry.

I sent the SRA clear written evidence of one of their members threatening defamatory action if a blew the whistle about a company who act as police expert witnesses making mistakes with their evidence. I provided full details to the SRA, showing them the original police documents and other documents that proved the solicitors claims lacked merit, but they simply dismissed it saying that there was not clear evidence. I sent them about 6 pages of written evidence, but somehow they said that there wasn't evidence, they could not assess the legality of the claim and I was not being unfairly disadvantaged as I could seek legal advice myself. This isn't what their own guidance says - if a solicitor makes a threat without merit then they should take action - they don't want to know - waited 45 days for an intial response then a few days later they decide that the can't do anything. Utter waste of time - my experience is the same as many others in that the SRA only acts to protect their members and ignore their bad behaviour - I suppose this is likely to happen where they are handling the complaints of the very people who pay their bills. It stinks. Would be no stars if that was an option.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority is unfit for purpose. As a former legal profession person Kier Starmer needs to rid the country of this biased company which protects only its members and not the public!

The SRA have failed to reinvestigate the fraud perpetuated by my conveyancer. Questions need to be answered by the SRA and its failure to uphold the Rule of Law its primary mandate. It appears the SRA is being corrupted by accepting licensing fees from the very profession it is mandated by the Legal Services Act 2007 to regulate a bit like receiving a defecation sandwich from Gordon Ramsay who claims because he eats well his byproduct is gourmet. The Legal Profession in the UK needs serious outside regulation from an independent body set up with fees from clients not Solicitors or Lawyers who have serious knowledge and financial advantages when misconduct is perpetuated on clients which if you read trust pilot reviews is never ending bringing UK fairness and justice into serious question The UK is the wild west of law and order

Nothing was done by SRA about the theft of my house by Sols. Ingram Winter Green and Bude Nathan Iwanier and other corrupt parties including those representing Justice at RCJ. A party represented by above obtained Council property with FRAUDULENT paperwork all over London, I believe. His name is Nathan Teitelbaum. A barrister ( Marie Claire Bleasdale) lied in Court. Let them show their innocence. ( They cannot). Little people suffer in this Country. Note. Perjurer Bleasdale still working and smirking at Radcliffe Chambers. Just to add, BNI Sols. ( above) been taken to RCJ for their nefarious dealings with a gentlemen in his 90's. Had to settle with him out of court. ( £1m?). They are apparently closing down now. Ha ha ha, I down, 1 to go. IWG Sols.( above), are money launderers with N. Teitelbaum with regard to housing purchase matters. Enabled by RBS bank. Does it ever end? The paper trail of fraud? No. Do these scum care? Just continue crawling out from slimy stones and muck heaps where they live and pretend to be human when someone shows them a scam.

Sham of an organisation

Disgrace

Having dealt with you personally, it's abundantly clear that your organisation is fundamentally unfit for purpose. You claim to regulate the legal profession, uphold justice, and protect the public, yet operate like an incompetent sheriff in a chaotic town—drunk, incapable, and indifferent. My grievances, backed by credible evidence, were dismissed, and I'm far from alone in experiencing this disgraceful treatment.

This letter follows my previous critiques such as ‘The SRA and Trustpilot: A Troubling View of Legal Regulation’ and ‘Enforcement Action Against the Solicitors Regulation Authority’. Time and again, you demonstrate an inability or unwillingness to fulfil your role effectively. The Axiom Ince scandal is just another in a long list of regulatory failures that mock your mission to safeguard justice.

1. Axiom Ince Crisis
Your reactive approach led to Axiom Ince’s collapse despite warnings and evidence of breaches. The Legal Services Board concluded that your response was neither adequate, effective, nor efficient—clear dereliction of duty.

2. Conflicts of Interest
Your investigators often come from or aspire to roles within the firms they regulate. This revolving door fosters regulatory capture, compromising independence. Your funding structure also relies on those you regulate, creating significant conflicts of interest.

3. Lack of Transparency
Your lack of transparency on affiliations such as Freemasonry fuels mistrust and suggests conflicts of interest. Refusing clear disclosure policies perpetuates distrust.

4. Inconsistent Enforcement
You fail to enforce the Code of Conduct consistently, allowing breaches to go unpunished and eroding public confidence. Justifying these failures with hollow explanations only further damages your credibility.

5. Weak Anti-Money Laundering Oversight
Your track record on AML is inadequate. For instance, VKM Solicitors received a mere £4,932 fine for over a decade of failings—signalling that wrongdoers have nothing to fear from you.

6. Corruption Allegations
Unaddressed allegations of corruption and favouritism damage public trust. Your reluctance to investigate shows a culture of evasion rather than accountability.

7. Flawed Dispute Resolution
Entrusting regulatory reviews to CEDR without oversight suggests an inability or refusal to ensure independence, compounding your failures.

8. Public Perception and Trust
Negative feedback on platforms like this paints a picture of an organisation lacking efficacy and integrity. The volume of criticism speaks for itself—you have lost public trust.

A Call for Immediate Reform
The time for superficial reflection has passed. Immediate and substantive action is required to restore credibility:

- Revise Funding: Reform the funding model to eliminate conflicts of interest.
- End Conflicts of Interest: Prevent revolving door practices and ensure impartiality.
- Enhance Transparency: Public deserves to know who influences your decisions.
- Enforce Code Consistently: Apply the Code uniformly across all professionals.
- Strengthen AML Enforcement: Proper enforcement is crucial; current leniency is unacceptable.
- Investigate Corruption: Address allegations transparently.
- Reassess Partnerships: Ensure independence in all regulatory processes.
- Engage Public Concerns: Be accountable, address feedback, and improve.

Your repeated failures undermine the integrity of the legal profession and public confidence in justice. Reform or step aside in favour of a body capable of upholding justice. Enough is enough—the public deserves a regulator that truly regulates, not one that hides behind bureaucracy.

Yours sincerely,

John Barwell