While the two provisions may seem similar at first glance, this will inevitably cause confusion – especially among new professionals, who may not know how these issues have been dealt with before. This is a shame, because the introduction of a client to another source of advice and, therefore, the obtaining of benefits through the recommendation (or introduction) in relation to the payment or granting of another benefit to third parties in order to guarantee instructions through a referral, are clearly subject to different considerations. Since 2012, lawyers have been allowed to sue “restricted” counsel. However, with effect in the fall of this year, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is proposing amendments to strengthen the referral procedure to the IFA. The burden of disclosing interest will be even greater if the recommendation is made on a commercial or paid basis. In this regard, the requirements set out in paragraph 5 of the Code for Individuals appear to go further than in the previous 2011 Code of Conduct, requiring that a written agreement be reached, and the client properly informed, with respect to any distribution of fees (or likely payment) situation. Ideally, this agreement would be drawn up not only on the actual payment made, but also on a kind of duty for the other if not a lawyer, to respect the provisions of paragraphs 5.1 (d ( and (e) – namely not receiving or making payments for “customers subject to criminal proceedings” and ensuring that any customer who directs you through an importer “has not been acquired in a manner that would be contrary to THE regulatory rules of the SRA if the person acquiring the client was regulated by the SRA” (more important for transfers with greater interest in a moment). In particular, companies must take into account the provision that introduction on a paid basis is not permitted in the area of criminal work (previously at point O (6.4). The words “or other interest” must be carefully considered, as they are often overlooked. If, in the example above, the company had not received a direct removal fee from the real estate agents, but there were personal interests such as the spouse/partner of one of the contractors as a partner, director or perhaps even employee of this application, it should be reported to the client. Another example might be where your firm does not have, for example, a family law department and therefore recommends divorce work to another company that returns the favor by recommending your business to its clients for each transportation job. This could be sufficient to be considered an “other interest,” which should therefore be disclosed to the client again. The draft text is currently awaiting the approval of the Legal Service (LSB) on the revisions, but as things stand, the proposals are: before entering into an agreement, you must carefully check whether it is reasonable and reasonable for the importer to carry out work.
We know that sometimes outsourcing can involve advising the client on the appropriate means to finance the issue, declaring the client and signing up to a conditional fee contract or compensation agreement. Remember that you are obligated to ensure that your clients receive enough information to make informed decisions about their subject matter and how they are treated. We believe that outsourcing of this type or the obligation on a third party to provide the customer with the necessary information is contrary to standards and regulations. Since you also have a responsibility (in accordance with paragraph 5.1) to ensure that each referral authority that sends you transfers does not obtain these contacts “in a manner that would be contrary to the regulatory rules of the ASA if the person who acquires the client was regulated by the ASA” – for example for members of the public who do not call cold – it would also be useful to ensure that such a provision is included in the written agreement.