At TWPFest in June, a roundtable discussion examined the role of compliance in wills and probate and estate planning. Led by host Darren Leggett, managing director of Property Ladder Group, the delegates shared their views on standards, educating clients and the role of social media.
If compliance officers were footballers they would work as a team to defend their firms and be the midfield engine of the business, enabling the attackers around them to pick the perfect pass to deliver exceptional service to their clients.
Sadly they’re not footballers, but the analogy is helpful when considering how law firms put the right players in the right positions to create a team capable of tackling the increasing regulatory burden facing law firms.
This was the topic of conversation at a recent best practice roundtable at TWPFest, brought together by Darren Leggett, managing director of Property Ladder Group, with players from all sides of the estate planning and private client community.
The role of compliance
At kick off, Leggett launched the debate with the role compliance plays in law firms and the increasing regulatory burden.
Delegates recognised that, for many firms and particularly smaller ones, there is simply too much to think about. Alongside the supervisory function played by many compliance officers, there are also specific issues to consider around anti-money laundering (Money Laundering Reporting Officer), data protection (Data Protection Officer) finance and administration.
The time firms invest in compliance roles continues to differ. Lakshmi Turner, CEO of the Association of Lifetime Lawyers, a representative and standards body for private client professionals, said that while some took the decision to appoint non-fee earning individuals to the positions, others continue to try and run a case load while conducting the responsibilities.
A firm’s compliance and quality standards are indicative of the standards of service clients might expect, she added. Good quality compliance lends itself to good quality service.
Ian Bond, former chair of the Law Society’s Wills and Equity Committee, picked up the theme, suggesting clients like the reassurance of regulation and identify with regulators.
For Jade Gani, CEO at Circe Law, there is too much to do. “You have to accept your limitations”, she said. Her firm took the decision to outsource some of the compliance requirements, but she advised setting clear expectations from the outset.
An outdated system
Genealogy services expert Neil Fraser, of Fraser and Fraser, suggested the issue of compliance is borne out of a legal system which has developed over hundreds of years. In the absence of legislation, and a reliance on precedent and legal process, compliance is necessary, he said. But, he added, greater joined up thinking is needed to avoid some of the weaknesses in the system, pointing to the recent fraud perpetrated through the Bona Vacantia list.
Ultimately regulators should work better with their regulated community, Charlotte Toogood, legal director at Kings Court Trust, said; they need the right balance of carrot and stick.
Suppliers have a role to play, according to James Emery, partnerships director at The Estate Registry. Suppliers can not only help firms with their compliance, by supporting with templates and service overviews, but also support firms’ credibility and client signposting. Strong partnerships are borne out of mutual trust, said Emery.
Luke Harris of Collaborative Conveyancing explained how the firm’s work with HAIG Legal Group sees them use outbound voice AI to follow up with compliance calls to verify clients’ understanding. The calls are scripted and where there is any ambiguity the client is signposted to a real person; but it’s an example of how suppliers are working with firms to support on compliance, he said.
The problem with AI
The discussion moved on to the use of AI in legal work, with Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) judgments full of warnings that over-reliance leads to hallucinated cases and precedents.
There’s nothing in the rules that says we can’t use AI, Bond argued, but there is guidance from the Information Commissioners Office and the regulators about advising clients when AI is being used. The challenge for practitioners is keeping a record of AI decision, Charlotte Ponder, director of compliance consultancy WillComply, said.
A recent Legal Services Board report warned much of the regulation and compliance standards in law were not designed with AI in mind and do not address AI-particular risks. The report highlights “hallucination, emergent bias arising from training data, opacity in reasoning processes, and the difficulty of attributing responsibility for automated outputs” as issues that AI regulation still needs to address.
Indeed lawyers still need to understand the power and fallibility of AI, warned Toogood, reminding delegates that in open environments the responses provided by AI tools are drawn from all over the world. There is a skill in being clear about your instructions, said HAIG Legal Group director Helen Claydon.
In light of the warnings, Andy Price, managing director of Just Wills and Legal Services, questioned how much we can trust AI.
A little knowledge…
The problem according to Anthony Belcher, managing director of self-regulatory and standards body the Society of Will Writers, is that clients do trust AI – in many instances more than they trust lawyers.
Increasingly, the profession is seeing clients come to solicitors armed with what they think they want, informed by AI, Bond said.
The compliance ramifications of this could be serious, he added. How do we as professionals reconcile client instructions, which we may advise against, with our ethical duty to “do no harm”? Should we ask clients to sign to say they are carrying out work against the advice of their lawyer, Bond asked?
The roundtable finished where it began; the role of compliance in protecting clients and shaping legal services. In a sector still split between the regulated and unregulated communities, the onus is on professionals to do the right – compliant – thing.
Utilising social media
Some members of the roundtable were vocal on the mis-selling of asset protection trusts; but how much would ‘compliance’ have stopped that from happening?
Law firms have a responsibility to educate their clients through the mediums they engage with; it’s why Fraser and Fraser has employed in-house videographers to profile their work through platforms like TikTok, Neil Fraser said.
But poor practice still exists. There are lots of moving parts; legal services is complex.
Leggett concluded by saying it’s up to firms to be the referee, do the right thing and lead by example to root out the bad eggs.
