The news items and other information on this site do not purport to be comprehensive or to give legal or professional advice. cpm21 does not provide legal advice. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, neither cpm21, its owners, employees, associates, collaborators, agents or trainers can be held liable for any errors or omissions or inaccuracies contained within each communication, on its website, or in articles, tweets, posts or blogs on social networking sites. Readers should not act upon (or refrain from acting upon) information provided without first taking further specialist or professional advice. cpm21.

2019 - The State of the Solicitors Profession - A Year in Review

In our pre-Christmas article last year and the two years before, we talked about the EU, and of course – the “B” word. This still hasn’t been resolved even now, and we have to await the result of the 12th December 2019 General Election to get an inkling of how that will go. We did ask the following question last year;

“It may be this time next year the question will be “Theresa who…?”

Seems like we were accurate on that one.

Brexit and politics aside, it’s time for the question we usually pose at this time of year for solicitors firms, what will 2019 be remembered for?

Well, if we start with the regulator, the SRA launched its’ “Standards and Regulations” which at the time of this article is now in effect. This consisted of a new set of accounts rules, 7 new principles, and 2 codes of conduct; one for firms, and the other for individuals who, for the first time, could offer reserved legal services as “freelancers.”

This all being done in the name of “access to justice” and “driving costs down,” and the auspices of the Legal Services Act 2007.

The press releases for these were all about how the changes made things “simpler” and “less prescriptive” and allow firms to “focus on what is important.”

Well, the codes of conduct are simpler…because there is no guidance whatsoever for them. The same applies to the Accounts Rules, which officially have no guidance, however some “notes” have been released to go along with them…

We have provided training on the new codes of conduct for solicitors, and have posed the question about whether solicitors would prefer to have detailed prescriptive rules with guidance, versus more open rules with little guidance that can be interpreted differently?

The result; 99.9% of those asked preferred the detailed prescriptive rules with guidance, which is a pity, because that isn’t what they will now be having to use.

Also still trundling along in the background is the 2018 Service and Transparency Rules, which required firms to publish their prices for certain areas of law. This became mandatory from the 6th December 2018, however there are still plenty of firms out there who have yet to do this on their websites, and it must only be a matter of time before the SRA take some sort of action against them. Another aspect of these rules was the new digital badge, which an authorised and regulated firm must display on its website when it became mandatory to do so on the 25th November 2019. Again, at the time of publishing this article there are still firms which have not done this, and there is a push back against the SRA with one firm reporting them to the Information Commissioner’s Office for breaching the requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation. At this point there has been no published response from the ICO on this matter, so stay tuned to the Law Society Gazette to see what happens…

So what else happened in 2019?

Where should we start?

CQS – in last year’s review article, we predicted a “strong” response from the Law Society to criticism about the scheme that it wasn’t audited effectively and that the scheme wasn’t robust enough.

And that is precisely what happened. The Law Society re-launched CQS with a new set of Core Practice Management Standards (CPMS), and for the first time in the scheme’s history, the CPMS took a departure from the Lexcel standard in some cases, with the requirement for specific conveyancing policies and procedures, such as an SDLT policy and procedure, and Leasehold policies and procedures.

The new CPMS were quickly followed by a new Law Society Code for Completion by Post, and a new set of Conveyancing Protocols. All of these documents were developed in line with the risk profile for residential conveyancing and designed to improve that for firms while also improving the client conveyancing experience.

And of course, we mustn’t forget the audits. The Law Society also announced that firms would be subject to audit, with two levels, a desk based audit where the auditor would not visit the firm, and an on-site audit where they would.

For a lot of CQS firms, this set off a frenzy of activity in upgrading or updating their CQS documentation and training conveyancing teams in what was expected of them.

While many firms have prepared, there are still some there labouring under the belief that there haven’t been any changes to CQS from previous years. We’re sure the CQS auditors will be very understanding about that…!!!!

Anti-Money Laundering Regulation – The SRA have undertaken a “thematic review” of Anti-Money Laundering by visiting many lucky legal firms this year to evaluate their Anti-Money Laundering policies, systems and procedures. They have subsequently published their findings on their website, and also in their 2019 Risk Outlook. Overall, for many firms their findings were quite damning in that many were still not completing the overall AML risk assessment, or carrying out the required independent audit function. In the article published on their website in October 2019, the former was 20% of the respondent firms. Rather strangely, the article also comments that the majority of firms (64%) were using templates, which were “generally of lower quality.” The article then indirectly implies that templates are not a good idea…and then goes on to say that the SRA has developed a suggested template…

Firms should expect more on-site visits from the SRA, with ever more stringent requirements, particularly if the 5th EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive comes into effect in early January 2020 (and the only thing that might stop it is…yes you guessed…Brexit…)

Diversity Data Submission - 2019 also saw the biennial requirement for firms to submit their diversity data. The SRA usually use this data to inform their Risk Outlook, however statistical analysis to form meaningful conclusions for any purpose requires a reasonable sample size to gain statistical confidence. While the raw data input by each firm isn’t accessible for our analysis, it would be difficult to imagine every single person in every single legal firm answers every question, especially when the questionnaires for completion by the individual are optional, and allow the individual to not have to answer any or all of them by selecting the “prefer not to say” option. For example, the 2019 risk outlook states that “Disability status is under reported in the profession – only 3% of solicitors and partners said they had a disability in 2017, compared to 10% of everyone in employment.” There are two assumptions that may be made with this statement.

The first is that the “10% of everyone in employment” figure is accurate. The second is that there should be another 7% of disability reported in the SRA figures. Therefore there are two possible conclusions; either this protected characteristic is under-reported and that there is an equivalent number of individuals in legal firms who make up the same proportion (again assuming that the general population figure of 10% is accurate) who simply don’t answer the question in the questionnaire, or the profession is not reflective of the general working population for this protected characteristic.

There may well be individuals in legal firms who find this question intrusive and sensitive and therefore choose not to answer it, in either event it is difficult to make a meaningful conclusion that then helps firms decide on strategies to increase the numbers for this criteria, or in fact any of the other criteria that the questionnaires aim to identify and quantify.

GDPR – those people reading this are probably wondering “GDPR in 2019 – I don’t remember that featuring much in the year.” Well that’s because it didn’t feature highly, we just wanted to remind everyone about it after 2018 turned into the year of GDPR and the amount of work that every firm did to implement new policies on handling personal data, privacy notices for clients displayed on their websites (or in printed form for those that didn’t have any), employee privacy notices, new client care and/or terms of business clauses, appointment of a Data Protection Supervisor/Manager/Liaison (everything except a Data Protection Officer…)

The cpm21 year…

For us, some things remained the same in terms of our services, while we responded to other requirements related to what our clients needed. We still supported hundreds of firms for their Annual Maintenance, Reaccreditation or Initial Lexcel V6.1 audits, but for us, by far the biggest task was supporting clients with their CQS needs. We developed compliant policies, plans, procedures, letters and various templates and checklists to meet the requirements of the new Core Practice Management Standards. Because of the divergence of CQS from Lexcel, we did this for firms with and without Lexcel.

CPD has been gone for a while now, but we still trained over a thousand solicitors and support staff on a variety of topics. One of the main areas of training this year was – yes, you guessed it – CQS while another growing one was Anti-Money Laundering…

Our Professional Skills Course saw another two cohorts of trainee solicitors provided with the mandatory training they need to complete before becoming authorised to practice…

We continued to conduct file reviews, with well over a thousand completed as part of our outsourced file review service. For some firms this was a continuation of the service which has had beneficial effects by reducing corrective actions on files for their fee earners, which in turn reduces complaints and indemnity notifications, a massive benefit in today’s stringent professional indemnity market.

We also helped firms with outsourced complaints handling, where we assisted in liaising with the Legal Ombudsman or the SRA where necessary to investigate and resolve complaints in a timely manner for firms.

We helped firms respond to the risks outlined by the SRA in their 2019 Risk Outlook, normally by examining their systems, policies and procedures, identifying gaps and helping them develop responses in their Compliance Plans.

And of course, we supported firms with their general SRA requirements, including when the SRA decided it wanted to audit them…

2020 – The shape of things to come…

We’re already preparing for some key milestones for 2020

Conveyancing Quality Scheme (CQS) – While most firms were braced for the audits that had been promised by the Law Society, in reality not many were undertaken, however auditors were trained, and we expect 2020 to be a year where on-site audits become frequent. Firms will need to be prepared for this, as the consequences of losing lender panel membership may be costly to them…

SRA Anti – Money Laundering Audits – from their October article on the subject, the SRA said “We will increase checks on law firms after we found that too many were not complying with anti-money laundering regulations”

At the time of writing this article, the SRA were actively visiting firms for this, and firms can expect to see more of the same in 2020, with even more stringent expectations with the introduction of the 5th EU AML Directive. We will be assisting firms in the New Year with their “Independent Audit Functions” to ensure they meet the current and new AML regulations…

SRA Client Money Audits – While the SRA have said their new Standards and Regulations will allow solicitors a greater amount of freedom, and that they intend to allow firms to “use their professional judgement” the fact is that a large proportion of SDT hearings are in connection with irregular or unlawful use of client account by firms. So while the new 2019 SRA Accounts Rules may have a little more flexibility than previous accounts rules, there is still the danger of poor management of client money, or the temptation it can pose in some cases as outlined in the 2019 Risk Outlook. It would be a reasonably safe conclusion that the SRA will take a more stringent stance with any firm or individual they consider the need to investigate, and there is a possibility that they will complete forensic audits to be sure that firms have adopted the new approach in their 2019 rules.

New Legal Aid Agency Criminal Contract Tenders – as publicly funded Legal Aid Criminal defence firms will know, their contracts have been extended until the end of March 2021. This most likely means that firms can expect a tender to open in the autumn of 2020, with a submission date of the end of the year. Many firms will remember the hoops and hurdles that the ambition of the tender for the current contract made them navigate last time around, with the prospect of bidding for large contracts in criminal justice zones, and the requirement to become much bigger than they were, or partner up with “Delivery Partners.” This eventually failed last time around, but it may well be something that the Legal Aid Agency try again…

12 Years of support which will always be there for you…

We’re proud of our record in supporting solicitors with their regulatory and management support needs, and 2019 was our 12th year of doing so. If you’re one of our clients, or a client of the future, you can continue to rest easy in the knowledge that we will continue to provide the support you need to navigate the continuous complexities of running a legal firm and the changes and challenges to come.

You can see that we’re already considering what firms will need next, and in these times of constant change we’ll leave you with the one message;

“We’re still there for you.”

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year from the cpm21 team.

We’ll see you in 2020.

To read this article in Welsh, simply read on….

2019 - Cyflwr Proffesiwn Cyfreithwyr Blywddyn Adolygiad

Yn ein herthygl cyn y Nadolig y llynedd a’r ddwy flynedd o’r blaen, buom yn siarad am yr UE, ac wrth gwrs - y gair “B”. Nid yw hyn wedi ei ddatrys hyd yn oed nawr, ac mae'n rhaid i ni aros canlyniad Etholiad Cyffredinol 12fed Rhagfyr 2019 i gael inc o sut y bydd hynny'n mynd. Gwnaethom ofyn y cwestiwn canlynol y llynedd;

“Efallai adeg hon y flwyddyn nesaf fydd y cwestiwn fydd “Theresa pwy…? ”

Mae'n ymddangos ein bod ni'n gywir ar yr un hwnnw.

Brexit a gwleidyddiaeth o’r neilltu, mae’n bryd i’r cwestiwn rydyn ni fel arfer yn ei ofyn yr adeg hon o’r flwyddyn i gwmnïau cyfreithwyr, beth fydd cofio 2019 amdano?

Wel, os dechreuwn gyda’r rheoleiddiwr, lansiodd yr SRA ei ““ Safonau a Rheoliadau ”sydd bellach ar adeg yr erthygl hon i bob pwrpas. Roedd hyn yn cynnwys set newydd o reolau cyfrifon, 7 egwyddor newydd, a 2 god ymddygiad; un ar gyfer cwmnïau, a'r llall ar gyfer unigolion a allai, am y tro cyntaf, gynnig gwasanaethau cyfreithiol neilltuedig fel “gweithwyr llawrydd.”

Mae hyn i gyd yn cael ei wneud yn enw “mynediad at gyfiawnder” a “gyrru costau i lawr,” a dan adain Deddf Gwasanaethau Cyfreithiol 2007.

Roedd y datganiadau i'r wasg ar gyfer y rhain i gyd yn ymwneud â sut roedd y newidiadau yn gwneud pethau'n “symlach” ac yn “llai rhagnodol” ac yn caniatáu i gwmnïau “ganolbwyntio ar yr hyn sy'n bwysig.”

Wel, mae'r codau ymddygiad yn symlach ... oherwydd nid oes arweiniad o gwbl ar eu cyfer. Mae'r un peth yn berthnasol i'r rheolau cyfrifon, nad oes ganddynt unrhyw ganllaw yn swyddogol, ond mae rhai “nodiadau” wedi'u rhyddhau i fynd gyda nhw…

Rydym wedi darparu hyfforddiant ar y codau ymddygiad newydd ar gyfer cyfreithwyr, ac wedi gofyn y cwestiwn a fyddai'n well gan gyfreithwyr gael rheolau rhagnodol manwl gyda chanllawiau, yn erbyn rheolau mwy agored heb lawer o ganllawiau y gellir eu dehongli'n wahanol?

Y canlyniad; Roedd yn well gan 99.9% o'r rhai a ofynnwyd y rheolau rhagnodol manwl gydag arweiniad.

Sy'n drueni, oherwydd nid dyna'r hyn y byddan nhw'n gorfod ei ddefnyddio nawr.

Hefyd yn dal i grwydro yn y cefndir mae Rheolau Gwasanaeth a Thryloywder 2018, a oedd yn ei gwneud yn ofynnol i gwmnïau cyhoeddi eu prisiau ar gyfer rhai meysydd cyfreithiol. Daeth hyn yn orfodol o'r 6ed Rhagfyr 2018, fodd bynnag, mae yna ddigon o gwmnïau allan yna sydd eto i wneud hyn ar eu gwefannau, a rhaid mai dim ond mater o amser yw hi cyn i'r SRA gymryd rhyw fath o gamau yn eu herbyn. Agwedd arall ar y rheolau hyn oedd y bathodyn digidol newydd, y mae'n rhaid i gwmni awdurdodedig a rheoledig ei arddangos ar ei wefan pan ddaeth yn orfodol gwneud hynny ar 25 Tachwedd 2019. Unwaith eto, ar adeg cyhoeddi'r erthygl hon, roedd cwmnïau o hyd sydd â heb wneud hyn, ac mae gwthio yn ôl yn erbyn yr SRA gydag un cwmni yn eu riportio i Swyddfa'r Comisiynydd Gwybodaeth am dorri gofynion y Rheoliad Diogelu Data Cyffredinol. Ar y pwynt hwn ni chyhoeddwyd ymateb gan yr ICO ar y mater hwn, felly cadwch draw i Law Society Gazette i weld beth sy'n digwydd…

Felly beth arall ddigwyddodd yn 2019?

Ble dylen ni ddechrau?

CQS - yn erthygl adolygiad y llynedd, gwnaethom ragweld ymateb “cryf” gan Gymdeithas y Gyfraith i feirniadaeth am y cynllun na chafodd ei archwilio’n effeithiol ac nad oedd y cynllun yn ddigon cadarn.

A dyna'n union beth ddigwyddodd. Ail-lansiodd Cymdeithas y Gyfraith CQS gyda set newydd o Safonau Rheoli Ymarfer Craidd (CPMS), ac am y tro cyntaf yn hanes y cynllun, cymerodd y CPMS wyro oddi wrth safon Lexcel mewn rhai achosion, gyda'r gofyniad am bolisïau trawsgludo penodol. a gweithdrefnau, megis polisi a gweithdrefn SDLT, a pholisïau a gweithdrefnau Prydles.

Dilynwyd y CPMS newydd yn gyflym gan God newydd ar gyfer Cwblhau Cymdeithas y Gyfraith trwy'r Post, a set newydd o Brotocolau Trawsgludo.

Datblygwyd yr holl ddogfennau hyn yn unol â'r proffil risg ar gyfer trawsgludo preswyl a'u cynllunio i wella hynny ar gyfer cwmnïau tra hefyd yn gwella profiad trawsgludo cleientiaid.

Ac wrth gwrs, rhaid i ni beidio ag anghofio'r archwiliadau. Cyhoeddodd Cymdeithas y Gyfraith hefyd y byddai cwmnïau’n destun archwiliad, gyda dwy lefel, archwiliad desg lle na fyddai’r archwilydd yn ymweld â’r cwmni, ac archwiliad ar y safle lle byddent.

I lawer o gwmnïau CQS, cychwynnodd hyn frenzy o weithgaredd wrth uwchraddio neu ddiweddaru eu dogfennau CQS a hyfforddi timau trawsgludo yn yr hyn a ddisgwylid ganddynt.

Er bod llawer o gwmnïau wedi paratoi, mae yna rai yno o hyd yn llafurio o dan y gred na fu unrhyw newidiadau i CQS o flynyddoedd blaenorol. Rydyn ni'n si┼Ár y bydd yr archwilwyr CQS yn deall hynny ...

Rheoliad Gwrth-Gwyngalchu Arian - Mae'r SRA wedi cynnal “adolygiad thematig” o Wrth-Gwyngalchu Arian trwy ymweld â llawer o gwmniau cyfreithiol lwcus eleni i werthuso eu polisiau, eu systemau a'u gweithdrefnau Gwrth-Gwyngalchu Arian. Wedi hynny maent wedi cyhoeddi eu canfyddiadau ar eu gwefan, a hefyd yn eu Rhagolwg Risg 2019. Yn gyffredinol, i lawer o gwmnïau roedd eu canfyddiadau yn eithaf damniol yn yr ystyr nad oedd llawer yn dal i gwblhau'r asesiad risg AML cyffredinol, neu'n cyflawni'r swyddogaeth archwilio annibynnol ofynnol. Yn yr erthygl a gyhoeddwyd ar eu gwefan ym mis Hydref 2019, y cyntaf oedd 20% o'r cwmnïau a ymatebodd. Yn rhyfedd ddigon, mae'r erthygl hefyd yn nodi bod mwyafrif y cwmnïau (64%) yn defnyddio templedi, a oedd “o ansawdd is yn gyffredinol.” Mae'r erthygl wedyn yn awgrymu yn anuniongyrchol nad yw templedi yn syniad da ... ac yna'n mynd ymlaen i ddweud bod y Mae SRA wedi datblygu templed a awgrymir ...

Dylai cwmnïau ddisgwyl mwy o ymweliadau ar y safle gan yr SRA, gyda gofynion llymach fyth, yn enwedig os daw 5ed Cyfarwyddeb Gwrth-Gwyngalchu Arian yr UE i rym ddechrau mis Ionawr 2020 (a’r unig beth a allai ei atal yw… ie gwnaethoch chi ddyfalu… Brexit…)

Cyflwyno Data Amrywiaeth - Yn 2019 hefyd gwelwyd y gofyniad dwyflynyddol i gwmnïau gyflwyno eu data amrywiaeth. Mae'r SRA fel arfer yn defnyddio'r data hwn i lywio eu Rhagolwg Risg, ond mae dadansoddiad ystadegol i ffurfio casgliadau ystyrlon at unrhyw bwrpas yn gofyn am faint sampl rhesymol i fagu hyder ystadegol. Er nad yw'r mewnbwn data crai gan bob cwmni yn hygyrch ar gyfer ein dadansoddiad, byddai'n anodd dychmygu bod pob unigolyn ym mhob cwmni cyfreithiol yn ateb pob cwestiwn, yn enwedig pan fo'r holiaduron i'w llenwi gan yr unigolyn yn ddewisol, ac yn caniatáu i'r unigolyn i beidio â gorfod ateb unrhyw un neu bob un ohonynt trwy ddewis yr opsiwn “mae'n well gen i beidio â dweud”.

 Er enghraifft, mae rhagolwg risg 2019 yn nodi “Ni adroddir yn ddigonol am statws anabledd yn y proffesiwn - dim ond 3% o gyfreithwyr a phartneriaid a ddywedodd fod ganddynt anabledd yn 2017, o’i gymharu â 10% o bawb mewn cyflogaeth.” Mae dau dybiaeth a allai fod gael ei wneud gyda'r datganiad hwn. Y cyntaf yw bod y ffigur “10% o bawb mewn cyflogaeth” yn gywir. Yr ail yw y dylid nodi 7% arall o anabledd yn ffigurau'r SRA. Felly mae dau gasgliad posib; naill ai mae'r nodwedd warchodedig hon wedi'i than-adrodd a bod nifer gyfatebol o unigolion mewn cwmnïau cyfreithiol sy'n ffurfio'r un gyfran (gan dybio eto bod ffigur cyffredinol y boblogaeth o 10% yn gywir) nad ydyn nhw'n ateb y cwestiwn yn y holiadur, neu nid yw'r proffesiwn yn adlewyrchu'r boblogaeth waith gyffredinol ar gyfer y nodwedd warchodedig hon.

Mae'n ddigon posibl y bydd unigolion mewn cwmnïau cyfreithiol sy'n teimlo bod y cwestiwn hwn yn ymledol ac yn sensitif ac felly'n dewis peidio â'i ateb, beth bynnag mae'n anodd dod i gasgliad ystyrlon sydd wedyn yn helpu cwmnïau i benderfynu ar strategaethau i gynyddu'r niferoedd ar gyfer y meini prawf hyn, neu mewn gwirionedd unrhyw un o'r meini prawf eraill y mae'r holiaduron yn ceisio eu nodi a'u meintioli.

GDPR - mae'n debyg bod y bobl hynny sy'n darllen hwn yn pendroni “GDPR yn 2019 - dwi ddim yn cofio bod hynny'n cynnwys llawer yn y flwyddyn.” Wel, am nad oedd yn nodwedd uchel, roedden ni eisiau atgoffa pawb amdano ar ôl i 2018 droi yn blwyddyn o GDPR a faint o waith a wnaeth pob cwmni i weithredu polisïau newydd ar drin data personol, hysbysiadau preifatrwydd ar gyfer cleientiaid sy'n cael eu harddangos ar eu gwefannau (neu ar ffurf brintiedig ar gyfer y rhai nad oedd ganddynt unrhyw beth), hysbysiadau preifatrwydd gweithwyr, cleient newydd gofal a / neu delerau cymalau busnes, penodi Goruchwyliwr / Rheolwr / Cyswllt Diogelu Data (popeth ac eithrio Swyddog Diogelu Data ...)

Y flwyddyn cpm21…

I ni, arhosodd rhai pethau yr un peth o ran ein gwasanaethau, tra gwnaethom ymateb i ofynion eraill yn ymwneud â'r hyn yr oedd ei angen ar ein cleientiaid. Roeddem yn dal i gefnogi cannoedd o gwmnïau ar gyfer eu harchwiliadau Cynnal a Chadw Blynyddol, Ail-achredu neu Lexcel V6.1 Cychwynnol, ond i ni, y dasg fwyaf o bell ffordd oedd cefnogi cleientiaid â'u hanghenion CQS. Gwnaethom ddatblygu polisïau, cynlluniau, gweithdrefnau, llythyrau ac amrywiol dempledi a rhestrau gwirio i gydymffurfio â gofynion y Safonau Rheoli Ymarfer Craidd newydd. Oherwydd dargyfeiriad CQS o Lexcel, gwnaethom hyn ar gyfer cwmnïau gyda Lexcel a hebddo.

Mae DPP wedi mynd ers tro bellach, ond rydym yn dal i hyfforddi dros fil o gyfreithwyr a staff cymorth ar amrywiaeth o bynciau. Un o'r prif feysydd hyfforddi eleni oedd - ie, fe wnaethoch chi ei ddyfalu - CQS tra bod un arall a oedd yn tyfu yn Gwrth-Gwyngalchu Arian…

Gwelodd ein Cwrs Sgiliau Proffesiynol ddwy garfan arall o gyfreithwyr dan hyfforddiant yn cael yr hyfforddiant gorfodol y mae angen iddynt ei gwblhau cyn cael eu hawdurdodi i ymarfer…

Fe wnaethom barhau i gynnal adolygiadau ffeiliau, ymhell dros fil wedi'u cwblhau fel rhan o'n gwasanaeth adolygu ffeiliau ar gontract allanol. I rai cwmnïau, roedd hwn yn barhad o'r gwasanaeth sydd wedi cael effeithiau buddiol trwy leihau camau unioni ar ffeiliau ar gyfer eu henillion ffioedd, sydd yn ei dro yn lleihau cwynion a hysbysiadau indemniad, budd enfawr ym marchnad indemniad proffesiynol llym heddiw.

Fe wnaethom hefyd helpu cwmnïau gyda thrin cwynion ar gontract allanol, lle gwnaethom gynorthwyo i gysylltu â'r Ombwdsmon Cyfreithiol neu'r SRA lle bo angen i ymchwilio a datrys cwynion mewn modd amserol i gwmnïau.

Gwnaethom helpu cwmnïau i ymateb i'r risgiau a amlinellwyd gan yr SRA yn eu Rhagolwg Risg 2019, fel arfer trwy archwilio eu systemau, eu polisïau a'u gweithdrefnau, nodi bylchau a'u helpu i ddatblygu ymatebion yn eu Cynlluniau Cydymffurfiaeth.

Ac wrth gwrs, gwnaethom gefnogi cwmnïau â'u gofynion SRA cyffredinol, gan gynnwys pan benderfynodd yr SRA ei fod am eu harchwilio…

2020 - Siâp y pethau sydd i ddod ...

Rydym eisoes yn paratoi ar gyfer rhai cerrig milltir allweddol ar gyfer 2020…

Cynllun Ansawdd Trawsgludo (CQS) - Er bod y rhan fwyaf o gwmnïau wedi cael eu harchwilio am yr archwiliadau a addawyd gan Gymdeithas y Gyfraith, mewn gwirionedd ni chynhaliwyd llawer, ond hyfforddwyd archwilwyr, a disgwyliwn i 2020 fod yn flwyddyn lle daw archwiliadau ar y safle. yn aml. Bydd angen i gwmnïau fod yn barod ar gyfer hyn, oherwydd gallai canlyniadau colli aelodaeth panel benthycwyr fod yn gostus iddyn nhw…

Archwiliadau Gwrth-Gwyngalchu Arian SRA - o’u herthygl ym mis Hydref ar y pwnc, dywedodd yr SRA “Byddwn yn cynyddu gwiriadau ar gwmnïau cyfreithiol ar ôl i ni ddarganfod nad oedd gormod yn cydymffurfio â rheoliadau gwrth-wyngalchu arian”

Ar adeg ysgrifennu'r erthygl hon, roedd yr SRA wrthi'n ymweld â chwmnïau ar gyfer hyn, a gall cwmnïau ddisgwyl gweld mwy o'r un peth yn 2020, gyda disgwyliadau hyd yn oed yn fwy llym wrth gyflwyno 5ed Cyfarwyddeb AML yr UE. Byddwn yn cynorthwyo cwmnïau yn y Flwyddyn Newydd gyda'u “Swyddogaethau Archwilio Annibynnol” i sicrhau eu bod yn cwrdd â'r rheoliadau AML cyfredol a newydd…

Archwiliadau Arian Cleient SRA - Er bod yr SRA wedi dweud y bydd eu Safonau a'u Rheoliadau newydd yn caniatáu mwy o ryddid i gyfreithwyr, a'u bod yn bwriadu caniatáu i gwmnïau “ddefnyddio eu barn broffesiynol” y gwir yw bod cyfran fawr o wrandawiadau SDT i mewn cysylltiad â defnydd afreolaidd neu anghyfreithlon o gyfrif cleient gan gwmnïau. Felly er y gallai fod gan Reolau Cyfrifon SRA newydd 2019 ychydig mwy o hyblygrwydd na rheolau cyfrifon blaenorol, mae perygl o hyd o reoli arian cleientiaid yn wael, neu'r demtasiwn y gall ei beri mewn rhai achosion fel yr amlinellwyd yn Rhagolwg Risg 2019.

Byddai'n gasgliad rhesymol ddiogel y bydd yr SRA yn cymryd safiad llymach gydag unrhyw gwmni neu unigolyn y maent yn ystyried yr angen i ymchwilio iddo, ac mae posibilrwydd y byddant yn cwblhau archwiliadau fforensig i sicrhau bod cwmnïau wedi mabwysiadu'r dull newydd yn eu rheolau 2019.

Tendrau Contractau Troseddol yr Asiantaeth Cymorth Cyfreithiol Newydd - fel y bydd cwmnïau amddiffyn troseddol Cymorth Cyfreithiol a ariennir yn gyhoeddus yn gwybod, mae eu contractau wedi'u hymestyn tan ddiwedd mis Mawrth 2021. Mae hyn yn fwyaf tebygol yn golygu y gall cwmnïau ddisgwyl i dendr agor yn hydref 2020, gyda dyddiad cyflwyno ar ddiwedd y flwyddyn. Bydd llawer o gwmnïau'n cofio'r cylchoedd a'r rhwystrau y gwnaeth uchelgais y tendr am y contract cyfredol iddynt lywio y tro diwethaf, gyda'r gobaith o gynnig am gontractau mawr mewn parthau cyfiawnder troseddol, a'r gofyniad i ddod yn llawer mwy nag yr oeddent, neu partner gyda “Delivery Partners.” Methodd hyn y tro diwethaf yn y pen draw, ond mae’n ddigon posib ei fod yn rhywbeth y mae’r Asiantaeth Cymorth Cyfreithiol yn rhoi cynnig arall arno…

12 mlynedd o gefnogaeth a fydd bob amser yno i chi…

Rydym yn falch o'n record o ran cefnogi cyfreithwyr gyda'u hanghenion cymorth rheoleiddio a rheoli, a 2019 oedd ein 12fed flwyddyn o wneud hynny. Os ydych chi'n un o'n cleientiaid, neu'n gleient yn y dyfodol, gallwch barhau i orffwys yn hawdd gan wybod y byddwn yn parhau i ddarparu'r gefnogaeth sydd ei hangen arnoch i lywio cymhlethdodau parhaus rhedeg cwmni cyfreithiol a'r newidiadau a'r heriau i ddod.

Gallwch weld ein bod eisoes yn ystyried yr hyn y bydd ei angen ar gwmnïau nesaf, ac yn yr amseroedd hyn o newid cyson byddwn yn eich gadael gyda'r un neges;

“Rydyn ni dal yno i chi.”

Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Ffyniannus gan y tîm cpm21.

Fe welwn ni chi yn 2020.