Category Archives: News

The Professional Paralegal Register warmly invites you to attend this inaugural Paralegal Conference, designed to benefit all Paralegals regardless of whether you are self-employed private practitioners; employed in company legal departments; local authorities; law practices; the courts or any other type of business. The conference will also benefit law students, legal secretaries and those seeking to find out about a new career in the law.

This 2016 event will cover a range of Paralegal topics that will allow you to receive the most current information within the Paralegal sector and to enable you to think more strategically about the future.
Paralegals are now the fourth arm of the legal profession and quite rightly take their place as professionals in their own right.

We are delighted to announce that our speakers include Steve Green, Chair Office for Legal Complaints; Derek Wood QC, Elisabeth Davies, Chair Legal Services Board Consumer Panel; Espe Fuentes, Head of Legal, Which?Legal; Chris White, Founder Aspiring Solicitors and more to be announced.

There are opportunities to obtain CPD through attending two workshops from a choice of sessions covering skills, business development, updates in law and practice; Paralegal Practising Certificates and PPR compliance.

Come and join the fastest growing arm of the legal profession and meet other Paralegals to network and share good practice.

The conference, including a sit down lunch is just £30.00 for PPR members and £50 for non-members.

Join us

The title sounds like it could be a movie but fiction it isn’t.

The Professional Paralegal Register (PPR) offers regulation for Paralegals who work outside of the regulated sector. Paralegals make up the majority of legal service providers in England and Wales and yet because of the perceived lack of professionalism, which amounts to a lack of accountability through regulation, they have failed as a profession to propel themselves to the top, alongside the old boys clubs of the Bar, The Law Society and the newer kids on the block CILEX.

I have attended so many forums; strategy groups; lectures; conferences over the last fifteen years where the ‘issue’ of Paralegals has either been ignored or paid lip service to, that I think that those within the legal sector who profess to encourage diversity need to embrace the Paralegal Profession.

As you are aware, the PPR spent many months working with Insync to secure an appropriately worded cover for Paralegals at a reasonable cost.

The uptake by our members to use this scheme has been lower than anticipated and therefore you may have received an automated e mail from Insync about your renewal.

Please be aware that Insync are brokers that work on our behalf and therefore can still assist you.

For any further assistance please contact Callum Goulding, Senior Developer at Insync, at [email protected] and he will be delighted to assist you

A proposal by CILEx Regulation (CRL) to make it easier for paralegals to become qualified legal executives has been rejected as likely to cause “confusion to employers and consumers” by the new voluntary paralegals regulator.

In a speech to this week’s Westminster Legal Policy Forum, David Gilbertson, a board member of the legal executives’ regulator, said its next step would be a period of review following completion of its new schemes for CPD and competence assessment of CILEx independent practitioners.

It would include “looking at the possibility of creating streamlined pathways to enable paralegals to become both Chartered Legal Executives and CILEx Practitioners, without the need for unnecessary duplication of evidence where it is appropriate to do so”.

But Rita Leat, managing director of the Professional Paralegal Register (PPR), a voluntary regulation scheme for paralegals launched in July, said: “The [PPR] regulates all paralegals who work in the unregulated sector and already provide the necessary pathways for specialist paralegal practitioners to operate with paralegal practising certificates without the need to become something else [such as] legal executives…

“It would be less of a repetition of efforts if CILEx would engage more with the PPR to offer a greater diversity of opportunity in the sector and enable consumers to access a more cost-effective legal system. It appears to us to be a muddying of the waters that causes confusion to employers and consumers.”

A spokesman for CRL explained that the streamlining of rules for paralegals could include “aligning some of the evidence we require for a practice rights application with the work-based learning portfolio aspiring Chartered Legal Executives must provide. Paralegals seeking lawyer status either as Chartered Legal Executives, or with CILEx practice rights, would therefore not have to duplicate their evidence unnecessarily.”

He added: “Of course, application for practice rights specifically in conveyancing or probate is open to anyone… Our desire is to make our application processes more streamlined without diminishing the high standards we expect of applicants.”

CILEx last year announced an enquiry into paralegals, reflecting a push by the representative body to assert a leadership role in an area of the legal employment market widely expected to grow over the next decade. At the time, CILEx estimated it had about 12,500 paralegals in its membership, including students, affiliates, associates and graduates who were working in the legal aid field.

Separately, CRL this week launched an eight-week consultation on whether it should become a licensing authority for alternative business structures (ABS), claiming it “receives enquiries regularly from organisations seeking to be licensed by it as a licensed body” under the Legal Services Act 2007.

Currently only entities run by Chartered Legal Executives, CILEx Practitioners or other lawyers can be authorised by CRL, but not those with non-lawyer owners or managers.

The consultation said its current inability to licence ABSs “limits growth, consumer choice and innovative delivery of legal services”.

In particular, it said, “the demographic of the community regulated by [CRL] includes a high proportion of females, ethnic minorities and those from less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds, potentially increasing the market for consumers who may seek legal advice from those closer to their own demographic.”

The consultation closes on 29 January 2016.

Source: http://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/plan-to-smooth-paralegals-path-to-cilex-qualification-sparks-confusion-claim

24th July 2017

We have had queries regarding video publications made by NALP inferring that the PPR values have changed, and it has become incumbent on me to answer those queries.

The PPR was set up by NALP and IoP as a direct response to recommendations made by the LETR that a regulator should come forward for the unregulated sector.

Both organisations committed to developing such a voluntary regulatory scheme for the benefit of the sector and for greater consumer protection. These values set up by NALP and IoP remain unchanged.

The NALP were present and active at the PPR Conference on 22nd June and our values have not changed since that date, when one can assume that NALP agreed with our values. We are unable to comment further on what NALP believe is a change in our values as they have declined to provide any clarification.

The success of the PPR is dependant on the vetting of membership bodies to ensure that they meet the required standard in ensuring their application processes reflect good practice and that they have a sound, fair and reasonable complaints procedure to handle Tier 1 and 2 complaints prior to being finally reviewed and adjudicated by an independent regulator where required. These values remain unchanged.

For accountability and credibility, it is vital that the sector has an independent regulatory scheme. The IoP previously issued ‘Practising Certificates’ which was wholly inappropriate, as a membership body should not act as a regulator during the final outcome of a complaints process. The IoP withdrew their practising certificates and embraced the new regulatory regime and now has a high number of IoP members registered or regulated by the PPR. The IoP remain committed to the PPR as removal would be a great detriment to their members and to the sector as a whole.

The NALP maintained its ‘Licensed’ Paralegals, very small in number, assuring the PPR that this was a ‘Membership Level’ only, as there was no substance behind it and not an actual licence to practise. Unfortunately, the NALP decided to maintain its ‘Licensed’ Paralegal status which the PPR felt was confusing for the consumer, and therefore in this context, the NALP did not embrace the new regulatory regime to the same extent as the IoP.

The PPR values have not changed and we firmly believe as do our supporters from the Legal Ombudsman’s office that independent regulation is vital.

The PPR is shocked and saddened by the actions of NALP in deciding to promote a Licensing Scheme with no discussion with the PPR or any other of the key legal stakeholders. We do not believe that this is in the best interests of the sector or consumers.

We would expect any of our Recognised Bodies to consult their members before withdrawal from the PPR so that we can ensure that they can be accommodated without unnecessary detriment being caused. We will be seeking to include this in our rules going forwards.

The PPR is a voluntary Regulator and not a membership body and it spent almost two years consulting with key stakeholders before it was robust enough to offer the credibility and accountability that a regulator should do.

There are many membership bodies offering self-regulation with no substance behind them and no real redress for consumers. This is what NALP and the IoP have fought against. It would appear that perhaps NALP’s values have changed and not the PPR’s.

We do not recognise any membership body’s self-regulation certificates or licences as this would be a bleak step backwards for the sector and for consumer protection.

The PPR remains focused on what is right and will continue to support the sector to promote its members as the Fourth Arm of the Legal Profession.

Regulation for Paralegals is voluntary and we would advise all Paralegals who choose to be regulated to choose wisely.

The PPR Conference 2018 was a great success

Thank you to everyone who attended and made it the best one yet, we hope to see you next time!

Here are some of the highlights, who can spot themselves?

The PPR Forum Meeting at the HoC on 28th November was attended by 30 key stakeholders in the sector. Kate Hoey MP hosted the event to show her support for the work of the PPR. The PPR is now recognised as the voluntary over-arching regulator for all those who offer legal services or give legal advice in the unregulated sector.

Sean-Randall Morris, Chairman of the Regulatory Committee has given the green light for the PPR to be able to regulate individuals across the globe, as the over-arching voluntary regulatory regime is suitable for all those who practice English Law.

Paralegals are to be encouraged to join the PPR as are membership bodies who operate self-regulatory schemes that in the main offer no real protection for the consumer.

Derek Wood, CBE, QC has launched a supporters group for the PPR with many stakeholders signing up including the Legal Ombudsman; Which? Legal; The Citizenship Foundation and many more. The supporters group assists with the commitment of the PPR and its recognised bodies to enhance PLE.

PPR Paralegal Practising Certificates issued by the PPR are the only practising certificates that ate authorised by the over-arching regulator.

Pictured below from L to R:

Rita Leat, Managing Director, PPR; Baroness Diane Hayter of Kentish Town; Kate Hoey MP, Ian Grant, Director PPR