Two SRA consultations close this autumn, one on complaints handling and one on litigation funding. The Court of Appeal has refused leave to appeal in the first SFO tipping-off prosecution of a solicitor. The leasehold bill has slipped its timetable. And vendor research says most fee-earners use AI tools their firm never approved.
SRA consultation on complaints handling closes 1 September
The SRA opened this one on 3 July 2026. It runs until 1 September.
The proposed rules aim to keep clients informed when they need to complain to a regulated firm. They sit on top of changes the SRA settled after a 2025 consultation. This round does not reopen those. Final proposals covering both then go to the Legal Services Board for approval.
The timing is pointed. The Legal Ombudsman’s annual data landed on 23 July. It found poor complaint handling in 46% of investigated cases across all areas of law. In conveyancing the figure was 53%. Firms have four weeks left to shape rules drafted against that backdrop.
What is the SRA proposing on litigation funding?
Three new duties, and they land on a small number of firms.
The regulator opened a 10-week consultation on 9 July 2026, closing on 17 September. Firms that use or arrange third-party litigation funding for consumer claims pick up three obligations. Notify the SRA. Produce and keep a funding risk assessment. Give clients a summary document before they sign. New guidance on existing duties arrived alongside it, covering independence, conflicts, clients’ best interests and money laundering.
The scale is worth noting. Fewer than 1% of regulated firms are likely to fall in scope. Those firms act for tens of millions of clients. At the end of June 2026 the SRA had 94 open investigations, spanning 68 firms that handle high-volume consumer claims. It has already closed seven firms in the sector. It also found cases where funding debt ran past a firm’s annual turnover, with motor finance claims a particular concern.
First SFO tipping-off conviction survives appeal
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal on 28 July 2026.
William Osmond, now 72, was co-founder and senior partner of Osmond & Osmond Solicitors, and its money laundering reporting officer. In 2018 SFO investigators made covert enquiries of him about a client. He told the client. He also prepared a false letter of engagement.
A five-day Old Bailey trial convicted him in late 2023. The charges were tipping off under section 333A(3) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, and one count of forgery. He received nine months suspended for 18 months. He also got 100 hours of unpaid work and a £5,000 order towards SFO costs.
His grounds focused on points the trial judge ruled on herself rather than leaving to the jury. Lord Justice Males gave the court’s unanimous decision. Those rulings were needed to keep the trial on the real issues, he held.
This is the first case on the section 333A(3) tipping-off provisions to reach the Court of Appeal. The court gave leave for its judgment to be cited. Firms now have appellate guidance on an offence that sits awkwardly beside every MLRO’s day job.
When will the leasehold bill arrive?
Later than the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee wants.
The Committee has published correspondence from Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook, dated 10 July 2026. It confirms his department could not answer the Committee’s pre-legislative scrutiny report by the two-month deadline of 27 July.
That report, published on 27 May, ran to 56 conclusions and recommendations. It asked for the final bill in autumn 2026. Second reading would come before the November recess, and Royal Assent by mid-2027. Committee chair Florence Eshalomi has pressed for an early commitment to bring the revised legislation forward.
Anyone advising a leaseholder on whether to enfranchise now or wait for commonhold should plan on that timetable slipping.
Do firm leaders know who is using AI?
On the evidence of one vendor survey, no.
Censuswide carried out the research for Access Legal, a legal software supplier. It polled 200 UK legal professionals in April 2026: 100 firm leaders and 100 practitioners. It found that 59% of fee-earners at small and mid-sized firms admit using unapproved tools. Free versions of ChatGPT are the obvious example. Yet 68% of leaders believe they have full visibility. They see zero risk of unapproved AI touching client work. Treat both numbers as self-reported, and note who paid for the work.
The split by role is sharper than the headline. Some 71% of paralegals and 57% of solicitors said they reach for unapproved tools to keep up with workload.
The survey also points at a supply problem. Half of fee-earners want AI built into their case management system. Only 25% of firms have it. That gap is doing some of the work here. It is a procurement question as much as a governance one.
Three of these five items carry a date a firm can act on. 1 September for the complaints consultation. 17 September for litigation funding. No date at all for the leasehold bill. The tipping-off ruling and the AI research point the same way. Each is about whether a firm can see what its own people are doing, which is the question every regulator is now asking.
The SRA’s complaints consultation page carries the response form for the 1 September deadline.