There are various approaches to regulation across a whole breadth of sectors, from very light touch to intense scrutiny. Being judged by others is always difficult and therefore regulation needs to be not just rigorous but sensitive. The tragic case of headmistress, Ruth Perry, who killed herself following the publication of a critical Ofsted inspection, shows just how painful regulatory criticism can be.

The question regulators, in any industry, need to ask themselves is how much can regulation be about prevention rather than enforcement? In the legal world, the current model favoured by most regulators is focused on disciplining wrongdoing, rather than a more active approach utilising engagement to stop it in the first instance and to promote ongoing competence.

The way that the Council for Licensed Conveyancers (CLC) handles lawyers who end up in difficulty is different from that used by others. Our approach, which we call ‘assisted compliance’ is highly collaborative and is designed to address non-compliance when the first difficulties are spotted, not waiting for risk to crystallise into actual harm to the client or public interest.

This approach can sometimes be misunderstood as being light-touch, or even a soft-touch. But that is really a misconception. It’s not about simplifying the rules or expectations, it’s about helping the firms and individuals that we regulate to meet our expectations and the requirements of the law. We operate a zero-tolerance approach to non-compliance and expect every instance to be remedied.

Of course, there will always be times when action is required, and our robust processes require all instances of non-compliance to be addressed. As a specialist regulator, we are in very close contact with our practices and work with them to bring them back into compliance promptly. Not all instances of non-compliance merit formal discipline, but if there is persistent non-compliance, unacceptable risk of harm or actual harm occurs, then we will move without hesitation to our disciplinary tools. The absolute number of disciplinary cases against licensed conveyancers should not be misinterpreted as a laxity. In fact, proportionately more CLC practices go through a formal disciplinary process at the Adjudication Panel each year than SRA firms at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. This demonstrates the enforcement of high standards of compliance.

Achieving compliance

Undoubtedly, our approach to regulation is intensive, involving very close monitoring of the regulated community and working with them to secure compliance. Our unique specialist insight and focus along with our proactive management of the risks that helps us identify, is one of our greatest strengths. We encourage practices to work with us, and we, in turn, work closely with them to remediate any code breaches. Our firms know our expectations for compliance, and we seek to ensure that by jointly agreeing actions, and then checking on their implementation we can prevent reoccurrence. This approach has established a culture of candour and frankness that fosters self-reporting. Combined with our high touch inspections, this means we have a strong track record in resolving breaches before any harm comes to consumers.

As a specialist regulator we have been able to tailor our approach so that it addresses the needs of the property sector. We will continue to regularly review our approach, as we are currently doing with our revised Code of Conduct, to ensure that we remain alert to the challenges the industry faces, foresee where more action will be needed, such as with anti-money laundering compliance and provide businesses with a framework in which to flourish as they respond to changing consumer demands.

Stephen Ward is director of strategy and external relations at the Council for Licensed Conveyancers