LSB responds to accusations from industry regulators of micro-management and overstepping its remit

The Legal Services Board (LSB) has restated its intention to work better with industry regulators following a series of criticisms by bodies including the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and the Bar Standards Board (BSB).

The LSB – the independent body responsible for overseeing the regulation of legal services in England and Wales – this month released its finalised business plan for 2013-14, with the plan "re-scoped significantly" following complaints of micro-management and unnecessary intervention.

The business plan details the LSB's goals to "work with regulators in a relationship of openness and trust"; avoid duplication of work undertaken by others; assure and improve the performance of approved regulators in areas including diversity; help consumers choose and use legal services; and address risks in the field of regulation. The body, which came into force in 2010 in the wake of the Legal Services Act (LSA), has the ability to strip underperforming professional bodies of their powers.

In a separate document, the LSB has also responded  to criticism it received during a consultation on its business plan, which concluded in March. The consultation saw several respondents question the role of the LSB, expressing concern about the way the body interprets and exercises its statutory remit. 

Earlier this year SRA chief executive Antony Townsend argued there was an "imbalance"in the LSB's approach to its regulatory objectives, "which tends to see the LSA in terms of narrow economic liberalisation, rather than the carefully balanced approach the Act was designed to achieve".

Townsend also accused the oversight regulator of over-stepping its remit, describing its past actions and future plans as having a tendency "to seek to intervene in the front-line regulators' exercise of their discretion, thus risking undermining the regulators' proper independence, skewing regulatory activity away from the highest risks, and leading to unhelpful and wasteful duplications of function".

The LSB has rejected the accusation of micro-management and duplication, countering that it does "not accept that oversight is a passive responsibility – although we continue to be clear that regulators have the primary responsibility for taking decisions".

It also "rejected utterly" a "totally un-evidenced assertion"by the SRA that the LSB is at risk of being too close to Government.

"There is no hotline from the LSB to the Ministry of Justice," said a spokesperson. "Obviously there are going to be tensions between the regulator and the regulated, but we have worked hard to ensure that these are addressed in an open and transparent manner."

Meanwhile, BSB director Vanessa Davies accused the LSB of conflating statutory and discretionary objectives and of giving them equal weight. The LSB responded to this charge by acknowledging it still has "work to do to convince stakeholders that that is not the case".

Other groups from the legal profession to respond to the consultation include the Bar Council, the Law Society and the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives.

The LSB's budget for 2013-14 stands at £4.45m, a £50,000 decrease on last year's running costs.

Related: Legal Services Board invites applications for panel spots.