Levels of Responsibility for Paralegals
Let us have your comments on this please.
JANUARY 2007
It was brought to our attention that in some medium and small High Street Firms the practice of instructing Paralegals to sign the Firm’s name on formal letters (e.g. Missives and Letters of Obligation) and Forms (Legal Aid) is becoming the norm rather than the exception. The SPA has serious concerns at Paralegals being expected to take on this level of responsibility and it does not concur with our guidelines that all Paralegals must work under the supervision of a Solicitor and should not carry out work at a level they are not comfortable with.
Historically in Scotland, Paralegals had previously worked in a secretarial support role and had considerable practical experience before gaining a formal qualification. However, in the past 5 years or so, Paralegals are entering the profession after gaining qualifications but with no practical hands on experience. This is one of the reasons why SPA has a Trainee Grade for Members with less than 2 years practical experience no matter what their qualifications. However, at this time, only SPA Members can provide proof of their competency levels as shown on their annual Membership/Practising Certificate. Bearing in mind it is estimated there are now 10,000 people working in a Paralegal role in Scotland, that leaves a considerable number of Paralegals on a yearly basis working in the profession with little or no practical experience.
We have taken this matter up with the Law Society of Scotland and with Marsh, the Insurance Brokers for the legal profession in Scotland who also advise on Risk Management. We narrate their response as follows:-
The Law Society has advised that Paralegals or any “non principal member of a Firm” who has the authority to sign formal documents on behalf of the Firm, as a matter of best practice, should have written authority to do so either on a case by case basis of setting out the parameters under which such authority can be exercised. Verbal authority would be lawful but carries the risk of dispute. The issue of levels of responsibility and supervision of work is taken to be a matter for each individual Firm to assess as part of their risk management strategy.
We very much doubt if many of our Members have written authority to work at this level of responsibility and should you be asked to do so, we would urge you to request this from the principal Partner of the Firm.
The absence of written authority would, in our view, place you in a difficult position in the event of any dispute arising as you would have no hard proof that you were authorised to sign the Firm’s name on formal documentation. If your request is ignored or refused please advise us of this.
Marsh have advised that the Master Policy would cover, subject to its terms and conditions, both the Firm and the Paralegal – the Paralegal as an employee of the Firm being covered by the firm’s Master Policy.
We also raised the question of Paralegals having sole responsibility for a legal office at a time when the Solicitor is on holiday or ill – this applies in the main to branch offices or Sole Practitioners. The Law Society have advised that they consider it reasonable for an experienced paralegal to look after the day to day running of an office but it is prudent for arrangements to be made for another Solicitor to be available when required. Apparently the facility of mobile phones where the Solicitor is only a phone call away is seen as a level of support fit for the purpose. Again the SPA has a concern if this period of time was for more than one week and who is to deem the level of experience of the Paralegal as adequate for this role?
At the end of the day the view of both the Law Society of Scotland and Marsh appears to be that Solicitor Principals in all Firms have ultimate responsibility for the actions of their staff including Paralegals. We sincerely trust that the Solicitors concerned appreciate this responsibility and give full support to their Paralegals should any issues arise.