Custodiance

SRA · Law firms

SRA Transparency Rule 6 implementation: the 2026 website checklist

By Jordan Gilbert

In brief

The SRA Transparency Rules are read against the public website, not the firm's internal records. A compliance officer reads the homepage and footer, marks each rule satisfied or unsatisfied, and writes to the firm where a clause is missing or buried. This is the 2026 implementation checklist for Rules 1 to 6, plus the Code of Conduct Rule 7 publicity duty: every clause named, the markup pattern that satisfies it, and the structured-data signal that lifts the firm into the LegalService rich result.

The SRA Transparency Rules are not a brochure exercise. They are a checked set of disclosures the Solicitors Regulation Authority audits by browsing the firm’s website, marking each rule satisfied or unsatisfied, and writing to the firm where a clause is missing or buried. Spot checks happen continuously. The SRA’s 2024 enforcement report noted that the majority of sampled conveyancing and probate firms remained partially non-compliant on Rule 1 — price transparency — two years after the rules took effect.

Most independent solicitors’ sites satisfy the rules partially at best. The price page is a buried PDF. The complaints procedure is a single dense paragraph at the foot of an “About” page. The firm’s SRA number appears only on the homepage hero. The Transparency Rules name precisely where each disclosure must appear and what it must contain. This is the 2026 implementation checklist.

What the Transparency Rules actually cover

The Transparency Rules are six numbered rules issued under the SRA Standards and Regulations. They sit alongside the Code of Conduct for Firms, not inside it. Together they cover price publication (Rule 1), complaints publication (Rule 2), regulatory information (Rule 3 to 4), the digital badge, and the supplementary publication and prominence obligations (Rules 5 and 6). The Code of Conduct adds Rule 7.1’s publicity duty on top. The website is where the SRA reads them.

What follows walks through each rule, names the clause, sets out the markup pattern that satisfies it, and adds the structured-data signal that compounds the regulatory disclosure into a search rich-result opportunity. The two outcomes — satisfying the SRA and being read correctly by search engines — share most of their work, because both depend on machine-readable, on-page disclosure.

Rule 1 — Price publication

The clause

Rule 1.1 requires firms to publish cost information where they offer, to individuals: residential conveyancing, probate (uncontested, UK estate), motoring-offence advice, immigration (excluding asylum), employment tribunal claims (unfair or wrongful dismissal), debt recovery up to £100,000, or licensing applications. Rule 1.2 details what must appear: total cost (or average or range), basis of the charge, disbursements with descriptions, VAT treatment, key stages, indicative timescales, and the qualifications and experience of the people doing the work.

The implementation

Each regulated service takes its own dedicated, indexable URL — /services/residential-conveyancing-fees, /services/probate-fees, /services/employment-tribunal-fees. Not a buried PDF; not a single combined page. The reviewer follows the homepage navigation and expects a discrete page per service.

Each page carries, in order, the eight Rule 1.2 elements as named subheadings. The markup pattern:

<article>
  <h1>Residential conveyancing fees</h1>
  <section>
    <h2>Total cost</h2>
    <p>Our legal fees for a freehold purchase at £350,000 are £1,450 plus
    VAT (£290), totalling £1,740. Leasehold transactions add £350 plus VAT
    for the additional work involved.</p>
  </section>
  <section>
    <h2>Basis of charge</h2>
    <p>Fixed fee based on purchase price and tenure. We do not bill hourly
    on standard residential conveyancing.</p>
  </section>
  <section>
    <h2>Disbursements</h2>
    <ul>
      <li>HM Land Registry fee — variable by price (£40 to £455)</li>
      <li>Local authority search — typical £180 to £250</li>
      <li>Bank transfer fee — £30 plus VAT</li>
    </ul>
  </section>
  <section>
    <h2>VAT treatment</h2>
    <p>Our legal fees and the bank transfer fee attract VAT at 20%. HM Land
    Registry fees, search fees, and Stamp Duty Land Tax do not.</p>
  </section>
  <section>
    <h2>Key stages</h2>
    <ol>
      <li>Take instructions and ID/AML verification</li>
      <li>Review draft contract and raise enquiries</li>
      <li>Review search results and report to client</li>
      <li>Exchange contracts and arrange completion</li>
      <li>Post-completion registration with HM Land Registry</li>
    </ol>
  </section>
  <section>
    <h2>Indicative timescales</h2>
    <p>A typical freehold transaction completes 10–14 weeks from instruction.
    Leasehold transactions typically add 4–6 weeks.</p>
  </section>
  <section>
    <h2>Who does the work</h2>
    <p>Lead solicitor: Jane Practitioner (admitted 2012, 13 years' residential
    conveyancing experience). Supervised by partner Adam Practitioner.</p>
  </section>
</article>

The structured-data layer

Each fee page should carry Service JSON-LD with a nested Offer and priceRange. The search result renders this as a price-band rich result for “residential conveyancing solicitor [town]” queries — the acquisition layer the Transparency Rules incidentally unlock:

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "Service",
  "name": "Residential conveyancing — freehold purchase",
  "provider": {
    "@type": "LegalService",
    "name": "Example Solicitors LLP",
    "identifier": { "@type": "PropertyValue",
      "name": "SRA number", "value": "123456" }
  },
  "offers": {
    "@type": "Offer",
    "priceCurrency": "GBP",
    "priceRange": "£1,450–£2,200",
    "priceSpecification": { "@type": "UnitPriceSpecification",
      "priceType": "https://schema.org/RegularPrice" }
  }
}

Rule 2 — Complaints publication

The clause

Rule 2 requires firms to publish their complaints procedure on the website, including the complainant’s right to complain, how and to whom, what to do if the complaint is not resolved, and the right to refer to the Legal Ombudsman — with the Ombudsman’s contact details and the statutory time limits: six years from the act or omission, three years from when the complainant should reasonably have known, and six months from the firm’s final response.

The implementation

A discrete /complaints page, linked from the footer of every layout. The page carries the named elements above as numbered headings. The footer link uses the exact text “Complaints” — not “Help” or “Contact us” — so the reviewer’s keyword scan succeeds in a single search.

<footer>
  <nav aria-label="Regulatory">
    <a href="/complaints">Complaints</a>
    <a href="/transparency">Pricing and transparency</a>
    <a href="/regulatory-information">Regulatory information</a>
  </nav>
</footer>

The /complaints page opens with a 60-word plain-English summary above the fold — “If you are unhappy with our service, here is how to complain to us, what we will do, and how to escalate to the Legal Ombudsman if you are not satisfied.” The detailed procedure follows, ending with the Legal Ombudsman contact block and the statutory time limits set out as a callout.

Rule 3 — Information on the firm’s regulator

The clause

Rule 3 requires firms to publish information stating that the firm is regulated by the SRA. The information must include the firm’s SRA number and a clickable link to the SRA’s online register or to the SRA Digital Badge.

The implementation

The SRA number appears in the footer of every layout, alongside the firm’s registered office, ICO registration number, and VAT number. A link to the firm’s entry on the SRA register sits next to it.

<footer>
  <address>
    Example Solicitors LLP · Registered office: 1 Example Street, Leeds LS1 1AA<br>
    Authorised and regulated by the
    <a href="https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/register/?firmNumber=123456">
      Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA number 123456)
    </a><br>
    ICO registration: ZA123456 · VAT registered: GB123 4567 89
  </address>
</footer>

Rule 4 — SRA Digital Badge

The clause

Rule 4, under the SRA’s “Authorisation and regulatory information” guidance, provides for the SRA Digital Badge — an embedded image and link issued via the SRA’s badge service that, when clicked, surfaces the firm’s regulated status verifiable from the SRA. Firms are expected to display the badge where it is reasonable to do so.

The implementation

The badge code is supplied by the SRA: a <div> with a script tag that resolves the badge from clickabletrustbadge.sra.org.uk. Place it in the footer of every layout, not only the homepage. Lazy-load the script so it does not block the Largest Contentful Paint.

<div data-sra-badge="123456" class="sra-badge"></div>
<script async src="https://clickabletrustbadge.sra.org.uk/badge.js"></script>

Where the firm’s design system rejects the SRA-supplied styling, an equivalent text-based disclosure satisfies the rule — but the badge is preferred, because it gives the reviewer a one-click verification path back to the SRA register.

Rule 5 — Prominence and accessibility of the published information

The clause

Rule 5, read with Rule 6 and the SRA’s enforcement guidance, requires firms to publish the information required by the Transparency Rules on the firm’s website where it has one, and to ensure that information is accessible, prominent, and clear. Material buried two clicks deep behind a /legal-info.pdf link fails this rule.

The implementation

A /transparency page that acts as the index for everything the rules require: links to each regulated-service fee page, the complaints page, the SRA register, the regulatory-information page, and a last-updated date. The page is reached from the global navigation under a label such as “Pricing and transparency” — not a footer-only link.

Rule 6 — Other publications (the publicity duty)

The clause

Rule 6 of the Transparency Rules, with SRA Code of Conduct for Firms Rule 7.1, imposes the general publicity duty: publications must be accurate and not misleading, including in relation to the regulatory status of those providing services. This is the rule that catches the firm whose website advertises a service the named fee-earner is not actually qualified to deliver.

The implementation

Every people-page on the site names the individual’s role, year of admission or qualification, regulatory body, and area of practice. The markup pattern for a fee-earner profile:

<article itemscope itemtype="https://schema.org/Person">
  <h1 itemprop="name">Jane Practitioner</h1>
  <p itemprop="jobTitle">Senior Associate, Residential Conveyancing</p>
  <dl>
    <dt>Admitted as a solicitor</dt>
    <dd>2012 (England and Wales)</dd>
    <dt>SRA number</dt>
    <dd itemprop="identifier">654321</dd>
    <dt>Areas of practice</dt>
    <dd>Residential conveyancing — freehold and leasehold purchase, sale,
        re-mortgage. Not regulated to advise on commercial property.</dd>
  </dl>
</article>

The disclosure of what the fee-earner is not regulated to advise on is the element most agency-built profile pages omit. It is the precise sentence that satisfies Rule 6’s “not misleading” requirement.

LegalService JSON-LD for the homepage

Every solicitor site should carry top-level LegalService structured data on the homepage. This compounds the Transparency Rules disclosure into a search rich-result opportunity — areaServed, priceRange, and aggregateRating where genuine reviews exist:

{
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "LegalService",
  "name": "Example Solicitors LLP",
  "url": "https://example.co.uk",
  "telephone": "+44 113 000 0000",
  "address": { "@type": "PostalAddress",
    "streetAddress": "1 Example Street",
    "addressLocality": "Leeds",
    "postalCode": "LS1 1AA",
    "addressCountry": "GB" },
  "areaServed": [ "Leeds", "West Yorkshire", "England and Wales" ],
  "priceRange": "£££",
  "identifier": [
    { "@type": "PropertyValue", "name": "SRA number", "value": "123456" },
    { "@type": "PropertyValue", "name": "ICO registration", "value": "ZA123456" }
  ],
  "hasOfferCatalog": {
    "@type": "OfferCatalog",
    "name": "Regulated legal services",
    "itemListElement": [
      { "@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": {
        "@type": "Service", "name": "Residential conveyancing",
        "url": "https://example.co.uk/services/residential-conveyancing-fees" } },
      { "@type": "Offer", "itemOffered": {
        "@type": "Service", "name": "Probate (uncontested UK estate)",
        "url": "https://example.co.uk/services/probate-fees" } }
    ]
  }
}

How the work is held

Custodiance runs this as a managed estate, in-jurisdiction, to your regulator’s standard. The structural work is publishing six to ten new indexable pages — the fee pages, the complaints page, the transparency index, the regulatory-information page, security.txt, and named fee-earner profiles — wiring the structured data, and updating the footer of every layout. The detail and accuracy of each fee page is a content exercise the firm leads on; the templates, the markup, the structured-data wiring, and the publication discipline are held and maintained on the firm’s behalf.

This sits within the Growth tier (£1,495 per month) for an established practice that wants its estate run properly, or the Embedded engagement (from £6,000 per month, bespoke) where a fractional CTO owns the roadmap and the compliance posture outright. The Article 30 and Article 28 documentation work for the SRA confidentiality obligations runs in the same engagement — the residency-and-confidentiality layer the Transparency Rules sit on top of.

The Custodiance methodology — the published standard each estate is built to — is set out in the framework. The approach describes how an engagement runs across the year.

Request a scoping call

Where a firm’s website has not been audited against the current Transparency Rules text — or where the last SRA review flagged a Rule 1 or Rule 2 gap — request a scoping call. Each of the six rules above is reviewed against the live site and marked pass, partial, or fail, with the specific remediation for each.

Sources & methodology

Checklist drawn from the current published SRA Transparency Rules, the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms, the SRA’s enforcement guidance, and rule-by-rule review of independent solicitor websites under Transparency-Rules audit conditions across 2025–2026.

Last updated 3 June 2026.

Sources

  1. SRA Transparency Rules (current version)
  2. SRA Code of Conduct for Firms, Rule 7.1 (Publicity)
  3. SRA Digital Badge
  4. SRA Standards and Regulations enforcement reports (2023–2024)
  5. Legal Ombudsman scheme rules (time limits)
  6. Schema.org LegalService type

Custody, not marketing.

Have a senior partner read your estate against this.

A scoping call is a measured conversation about your obligations, your current setup, and what it would take to run it to your regulator's standard. No obligation, and no pressure.

Request a scoping call More briefings