When a law firm principal looks at professional indemnity renewal, the phrase "scheme broker" is one of the first that comes up. It is used loosely and does not always mean the same thing from one conversation to the next. This page sets out a factual map of the main scheme arrangements that solicitors in England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland typically encounter, and explains where scheme routes fit and where they do not. It complements our theoretical piece on scheme brokers versus specialist brokers by focusing on the practical who's-who.
A scheme broker, in solicitor PI, is a broker that has an arrangement giving it access to a defined set of participating insurers or a facility built for a defined class of firm. The arrangement may be branded through a professional body (as it is in Scotland and Northern Ireland), or it may be a broker-led facility that markets itself under a product name to firms that meet its criteria.
The word "scheme" therefore covers two different things. In Scotland and Northern Ireland it is a compulsory Master Policy arrangement, and every solicitor in private practice sits inside it by regulation. In England and Wales there is no compulsory master policy; the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) sets the Minimum Terms and Conditions and firms are free to place cover with any participating insurer through any FCA-authorised broker. What people call "scheme brokers" in England and Wales are broker facilities that group firms into standardised placements, usually with a small panel of insurers and standardised documentation.
The distinction matters. In Scotland the scheme is regulatory. In England and Wales it is commercial.
The arrangements below are the ones a firm in England and Wales is most likely to hear about at renewal. Each is described using information the broker publishes about itself. Availability, partner minimums, and pricing are matters for direct enquiry.
Griffiths and Armour is one of the longer-established solicitor PI facilities in the market. The business was acquired by Aon in recent years and now operates as an Aon company while retaining the Griffiths and Armour brand for its professional risks work. The facility has historically written PI for medium to larger law firms, and public materials indicate that it operates a partner minimum for the solicitor product. Firms below that threshold are typically directed to alternative routes. The proposition is centred on volume placement with a stable insurer panel and standardised wordings.
Arthur J Gallagher (AJG) offers solicitor PI through its specialist professions team, and the LawInsure brand has been used in the market to describe a Lloyd's-syndicate-underwritten solicitor product placed through Gallagher. Gallagher's proposition draws on its access to Lloyd's capacity, and positions itself as a scheme alternative for firms that want Lloyd's-backed paper. As with any facility, participation depends on the firm profile and the underwriter's appetite in a given renewal cycle.
Marsh is best known in the accountancy market as the exclusive appointed broker of the ICAEW Practising Certificate Scheme. For solicitors, Marsh's professional risks group offers PI placement through group arrangements rather than a professional-body-branded solicitor scheme. Marsh operates as a large placement house with the capacity to structure standard and non-standard solicitor risks; it is often encountered by mid-market and larger firms.
Howden is not a "scheme" in the Law Society-branded sense, but it has become a significant presence in solicitor PI through organic growth and acquisition. Howden's PII team publishes figures indicating that it places a substantial volume of professional indemnity premium in the UK and that a meaningful share of larger law firms uses it as a broker. For firms comparing scheme and non-scheme routes, Howden sits somewhere between the two: a broker-led facility at scale, without the professional-body branding of the Scottish and Northern Irish arrangements.
Beyond the names above, several other brokers operate solicitor PI facilities of varying size, including Lockton (which runs the Scottish Master Policy), JLT-branded teams inside the Marsh McLennan group, and mid-sized independents with sector specialisms. Consolidation among UK brokers has changed the picture over the last decade, and some legacy scheme names now sit inside larger group parents.
Scotland is the outlier in the UK map. Every solicitor in Scottish private practice is required to be covered by the Law Society of Scotland (LSS) Master Policy. The scheme is arranged by Lockton on behalf of the Law Society and it is not optional. There is no menu of scheme brokers in Scotland because the Master Policy is a single arrangement covering the whole profession. Individual firms interact with Lockton and with the participating insurers within that policy.
The compulsory nature of the Master Policy shapes almost every other question about Scottish solicitor PI, including run-off, cross-border practice, and the treatment of consultants. Our dedicated explainer sits at the Law Society of Scotland Master Policy explained.
Northern Ireland operates a comparable Master Policy through the Law Society of Northern Ireland (LSNI). Like the Scottish scheme it is compulsory for private-practice solicitors and is arranged through appointed brokers on behalf of the Society. The practical effect is similar: the scheme sets the terms and the participating insurers are drawn from a defined panel. Firms with cross-border practice will find that coordination between the LSNI Master Policy, the LSS Master Policy, and any E&W arrangement requires careful handling.
The choice between a scheme route and a non-scheme (or specialist broker) route is not usually a binary. It depends on how closely the firm's profile fits the scheme's target segment, on the work mix, and on the service model the firm wants.
A scheme route often suits firms whose profile is squarely inside the scheme's default assumptions: a partner count and firm size within the scheme's usual range, a work mix that sits inside the standard risk classes, a claims record that presents no unusual pattern, and no requirement for bespoke wording amendments. Firms in this position benefit from the volume pricing that scheme facilities negotiate and from the standardisation of the annual renewal cycle.
A non-scheme route tends to fit firms that fall outside the scheme's default profile. Common examples include sole practitioners and very small firms that sit below a scheme's partner minimum, firms whose work mix includes higher-severity practice areas the scheme prices generically, firms with claims histories that would attract loading in the scheme facility but can be re-presented individually, cross-border practices, firms that want individually negotiated wording amendments, and principals who value a named broker with continuity of contact.
A non-scheme route does not mean a lesser route. It means the placement is individually negotiated against the qualifying-insurer market, rather than fed into a standardised facility. For firms that fit the scheme profile the two routes may produce similar outcomes; for firms that do not, the individual placement often produces a materially different result.
One of the most misunderstood points is that the SRA does not distinguish between scheme and non-scheme routes. The Minimum Terms and Conditions (MTC) apply to every policy placed for a firm in England and Wales, and every participating insurer is required to write cover that meets those terms. The SRA maintains a public list of participating insurers, and the number of signed entities changes from year to year (as of the 2025-2026 indemnity period the list stood at around 52 entities; firms should check the current SRA publication for the definitive number).
The choice of scheme or non-scheme broker is a commercial choice, not a regulatory one. Firms have freedom of broker choice, and the regulatory obligation to place MTC-compliant cover with a participating insurer is satisfied whichever route is used. Our page on SRA Minimum Terms and Conditions covers the detail.
Can a firm get quotes from more than one scheme broker? In principle yes, but scheme facilities rarely undercut each other on identical risks. The wording and the panel are relatively stable, and pricing is calibrated to the segment rather than to the individual account. Where firms do get materially different quotes, it is often because the risk profile fits one facility's appetite more comfortably than another's.
Can a firm use a non-scheme broker even if it is eligible for a scheme? Yes. Freedom of broker choice is the regulator's default position. Eligibility for a scheme is a commercial gate on the broker's side, not a regulatory constraint on the firm's side.
Are scheme brokers cheaper? It depends. For a firm that sits neatly inside a scheme's target segment, scheme volume pricing can produce a competitive result. For a firm that does not, an individually placed submission can produce a lower premium, better terms, or both. Pricing outcomes are firm-specific.
Scheme routes remain the dominant channel for typical mid-sized firms in England and Wales, and the Scottish and Northern Irish Master Policies continue to cover their private-practice populations by regulation. Non-scheme routes have grown in visibility for firms outside scheme profiles and for firms that value named-broker service. The SRA participating insurer list has been broadly stable through 2025 and 2026. Individual scheme facilities usually deal with a small number of mainstream underwriters, whereas the wider qualifying-insurer market accessible through non-scheme brokers is larger.
Apex Insurance Brokers is a non-scheme specialist route. The firm is directly authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority (firm reference number 724952) and is led by a named director, Matthew Bartlett, who holds SMF3 (Executive Director), SMF16 (Compliance Oversight), and SMF17 (Money Laundering Reporting Officer) approvals. Solicitor PI placements are handled as individual submissions to the qualifying-insurer market rather than through a branded scheme facility. Apex is not a member of any Law Society-branded arrangement in England, Scotland, or Northern Ireland, and does not present itself as one.
The route suits firms that fall outside scheme partner minimums, firms with atypical work mixes or claims histories, cross-border practices, and principals who want continuity of contact with the same named broker at renewal, mid-term and at claim. Firms that fit a scheme profile squarely may find scheme pricing hard to beat; firms that do not usually see the practical value of an individually negotiated placement.
The scheme-versus-specialist question is covered in more depth at scheme broker versus specialist broker, and the non-scheme route for smaller firms is covered at PI insurance for non-scheme solicitors firms.
The most commonly encountered names are Griffiths and Armour (part of Aon), Gallagher (including the LawInsure Lloyd's-syndicate product), Marsh and the wider Marsh McLennan group, and Howden. Several other brokers run solicitor PI facilities of varying scale. None of these is a compulsory scheme in the Scottish or Northern Irish sense; they are broker-led facilities that firms may or may not use.
No. In England and Wales the SRA sets the Minimum Terms and Conditions and requires cover to be placed with a participating insurer, but it does not require any particular broker or facility. Freedom of broker choice is the default. In Scotland and Northern Ireland the Master Policies are compulsory but they cover the whole profession; they are not "brokers" that firms choose between.
The LSS Master Policy is a regulatory arrangement covering every solicitor in Scottish private practice. It is not optional and firms do not shop between scheme brokers. English scheme facilities are commercial arrangements that firms choose to use; they are one route among several, not the only route.
Yes. It is common at renewal for a firm to obtain a scheme facility quote and one or more non-scheme individually placed quotes to compare the terms and pricing. Coordination matters: insurers do not welcome being approached by more than one broker for the same risk in the same renewal cycle, so the firm needs to agree an approach with each broker at the outset.
Partner minimums vary by facility and change over time. Firms below a given minimum are usually directed to alternative routes. The definitive answer for any given facility is a matter for direct enquiry with the broker.
No. Each facility typically has its own panel of participating insurers, drawn from the SRA participating insurer list. The panels overlap because the participating insurer market is not large, but the composition and the lead underwriter differ by facility. This is one reason scheme and non-scheme quotes can produce different outcomes on the same risk.
For the wider picture on solicitor PI, our long-form guide is at the ultimate UK solicitors PI guide 2026. For sole practitioners specifically, see professional indemnity insurance for sole-practitioner solicitors. The SRA MTC framework is covered at SRA MTC minimum terms and conditions explained, and the Scottish Master Policy at the Law Society of Scotland Master Policy explained.
Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Firm reference number 724952.