Build, buy or connect: choosing practice software without regret

A matter is opened in the case management system. Time is recorded there, or in a separate timer. Bills go out from an accounts package, and someone keeps a spreadsheet so the two can be checked against each other at month end. Nobody designed this. It grew one sensible decision at a time.

Why does a patched-together system matter for a regulated firm?

Because the records it produces are the ones you are required to keep. It is tempting to see the problem as untidiness. For a regulated firm it is more than that.

The SRA Accounts Rules require you to keep and maintain “accurate, contemporaneous, and chronological records” of client money under rule 8.1, and to reconcile every client account at least every five weeks under rule 8.3, matching the bank statement balance with the cash book balance and the client ledger total. When the figures that feed those records pass through a spreadsheet that one person maintains, the reconciliation depends on that person and that spreadsheet.

So the scrutiny of these records is increasing on a known timetable, which is a reason to deal with the plumbing now rather than in the week an accountant asks for it.

How do you find out what the workarounds actually cost?

Before you look at any product, find out where the time goes. For two weeks, ask everyone who handles matters, time or bills to note each time they copy information from one place to another by hand: re-typing client details, exporting time entries, updating a tracker, checking one total against another. For each entry, record what was moved, from where to where, who did it and roughly how long it took.

At the end, add the hours up and multiply them by what that time costs the firm. That gives you an annual figure from your own staff and rates, not a vendor’s brochure, to set against any licence fee, integration quote or development estimate.

Then mark the entries that touch client money or personal data. These need attention even if they take only a few minutes, because an error there is a breach risk as well as wasted time.

The pattern in the log usually points to the answer.

When should a firm buy legal practice management software?

Buying is the right answer when most of the workarounds exist because your core case management system lacks something that is standard in the market, such as integrated time recording, client account ledgers or document assembly. If your process is broadly how other firms of your size work, a mature product will usually handle it better than anything you could connect or build, and its supplier will keep it current as rules change.

The questions that matter most are about data and exit, not features:

Moving to a new system also means migrating client and ledger data. If the migration involves a new kind of processing that is likely to result in a high risk to individuals, the ICO’s guidance on when a DPIA is needed says you must carry one out first.

When should a firm connect the systems it already has?

Connecting is the right answer when the systems you have are good at their own jobs and the waste is in the gap between them. The log will show this as the same information re-keyed in the same direction, week after week.

The decision that makes or breaks an integration is which system is the record for each type of information. Client and matter details should live in one place, time in one place and the client ledger in one place. Every other system reads from that record or writes to it through the connection, never through a spreadsheet kept alongside. If two systems can both change the same client balance, you have created a second ledger, and the five-week reconciliation will be the first place you find out.

Before switching a connection on, run it on a copy of real data and reconcile the result in full. Agree who in the firm owns the connection once it is live, because suppliers change their systems, and an integration that fails without warning can leave records incomplete for weeks. The SRA Code of Conduct for Firms requires effective governance structures, arrangements, systems and controls at paragraph 2.1, and requires you to identify, monitor and manage all material risks to your business at paragraph 2.5. A connection that nobody watches is one of those risks.

If the connection sends client data to a new supplier, the same contract and impact assessment questions apply as when buying.

When should a firm build its own?

Rarely, if it is small or mid-sized. Building can make sense when two conditions are both true: the process is something that sets the firm apart, such as a particular way of running high-volume matters or reporting to a specific type of client, and no product handles it without heavy customisation. Even then, build only the part that is distinctive and connect it to established systems for everything else.

Do not build your own client account ledger or billing engine. Legal accounting software is a mature product category, and every rule change would become your development cost rather than your supplier’s.

Building also makes the firm responsible for securing what it builds. Article 32 of the UK GDPR requires security appropriate to the risk, and client files carry a high level of risk. Budget for maintenance, security updates and support for the tool’s whole life, not just the first version. If you cannot name who will look after it in three years’ time, that is a strong reason not to build it.

What should you settle before you sign anything?

Whichever route you choose, three questions are worth answering in writing:

Data protection guidance is being revised across the board following the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, so check the current version of anything you rely on rather than working from an internal note written a year ago.