Is WIP or disbursement funding available for solicitors, and in what scenarios?

Short answer: yes—specialist funders do provide WIP and disbursement funding to UK solicitors, typically for contingent-fee litigation and cash‑intensive case types

Work-in-progress (WIP) funding and disbursement funding are available to SRA-regulated law firms via niche lenders and litigation finance providers. They are most commonly used by practices handling conditional fee agreements (CFAs), damages-based agreements (DBAs), clinical negligence, personal injury, group actions, and other matters where fees are realised on conclusion. For conveyancing, corporate, commercial, and private client practices, alternative facilities such as fee or invoice finance, overdrafts, and revolving credit can sometimes be more suitable.

Understanding WIP funding for solicitors—what it is and when it’s used

WIP funding enables a law firm to draw down capital secured against its current, unbilled work on portfolios of eligible cases. It is designed to shorten lock‑up, smooth cash flow, and fund growth while cases progress towards settlement. Facilities are often tailored to the firm’s case mix, track record, and data quality.

WIP funding is most often used by litigation and claimant firms where revenue is contingent and case durations are longer. Typical examples include clinical negligence, personal injury, financial mis‑selling, housing disrepair, and group litigation. Some commercial litigation practices using partial or full contingency arrangements may also qualify.

It is less commonly applied to transactional work where fees are billed regularly or at completion. For those practices, fee advance, invoice finance against billed time, or a revolving credit line can be more cost‑effective. The aim is to align funding with the cash‑conversion profile of the underlying work.

How WIP funding is structured

Facilities are usually structured as a revolving line secured against a ring‑fenced portfolio of cases. Advance rates reflect case strength, stage, diversification, after‑the‑event (ATE) insurance, and historic recovery performance.

Pricing is generally a monthly interest rate plus arrangement and monitoring fees, with covenants linked to portfolio metrics. Security can include a debenture, assignment of case proceeds, fixed and floating charges, and in some instances a limited personal guarantee from partners or directors.

Well-run firms with robust case management and strong ATE coverage typically achieve higher advance rates. Funders place significant weight on MI quality, case vetting processes, and the firm’s settlement history.

Disbursement funding—covering hard costs like experts, court fees and searches

Disbursement funding supports the third‑party costs necessary to run cases to conclusion. Common disbursements include medical and expert reports, court and counsel fees, investigations, and for conveyancers, search packs and Land Registry fees.

Facilities can be case‑specific or portfolio‑based, with drawdowns aligned to documented disbursement needs. Many funders require ATE insurance on eligible litigation to mitigate adverse cost risks and improve recoverability prospects.

Two broad models exist—recourse and non‑recourse. Under recourse, the firm remains responsible for repayment even if a case does not succeed, whereas non‑recourse may allow the funder to bear loss on unsuccessful claims in exchange for higher pricing or participation in recoveries.

• Best-fit scenarios include clinical negligence and PI claims with high upfront expert costs.
• Group actions where case aggregation creates large, staged disbursement needs also fit well.
• For conveyancers, specialist providers can offer search and outlay accounts to ease daily cash demands.

Some firms combine WIP and disbursement funding to fully cover work and hard costs, particularly in long‑tail litigation. Others layer disbursement funding alongside a bank overdraft or practice loan so that each facility covers the costs it is best suited to finance.

Where a firm does legal aid work, there are specialist funders for LAA receivables and cash‑flow bridging. This is distinct from WIP/disbursement funding, and eligibility depends on the nature and predictability of payments from the Legal Aid Agency.

Eligibility, costs, security, and compliance considerations

Funders typically work with UK SRA‑regulated law firms structured as limited companies, LLPs, or partnerships. A provable track record in the relevant case types, stable leadership, and clean regulatory history are key.

Core eligibility factors include case inventory quality, diversification by defendant and case category, case stage distribution, and recovery ratios. Good MI, from-file audit trails, and integrated case management systems help expedite underwriting.

Expected documents usually include recent management accounts, statutory accounts, aged WIP and debtor reports, case pipeline analysis, settlement statistics, ATE policy schedules, PII details, and SRA Accounts Rules compliance evidence. Lenders may request sample file reviews or counsel opinions for complex portfolios.

• Costs: pricing reflects risk, term, and portfolio performance, usually interest plus fees.
• Security: a debenture, assignment of proceeds, and possibly limited personal guarantees may be requested.
• Covenants: reporting on case settlements, ATE cover, and concentration limits is common.

Compliance is paramount. Client money must remain segregated in line with SRA Accounts Rules, and funders will structure facilities to respect ring‑fencing obligations. Marketing and financial promotions should be clear, fair and not misleading, and avoid implying guaranteed outcomes.

If your firm is considering such facilities, it can be prudent to take independent legal and tax advice. Ensure any funding aligns with your professional obligations, PI insurance terms, and ethical duties to clients. Transparent communication with clients regarding costs and funding arrangements remains essential.

How to choose between WIP, disbursement funding, and alternatives

Match funding to cash‑flow timing. If revenue is predominantly realised at settlement, WIP funding can align with that profile, especially for CFA/DBA work.

If your main pain point is paying experts and court fees ahead of recoveries, disbursement funding may be the most precise fix. For practices with steady billing, legal invoice finance or an overdraft may be simpler and cheaper.

Other options include professional practice loans for tax or PII, VAT loans to smooth periodic liabilities, and asset finance for equipment and IT. Commercial charge cards with controlled limits can also help with day‑to‑day outlays.

1. Map your lock‑up: WIP days plus debtor days by department.
2. Identify pinch points: expert fees, court fees, or payroll growth.
3. Select the instrument that best mirrors these timings and risks.

Best Business Loans helps UK firms compare these options quickly and match with relevant providers. We do not lend directly, but our AI‑driven platform introduces you to specialist lenders and brokers for your case mix and sector.

To explore WIP or disbursement funding alongside other solicitor‑focused options, see our guide to solicitors business finance. Submit a Quick Quote to get matched for an eligibility check with no obligation.

Practical scenarios, key takeaways, and next steps

A clinical negligence firm with rising expert costs may use disbursement funding to maintain momentum while cases mature. When combined with a modest WIP facility, growth can be funded without over‑reliance on partners’ capital.

A PI practice expanding marketing can deploy WIP funding to bridge the time between case acquisition and settlement. Portfolio monitoring and ATE coverage help maintain healthy advance rates.

A conveyancing practice facing seasonal spikes may favour search and disbursement accounts alongside an overdraft. If billed fees accumulate, a fee‑advance facility can accelerate cash conversion.

• WIP funding: best for contingent‑fee litigation with predictable settlement pipelines.
• Disbursement funding: best for high upfront third‑party costs such as experts and court fees.
• Alternatives: invoice finance for billed fees, overdrafts for short gaps, practice loans for tax/PII.

Next steps are straightforward. Share your firm profile via our Quick Quote form, outline your case mix, and indicate whether you need WIP, disbursement support, or both.

Our system will match you with providers actively funding UK solicitors. You stay in control—review offers, compare terms, and proceed only if it suits your goals and risk appetite.

Important information and compliance notice

Best Business Loans is an independent introducer and does not provide loans or credit directly. Any funding is subject to status, underwriting, affordability, and the provider’s terms and conditions.

Fees, interest, security, and covenants may apply, and early repayment charges might be payable depending on the agreement. Information on this page is for UK businesses only, does not constitute advice, and should not be relied upon as a recommendation.

Consider independent legal, tax, and financial advice before entering any agreement. Always ensure compliance with SRA Accounts Rules and client‑care obligations when arranging finance.

Ready to explore your options? Complete a Quick Quote to check potential eligibility for WIP or disbursement funding and compare suitable providers. Fast, secure, and no obligation.

Updated: October 2025