There have been very few, if any, Immigration suppliers who have achieved two consecutive Category 1 contract compliance (CCA) outcomes. We know of a firm who has achieved this. These results were obtained in a provincial city with the assessment undertaken by the local Regional Office (RO).

Their third audit, conducted as all now are in London, returned a Cat. 3 and was accompanied by a request for a staggeringly high recoupment.

A successful Internal Review later, the audit redone on the firm's home turf and they were back in Cat. 1.

This of course is only the dust cover summary of a much more interesting and intriguing story. It is a compelling if somewhat unnerving narrative which raises more questions about the conduct of CCAs (especially in Immigration) than it provides answers.

The third running of the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Awards last Thursday went swimmingly. You can read full reports here and here.

Given the unprecedented opportunity this occasion allows for the celebration of legal aid practice it seems churlish to raise even the most minor criticism, but...

It was too hot - how fickle are we regarding the weather in this country?

There were also a low number of nominees from the North. As this is our part of the world you can expect greater exhortation from us, for you to propose your colleagues next year. Start thinking now!

Once again it was a fantastic event and congratulations to the organisers LAPG & Independent Lawyer.

NfP means "not for profit" and is used by the LSC to denote the voluntary sector, civil contractors involved in the CLS. The LSCs own attitude to making a profit has become apparent in recent days.

Under the tailored fixed fee scheme firms have differing options when the statutory charge applies. Most significantly, if the overall cost of the case is higher than the fixed fee, and the charge applies, you can report it as zero and retain the full costs of the case from the client.

What, however, if you are reporting the case in conjunction with a certificated matter and the stat. charge is to be enforced later on the sale of property? This question was put to us last week. The response two different firms in two different regions got from the LSC is as follows:

They will recover the entire costs claimed from the client through the stat. charge but only pay you the fixed fee -- thus making a tidy profit. That's right they will charge the client more than they are paying you! One does wonder if this can be lawful?

Add your thoughts in the comments box below.

Simon is back out on the training circuit. This tour involves a practitioners guide to successful "Peer Review" and a definitive guide to "What every good Supervisor should know". Both topics are central to the new relationship with the LSC. Confirmed dates are:

LEEDS 19 JULY 2005
MANCHESTER 21 JULY 2005
GATESHEAD 26 JULY 2005
NOTTINGHAM 28 JULY 2005

For further information contact Sandra on 01642 225554

If you've not come across this type of site before it is a weblog (or blog as they are more commonly known). This is the latest JRS venture and one we hope it will become a valuable resource and a "favourite" you visit as a matter of routine.

The primary aim is to allow us regularly to communicate our experience of working with legal aid practitioners. We come across a story most days which is likely to be of interest to someone out there. We would like this communication to be reciprocal and the site to be a place where information is exchanged.

Those of you who know us will also be aware are not without opinions regarding the publicly funded scheme. We hope that this will become a forum where lively debate of current issues takes place. Join in -- either via the comments box or by submitting an article of your own to "post". The comments boxes are open to all.

Add the address to your favourites or bookmarks and get involved.