It has been a busy day at the LSC website news sections - Civil and Criminal including a pilot in appointment making via the CLA Helpline and some guidance on swapping Duty Solicitor rotas.
You might want to have a look at the other items as well.
I am on a short break from Peer Review related activity, assisting a couple of firms with current bid round applications for new Civil contracts. I am left wondering if this weight of paper is absoloutly necessary - I am sure there is a good (legal) reason why this is the case.
Andy has not been quite so lucky and so his perambulations in this area continue as will Steves on return next Monday. Meanwhile I have another recent report in front of me which, in comparison to others on file, is clearly more critical than others adjudged Cat 3. Perhaps the standard is settling at a more reasonable level.
Would you like work for 10 months with a 6 figure recoupment figure hanging over you head? Of course not, although some of you will have endured the experience and the pressure of trying to resolve a Contract Compliance rating. Hopefully this is now a thing of the past (we have only 2, 5 figure potential recoupments outstanding now).
Today once again demonstrated the total inadequacy of this process properly to reflect the cost and contract compliance of firms. Our experience demonstrates a 4 out of 5 failure to get the initial categorisation correct. This was yet another Cat 2 rating reduced to Cat 1 on representations (i.e. before a Cost Committee hearing) and whilst the costs involved in this to the firm are insignificant compared to the recoupment risk, they are still not insubstantial. There is no real prospect of getting these back.
Whilst I am clearly not as relieved as the Partner I have just spoken to, no longer having some responsibility for a firm threatening sum is a source of great comfort.
This LSC subscription service seems like a good idea. (Lets hope it works).
Andy is working on Peer Review today, I am working on Peer Review today and Steve is on holiday (its my turn next week). Before I start on a sample of files I have had the chance to have a more detailed read of the last three reports received, before they go in our PR library. Unusually they are all civil - 2 family, one Mental Health - and all category 3 albeit with some reviewer reservations in at least two of the cases. On balance this concurs with the optimistic end of our assessment range however all three could easily achieve a Category 2 score with a minimal amount of change to the basics.
Today I am looking at a sample from a firm becoming nervous about the prospect of the real thing. I bet I can guess the issues I will encounter in advance. (Might confirm this to you later).
On a positive note the recent proposals on BVT suggest a lowering of the required result to Cat. 3 Threshold Competence and certainly these results suggest a less demanding standard that we have previously experienced.
That said there is no reason not to have a try for a higher score.
Me 5
Graham 4
Sandra and Andy Nil
To what do these scores relate you ask?
How many of this years Mercury music prize nominations we own. Any advance on 5?
How you choose a winner out of that lot I know not. Radiohead's "In Rainbows" is probably the best, that said I have listened to it least as it was a download whilst listening to Krauss and Plant the most. In the spirit of this award offering a window of opportunity for slightly unsung heroes I do however hope that one of Friday Song veterans, British Sea Power or Elbow, win. Here are two of their songs, new to this place:
"Tell us what you think of the LSC Manual"
Can we have the Legal Aid Handbook back?
A forced day of inactivity on Monday (same old bad neck) and a full day of training yesterday has lead to it being quiet around here the last two days. That said news has been pretty thin as school holidays kick off. The only item of the aforementioned to emanates form JRS client world is in the negative, a failed Peer Review appeal. This is not likely to cheer anyone up.
With little happening and a further 6 hours on my feet in front of an eager audience tomorrow it may well be quiet here tomorrow too. (I will have a try before I get off to the Metro Centre in the morning).
Steve has gone on holiday and wanted "Here comes the Summer" by the Undertones but looking out of the window that is clearly a lie. Instead here is Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds.
This week I have found the LSC useful, constructive and/ or helpful on 3 occasions and stupid and obstructive only once. Is this just me, an aberration or the shape of things to come. I think I will begin to keep score.
The helpful ones know who the are too!
Someone out there recently asked me "how do I bill a Crown Court case when the defendant absconds?"
Both Andy and my own frail memory cannot remember quite who this was so I hope that this clears it up. To cut to the chase you can now make a claim online (of all things) -
"up to the point in the case that the client absconded, as long as the case fits the claiming rules under the Regulations".
Interim hardship payments are also now available.
We also now know how to report a supplementary Proceedings class claim when the standard fee has changed from that previously reported following the arrest of the client.
We reported upon and linked to Derek Hill's recent letter to the new look Gazette.
It only seems fair therefore to link to this reply.
It will not take you long to read the "Route Map" for Criminal Legal Aid. I have to say it is not one you would want to have to rely on when setting out on a long journey into the unknown.
The main area of substance is Best Value Tendering about which there is a separate consultation response.
A staggering 5% of respondents (I mean staggering, I cannot work out which 8 of the 173 who replied might have plumped for that option) chose BVT with 23% for essentially the status quo and 66% wanting something else. An equally staggering 6% favour a roll out of the Public Defenders Service.
So 95% reject BVT.
Have a guess what we are going to get?
Have my head down preparing course notes today plus the Halifax end of the operation has been struck down by a mystery virus. Blogging is unfortunately not top priority therefore.
Did however spot this re the Leicester CLAC. The involvement of non Legal agency A4e is something on which we have commented before and is now a reality.
Hope to have something of interest to those of you are involved in cases with large amounts of paper evidence tomorrow.
The LSC, in the form of the South Tyneside Business Delivery Center, have issued an "Urgent Fax Protocol" with which you may well want to become familiar.
Let us know how the process of getting an AC (authorisation code) works out.
The possible reworking of the VHCC scheme remains under consideration as this update from the Bar Council indicates. The optimistic deadline for this, of July 8th, has now passed and is now rescheduled for September. It is not clear what the Law Society's view is.
Beyond the scope of the present dispute does anyone else find this a bit unsettling?
"The task of analysing the data has turned out to be unforeseeably complex, in particular the task of matching Court and LSC data."
Good band practice session last night, it is remarkable how much we remember when we have long layoffs. We are opening up next time out with and acoustic version of this:
For those of a nervous disposition I can confirm that neither of us will be dressing like the lead singer on the 29th.
P.S. Watch to the end and you will see it is "performance" on a programme called Marc (Bolan) of which I have only very hazy recollections.
The Press Release accompanying the announcement of the new civil bid round begins as follows:
"People facing problems like homelessness or domestic abuse will have better access to legal aid, Legal Services Commission (LSC) announced today, following its decision to buy at least 40,000 extra cases of face-to-face civil legal aid".
I know about, and have trained on, the transformation of the LSC into a procurement agency but surely the use of "buy" rather than "fund" is inappropriate. How do you "buy" a case? It does demonstrate a corporate attitude however and one we will need to get used to.
The other factor which strikes me is a further twist in the Social Welfare law saga. Preference in bidding is now to be given to those with multiple franchises. I spoke to at least 2 firms yesterday who have voluntarily given up such contracts, under a degree of arm twisting from their Account Managers, over the years. What is more tolerance work as an avenue into these areas has also been largely closed off. Add to that the professed move to CLACs (we have a client who may lose their SWL category if they do not sub contract for the CLAC) and we have a snaking development of policy in which firms struggle cope with. Sighs.
This is too dry for a Friday isn't it?
As previously discussed a round of Civil bids has just been launched. These appear to cover most of the UK so there are likely to be opportunities to expand for most firms in priority categories or sub-categories e.g. domestic violence work in the Family category.
The deadline is 4pm on Thursday 7 August 2008 so get your skates on. If you are looking for a hand from JRS give us as much advance notice as possible.
Typically having mentioned Peer Review yesterday we have had a rush of clients in receipt of sample requests. Whilst we regularly work with quite a few firms this is not a representative sample of legal aid practitioners over the UK and we have a significant northern geographical bias. It is not therefore possible to gauge if this is a general or regional phenomenon. It is however not limited to Crime as a variety of civil categories are involved. This suggest that a process not simply related to Best Value Tendering (which is put back to 2013 in civil categories in any event). Let us know any non northern experiences.
For anyone vaguely interested, and in the area, slow time mondays are playing live in trendy Yarm (but in the "old blokes pub" ) on the 29th of this month.
Don't forget these next two training courses and Septembers tour. I am working on the former today and, though I say it myself, it is pretty good.
There will also be an interesting (could not quite bring myself to say "exciting") initiative for later in the Autumn so watch this space.
Not covered Peer Review in a while it does however continue to rumble away in the background. We were shaken awake on the issue yesterday with a result which suggests we are getting pretty sharp with our informal assessments. Our view was that these files were a 4, they thankfully got 3, but the reviewer added a heavy caveat - this was a very borderline decision and implied that benefit of the doubt had been applied in favour of the firm.
Wondering how your files will fare? Give us a ring.
We are always happy put the LSC's view on this site. This letter from Derek Hill, regarding applications to renew CDS contracts, also allows us to show you the newly designed Gazette website (you will have seen the change to the magazine no doubt).
You have probably guessed that I am back from my short break to Barcelona. This meant that I missed the Criminal Justice which I mentioned here.
Can anyone tell me if it is worth watching on BBC i Player?
Here is some clarification regarding the "logging" of cases with the DSCC. The most significant factor seems to be that "48 hours" means that and not “two working days”. One presumes that the clock starts from the date of the PACE attendance.
It goes on to state that it is only in cases where you are legitimately instructed by the client or his/her family and not when you determine that more than one standard fee is payable. Again I presume that direct client instructions also includes legitimate "transfers" from other firms.
If you read it differently let me know.
Andy Bean writes:
After a long search by many, Sandra (Indiana Jones) Ozturk has finally unearthed the newly released Legal Help & Graduated Fee Rates for cases started on or after 1st July from the LSC's website: Download file (right-click the link and 'save target as' to save onto your PC).
Our Civil Handouts will be updated and available on here soon - to order your (free) shiny laminated version(s) please send an email to us: jrs@we-are-jrs.co.uk with your postal address.
Andy Bean writes:
CIVIL/FAMILY
Please note that from 1st July any Legal Help matters started will be subject to the relevant rate/fee increases of 2%, as per the April 2008 Agreement with the Law Society and MoJ following the United Contract JR Ruling last year.
Hopefully you should have received the relevant updates from your software suppliers .
We are in the process of updating our laminated handouts and these will be available shortly.
CRIME
The new CDS6 Wizard is now finalised and will be released from 21st July 2008 (after June's submission is sent) in order to avoid any confusion. Please email our office: jrs@we-are-jrs.co.uk stating if you require the 'Carter' version and please also specify if you do need it before 21st July.
As always, if you have any questions regarding this or any Legal Aid matters, please call our free JRS Advice Line mobile numbers (top left).