I don't have the time to provide a rounded critique of the CDS BVT consultation today. As ever this attempt to impose an alternative , artificial "market solution" on the existing and real one, feels clumsy and contrived. (A footnote comparing the proposals to G3 telecom licences going some way to evidence this contention).

Some of the language used however gives a feel for the general direction - "optimise business structures", "suicide bids", "descending clock auction", "online bidding window" etc. Positively you will no longer have the hassle of claiming travel and waiting (if outside a Carter SF zone) similarly annual file review claims. You can also sleep soundly knowing the PDS will not have to bid but will get BVT contracts automatically.

Manchester or Avon firms wanting an early chat should pick up the phone.

I wanted to put something from the Decemberists new album, Hazards of Love, on today but there are no proper videos just those things American kids do involving some film of their own with the song as backing track. Or ones with just the picture of the cover and the music in the background. Neither of which I like very much.

As I also bought Lyle Lovett's most recent CD yesterday so here is one of his classics from the excellent album Pontiac -

The future of the CDS scheme is announced.

Not much fun for people in Avon & Somerset or Greater Manchester. More detail next week when I have had a chance to read it.

UPDATE

One word - "Price Drop TV" or "CDS Under the Hammer"

Have come across this Law Society survey of practitioners thoughts on the proposed new family fee scheme. You don't need to read it you can guess the response.

Hat Tip - AnonMike in the comments

Trained on Peer Review yesterday afternoon, received a copy of a clients Category 2, "Competence Plus", report this morning. London bus type thing.

It is still going on you know!

Another CCA appeal about to go - one of the ones dealing with the "mandatory" DSCC reference number recording issue. Will keep you informed.

Am I the only one who thought of the Porridge episode involving a match between the cons and Prison Officers when reading this invite to the LSC 60th Anniversary footy tournament.

Have you received a Family Fees impact assessment from the LSC this morning? If not one may well be in the post. They are a "finger in the wind" comparison of your recent claims patterns against the proposed new fee scheme. The one Andy has seen this morning shows the firm making more out of the scheme than previously.

We would be interested in your experiences especially if yours shows you losing out.

Am trapped at home office by broken things (car, fridge and dog). The jobs I have on my list for today all need me to be in the office. I have done some oddments and then came across the newly updated guide to Crime Peer Review success, which I have given a quick scan. I have the original printed out at the main office and will do a bit of a comparison later in the week. IN the meantime it does, from recollection, seem a bit more comprehensive than the first version. You might want to have a read.

PS Sorry about no Friday song last week but was on holiday - but also ended up dealing with broken things.

Further to this post on the proposed Family Advocacy Scheme Tim Collins at No. 6 is seeking some input from solicitors to their planned consultation response.

If you have the time to drop him a reply to this short questionnaire he would be very grateful.

The photo accompanying this story is much smaller that the one on the actual magazine which we thought made him look a little like The Joker. This is a larger one clearly taken just before or after the Gazette's snap.

His message, if you have not read it is a bleak one, so lets have a caption competition.

Today's song has been on here before and whilst I occasionally repeat-post artists, I avoid the same song. So what exceptional circumstance, worthy of 100% enhancement, has lead to this break with standard protocols?

I heard Annie Lennox's version of it on the radio yesterday and it is the most ill-conceived, inappropriate and poorly executed cover I have ever heard.

This is how it should be done:

I have previously agreed with Jimmy Nesbit that this should be the National Anthem. If it involves self-selected "divas" singing it before international sports event I retract that suggestion.

No need to rush your responses to the family fees consultation now - you have until the 3rd April.

For those interested here are some of the thoughts of the Bar via our friends at No 6 in Leeds.

After a hopeful start to the LSC on-line billing system one of our retained clients has spotted a problem when reporting Stand Alone Petitioner Divorce matters ("Moon Brick") under code FPL10.
 
It seems that if the staged reached code is not recorded as FD then only an FPL01 £96 SF will be credited. We understand that the LSC have had numerous calls about this now that suppliers via on-line billing can see exactly what the system allowing.
 
We also believe that this could be a problem with Level 2 claims for Public Law Matters i.e. FPC02 and FPC03 if FC is not recorded in the the stage reached section.
 
The most concerning point is that the on-line system does not show this as an error but will process it even if the LSC's bulkload spread sheet is used. Also we wonder if this has been occurring over the last twelve months when suppliers have been e-mailing their submissions.

Watch this space and if you have any concerns and want to discuss this further then please do not hesitate to contact us.

We have notification of our first A2 categorisation in Crime. As anticipated in this previous post failure to record DSCC reference number" which has lead to the 3+ nil assessments. I have, again, re-read the section of contract the LSC have referred us to, B 1.1.13, but cannot see this as a mandatory requirement with a cost reduction penalty. Is this more "makeitupaswegoalongery"?

Another training mini tour kicks off today - as I am covering the Family Advocacy Scheme so is there the possibility of a bus load of angry, uninvited Barristers turning up?

As ever, and right on cue, a bunch of time limited appeals have dropped on the door mat including another one by video link tomorrow pm. Don't like that I have to say but saves a lengthy trip to London on the other hand.

Andy helped a firm with an LF1 recently. I will spare you the details but the firm were expecting a significant payment on what was quite a paper heavy case. We thought the page count submitted might be a little high but nonetheless we were hoping for a 5 figure pay out. Anyone care to guess the final payment and the "page count" on which this was based? If so chose to "continue reading" below.

On a more positive note Mr Keogh tells me that a new, agreed page count form is close to agreement and issue - hopefully to resolve problems of this sort.

The bill was assessed at £282.59 the page count "Nil as per Crown Court"

Needless to say Elbow were magnificent last night but, as I am constantly reminded, I cannot simply post their stuff here every Friday. Instead here is a number from the support act.

Now I often miss the "special guests" as we now have to call them - we eat too late, fancy a pint and so forth. Well we got away early last night and our very good Chinese, with SP junior, was speedy plus I was driving so little need to hang around in the bar. Consequently we got to see the last half of the set by The Acorn which finished with this:

Back to pub rock tonight with 'Boro's finest The Rhythm Method - Dr Browns 9pm.

All three of us seem to be involved in and around FFCCA issues today. It is a subject we have discussed before. In that link there is a helpful summery of the key question and how to avoid a nil assessment - which is central to audit success.

These questions however primarily relate to civil files and I cannot find a CDS equivalent - unless some hawk eyed reader knows better. It seems to me, having advised a number of firms that the key risk points are as follows:

Police Station

Is the work in scope and the Sufficient Benefit Test met?
Is the adviser properly accredited as per the grid at UCC B 1.1.8(2)? (Page 293 of volume 4)
Was CDS 1&2 work, such as DSS interviews, wrongly claimed as a SF?
Is the DSCC number recorded? (although there is no contractual requirement for this, justifying a nil assessment, that I can see)

On Mags cases make sure you have a rep order to file and be careful with pre order and early cover etc.

Beyond that there seems only to be the general risk of "claim splitting" SF claims in both classes though this method of assessment does not seem to be focussed on that problem.

Ring regarding any of the above for greater detail or share your experience in the comments.

Did anybody attend the Birmingham Family Fees consultation event? If so can they confirm or refute the following story which has just reached me.

Apparently the Brum Family Bar turned up mob handed, having not reserved any places on the event. A "discussion" followed about their involvement in the event, health and safety concerns being paramount. They were subsequently allowed to participate and then insisted that the agenda be torn up and an open discussion take place as an alternative.

Do I need additional front of house support for our parallel events next week?

Head down over hot course notes for next week this morning. Places still available though Leeds/Bradford is down to the last handful now.