As the LSC inform us TLS won this afternoon. I have had very many phone calls but have not been able to get anything more substantive, that the above link, to post.

As can be seen from that, how much further this takes us is, as yet, unclear be prepared for our Plan B.

Do away goals count?

(Sorry for the football analogies)

Judgement is now expected tomorrow and indications are that leave to appeal will be granted whichever way it goes. What happens whilst this trundles on is less clear.

HAT TIP

Jonathan Woodhouse

And still no news from London.

Well I am interviewing graduate trainees all day so will not be constantly hovering over TLS or the Gazette website.

The new Family Fee scheme training season starts today.

There will be a webinar, or two, on the subject in the near future, today is in-house. The days of hired hotel conference rooms for training events might be over.

How were the LSC sessions?

We will try, once again, to schedule our Webinar summarising the state of play for the new Civil Contract this Friday.

With the Law Society JR being put back last week, we decided to postpone this "live news" summary to a more appropriate date.

Hopefully we will have something substantive to relay to delegates this time.

There is a whole big thing going on involving kids, presumably influenced by their parents record collections, playing folky/country style music. If you come here most recent Fridays you will have picked up on this.

Witnessed more of this last night with the very good "Chased by Wolves" who I much preferred to the slightly irritating headliner "Erland and the Carnival". You can google and Myspace them if interested.

There is nothing good enough on YouTube of the former. Here however are the band we first saw them with - who are from Thornaby on Tees who are not a good musicians but are more commercial;

Still nothing from the Manics to embed but the new album is great.

Quango cuts full list of bodies under review

HAT TIP

Nigel - again! (Get some work done)

From the Gazette;

Lord Justice Moses, hearing the case with Lord Justice Beatson, said:

‘Even firms that I’ve heard of have been up in arms about it, so that’s an indication that something has gone wrong.’

HAT TIP
Nigel

The inactivity here is once again occasioned by early morning departures to field work assignments - but not for much longer!!

Tuesday saw me involved in the ever-present Financial Stewardship process. Why is there such a degree of divergence in the level of flexibility, common sense and even basic interpersonal skills displayed by RMs?

And how about this;

A Petitioner Divorce claim was called for verification. This FPL10 claim was made on the instruction of the Specialist Cost assessment team after rejecting the exceptional claim on a basic Level 1, FPL01. The LSC therefore rejected a claim of over 3 X £94 in favour of the £162 Petitioner Divorce ("moon brick") alternative. This on the basis that the Petition had been drafted. The firm had relied on this guidance on all subsequent petition drafted claims. As you will no doubt know "drafted" is insufficient for the RMs.

Yesterday Dean and I went to look at some of the best Crime files we have seen in ages and which are bound to a Peer Reviewer this morning. We predict a definite Category 2 but possibly a 1. Come back in 4 months time to see the result and test our hypothesis that they are deliberately marking much harder at the moment.

On a cold, grey Teesside morning in January 1994 we sat nervously awaiting our first ever Franchise audit. In the circumstances, complete uncertainty about the nature of the process, it passed off not too badly with the horror of receiving "major" non-compliances being thoroughly explained by our new "Liaison Manager"

I next met this Liaison Manager, Dean Grindle, as a colleague, during my short stay at the LAB, 2 years later. (This might have lasted longer had my self-engineered transfer to the Newcastle Office not been vetoed by my Area Manager).

Dean is, as of this morning, once again a colleague this time at JRS. As you can probably imagine this is not without a huge sigh of relief on our part given current work loads. We are also absolutely delighted to be able to add such a depth of knowledge and experience to the team.

This Friday's Webinar is another "open ended" topic designed to bring you an up to the moment briefing on developments with regard to Civil Procurement. In the week in which the Law Societies JR of the process will be heard and determined we aim to be able to provide some immediate analysis and guidance as well as to distill our experience of the last round into some advice as to the future. Also we do not want to start on other pressing topics, Family Fee Scheme, until there is greater clarity as to the future.

Should be an interesting session

I wanted to post this by the Manics as today's Friday song but they too have disabled embedding. Follow the link and you will get them, back and on form! - don't think I can get to any of the tour dates however which is a major shame as British Sea Power are supporting.

Instead here is Robert Plant in his latest journey into Americana with his Band of Joy, I intend to pick this up next time I am in HMV

Nightmare return journey from London yesterday - no wifi, broke glasses, cricked neck typing, massive walk through Darlington Station, car park ticket in different jacket which was in my case, nearly lost broken glasses, nervous drive home. And the cost of bloody train tickets!

Cheered somewhat this morning by a highly unexpected "appeal" victory though an expected "generic" result has since soured the mood.

We will also have some exciting news on Monday so watch this space.

Yesterday, like most days, I had a number of conversations with uniformly unhappy lawyers. Reflecting on this I cannot remember a time of greater tension between the LSC and the profession. In relation to my current caseload little of this has to do with civil procurement and a lot to do with the other areas of possible friction. I certainly cannot remember a time and place where I had 4 distinct and different "termination" issues all at one time - although memory does fail.

This may well be a unrepresentative sample from which it is not possible to extrapolate any serious findings. As, however, the Commission can even alienate its successful bidders, vital to Family delivery if they are successful next week, it does have the feel of an all time low. The previous low water mark was at the time of the "vote of no confidence" in the LSC, even then I cannot remember this degree of all-round hostility. From our perspective the evidence from the inflexibility decision making and even the very tone of interaction bears this out.

The days of the Preferred Supplier Scheme, daft though this might have been, with its explicit admission of a pending irretrievable breakdown in the relationship now seems like a golden era.

Verification of new Crime Contracts has begun with predictable results - threats of termination. This, of course, is on the back of a request for a "quick, friendly visit" to see how you are getting along - not an audit, verification day or any more accurate description of the event.

Please give us a ring before you enter into this particular hornets nest.

A Court of Appeal judgement.

We have a couple more successful appeals in. Today's did not contain an NMS allocation, we are to be told at some unspecified date. I am not sure if this is because of the JR but one imagines so given the early successes confirmed that the LSC did indeed have a secret stash of NMS, exactly for this purpose. Certain PAs are now well over supplied, in one case we know of by 25% over previous supply.

These 2 results will certainly have a similar effect in their respective PAs.

On the JR this is news, especially the bit about contract extensions in all categories, not just Family. The impact of this thinking on any successful outcome for TLS is very interesting.

This Friday the Webinar session looks at Quality Assurance and specifically the post February requirements regarding on-going SQM assessment. At this point the LSC are "out sourcing" their auditing function at a cost to all Legal Aid suppliers.

We will also consider the alternative - Lexcel accreditation and will place both in the context of other continuing audit and assessment mechanisms.

This is an essential course for you "Contract Liaison Manager" or Franchise Rep as s/he is more likely to be known.

Not done much new stuff on a Friday for a while, though with albums out form Robert Plant, The Manics, KT Tunstall and others this month there may well be more. I have also just got Mercury winners, "the xx", album on spec so maybe that next week, if it is any good.

Laura Marling is a new(ish) artist who has twice been Mercury nominated. She has disabled embedding on all the new album videos so here is a clip from Jools;

If, as is looking increasingly likely, the LSC fail to defend the procurement round at Court they are going to be searching for a Plan B. I offer this one for free.

Find the largest supermarket in each procurement area. Secrete the NMS around the store. Allow each bidding firm one trolley and one minute to play Legal Aid supermarket sweep.

You can't deny it is equally as rational as the current process and much easier for the LSC to get right.

I thought I had hit rock bottom regarding Civil procurement. Thought it impossible that there could be anything worse than we have experienced to date. Thought it a certainty, given the time taken, that appeals would be so carefully considered that no more mistakes would be made. Now this;

Appeal point successful, an additional 5 points awarded for Panel membership, as claimed, and originally mismarked by the LSC.

The 5 points originally, and correctly, awarded for membership of the other LS Panel concurrently removed, because the Supervisor is not a member of the Resolution Panel, a claim never made in the bid.

No contract awarded.

JRS offer a bottle of champagne to anyone who can better this monumental cock up.

And all this at a time when the process is under such detailed Judicial scrutiny. How can they defend the legal challenge when they cant even do the basic marking properly?

You may well be too!

Ah the "continuing verification process" and nothing to do with this quote;

Collins adjourned the hearing and advised the LSC to ‘consider carefully’ its position. ‘If you fight this and lose it, you could set a precedent,’ he warned.

from this article

There is a statement from the LSC now confirming the proposed new timetable
here. New Civil contracts from November 15th.

The Law Society's outline claim is here and you can download the full version there too. It is worth reading.

The "Creighton" group of firms, who have been pursuing their action have also been given special leave to join TLS action as an Interested Party. They are making an Urgent Appeal for new participants and can be contacted via Oliver Hudson At Stamps in Hull. HIs e-mail address is - oliver.hudson@stamps-solicitors.co.uk

The last major round of LSC training on new Family costs arrangements was in 2007. These have started to become contentious as many participants remember being told a very different story to that being uncovered during financial stewardship audits. Many do NOT remember the "second meeting" requirement for Level 2 claims being aired and others have distinct recollections of being told that drafting a divorce petition alone sparked the higher Level 1 claim. These are just two examples of what I guess will be difficult to verify points of appeal.

There is a new set of these currently being offered. It might be worth doing some detailed annotation of your course notes this time round.

The impending Law Society JR hearing has blown many things off course - one of the least important being our Webinar programme.

There seems to us little point in running a course on the 2010 Civil Contract until this is resolved and our other planned session on the new Family fee structure is only likely to appeal to the optimists. At the same time we have had some requests to re-run the 2010 CDS Contract session of last month.

This months program is therefore

Friday 10th September

The 2010 CDS Contract

An essential practitioners guide to the changes brought about by the new contract. Make sure your firm is compliant with CDS financial Stewardship and Relationship Manager Assurance visits about to get into full swing.

Friday 17th September

SQM or Lexcel?

How to make sure that you are "Quality Assured" before the auditing of SQM is outsourced in February next year. Alternatively we will explore the alternative option - achieving Lexcel accreditation.

Friday 24th September

What is Happening to Civil Legal Aid

We hope in this session to bring you an unto the minute summary of progress with regard to the recent Civil Bid Round just days after the full hearing of TLS JR application.

If you missed this post on Friday - or it was a bit too obscure - here is confirmation that Civil contracts are on hold for another month pending the outcome of the LS JR. This is set to be heard on 21st September.

Closing with this tomorrow;

Looks like this, albeit a short one, is on the cards following today's JR hearing.

UPDATE

Yep

Like Resolution, the Law Society and the LAPG we are somewhat conflicted over the family procurement - we work for both successful and unsuccessful firms. That said we assist both in equal measure and do not have any difficulty in taking an independent overview which is essentially that this is a very shoddy piece of work on the part of the LSC.

This, however is astounding, cannot go without comment, and is likely to be of common ground amongst winners and losers.

Improving family legal aid services for vulnerable people throughout England and Wales is at the heart of the current family legal aid tender.

Wrong. No part of this process had any objective which involved "improving" family services nor could be said to have achieved this.

??We are disappointed that The Law Society has issued a pre-action protocol letter.  We agree with Resolution (a family law representative body) that further uncertainty will have a far greater destabilising effect on the availability of family legal aid than allowing the tender to take its course.

I am sure you are and would like all of your works to go unchallenged, and I don't know if Resolution said this or if they have been misquoted, but this assertion is palpable nonsense.

It was always clear that this would be a competitive process.  The Legal Services Commission carried out a formal public consultation on the process which was followed by discussions with representative bodies.  These led to many of their recommendations being adopted, including accreditation.

Lie. The competitive element was at best hidden and glossed over during the Consultation process, and then only partially explained in the final IFA. (See S.5.20 of the consultation response)

Under the new contracts, the LSC will commission the same level of help as last year, therefore, contracting with fewer legal firms does not equate to providing less access to justice.  The LSC has selected providers who demonstrated the under the competitive process and allocated work in accordance with their bids.

Utter nonsense, especially geographically e.g. suburbs of Leeds, most West Yorkshire mill towns, Blackburn, most rural areas especially Northumberland - could go no all day. Many individual firms with the "highest level of expertise and experience" have lost out, on occasions to very poor firms with a recently "employed" "consultant" involved in their bid.

We are aware that, in a very small number of procurement areas, there are issues for us to address.  However, the tender is not yet complete as we are currently carrying out a verification exercise and completing appeals. 

Define very small and how will they be addressed without calling into question the entire integrity of the process.

We remain confident that, by the end of the tender process, we will resolve these issues.  Once the process is complete we will undertake and publish a full review and we will discuss the scope of such a review with The Law Society, Resolution and other representative bodies. 

Oh good a review they always sort things out.
    
The LSC is fully aware of its statutory obligations and will continue its discussions with The Law Society and other representative bodies to ensure the continued availability of high quality legal aid services for clients.

Already too late for many firms

Was there any need for this rubbish? Why not just say, reasonably, we are involved in litigation no comment rather than insulting everyone's intelligence.

Over the past few days we have been having a significant problem with our e-mail, and other internet, services at the new office .

If you have sent something urgent and not received a response please give us a ring to discuss.

A constant feature of recent time has been coming to the office - on days when I am not out at pointless meetings - with a plan of action and finding myself, mid afternoon having, achieved none of my intended tasks. Something always happens which knocks me off track and I end up immersed in a new matter, with an ever increasing pile of other jobs. (The pile is becoming physical where it involves financial stewardship).

Just listed 10 priority tasks for today in the certain knowledge that I may get 1 done. It is also a weekend I can't utilise to reduce my backlog either.