As promised revised standard letters are now available in the resources section of this site. (Scroll down to the bottom).

Use them wisely!

Andy is in the 'Boro today finalising changes to our standard letters etc. necessitated by the October civil changes. They now require the skilled formatting hand of Sandra and then they have to go all the way to Scotland to be put into the resources link on the sidebar.

You should be able to download them shortly if you are desperate we might be able to handle e-mail requests from later on today!

We have had a few calls about Civil forms today so for the avoidance of doubt, if you have not had a Masterpack update yet, you can get all the new forms and new October 07 versions on the LSC website.

Here is a link to the new batch of Contracting Forms. Use these and go through all fee earners desks etc. to seek an destroy now obsolete versions.

That is all.

One of last weeks areas of friction, as you may well recollect, was with regard to the reporting of September 07 Civil Contract work. It was a late in the day document regarding transitional arrangements which sparked the concern. This stated, contrary to what we to then thought to be the case, that paper claims for civil work would not be accepted after October 1st.

We discussed this with the LSC believing the only rational interpretation of these arrangements was that as this was September reporting it fell under the previous contract and consequently paper submissions were acceptable. In effect we argued the new contract affects the reporting of contract work completed post October, a view supported by the guidance we quoted here on Friday. This view is further supported by the fact that post October 1st a new set of CMRF forms become operational all demanding information not previously required and which the current Online system could not process.

Today an amended version of the document which sparked the issue has been released which states:

"paper forms will still be accepted after October 2007"

(On Friday when I asked for a categoric answer to the question "will paper submissions post October 1st be accepted" I was of course told the opposite.)

How what seemed to us very simple transitional arrangements end up causing such confusion is beyond belief. No sorry it is not, it is par for the course.

UPDATE

The same position applies to the new CDS 6 as Online Marketing confirmed earlier:

"I can confirm that the new CDS6 format that includes the new scheme codes will be mandatory for October's submission that is submitted in November".

As you can probably imagine we have had a bit of an ear bending over the phone regarding the October changes. Confusion reigns (watch for further news here today regarding Online billing for instance!). A major gap in recent training (ours and theirs) has been lack of direct practical guidance on billing/reporting - not helped by the fact that forms were not actually available at the bulk of those courses.

Consequently we have had our arms twisted a bit to run a "nuts and bolts" session dealing with issues such as; which is the right form to use, how to issue Civil UFN and UCNs, how to report exceptional cases and how to avoid having your Online billing rejected?

We will also be attempting a very risky Question and Answer session, (as ever, for the grizzly, without the aid of a safety net!).

Timescales have restricted the events to our Northern heartlands, on the following dates:

Manchester - 25th October

Newcastle Gateshead - 30th October

Leeds Bradford - 31st October

Here is a downloadable booking form, alternatively you can ring or E-mail the office.

So if your idea of fun is watching someone dodging rotten fruit - we can indulge you in the very near future.

Having had a few queries about the move to mandatory electronic billing here is a link to the LSC guidance and below is a key area of current client concern:

How will these changes affect current LSC Online users?

It is important to us that these changes do not negatively impact on your ability to submit your monthly claims for controlled work. To ensure a smooth transition there are some key dates you need to be aware of:

• the deadline for submitting your September claims is 15 October 2007
• the deadline for registering with LSC Online to make this submission is 10 October 2007
• there will be no access to LSC Online between 15 October 2007 and 5 November 2007
• you will not be able to make your October submission until 5 November 2007
• you will need a new username and password to use LSC Online after 5 November
• these details will be issued to all firms prior to 5 November 2007

If your firm does not register with LSC Online prior to 10 October 2007 a key contact in your firm will be set up with basic access levels that will enable him/her to set up other users in the firm.

To find out who this person is, please contact LSC Online Marketing.

Our work on a new CMRF Wizard continues today - keep in touch.

As we reach the end of the current training tour I think it is worth reinforcing certain point especially those which have cropped up most commonly in recent phone traffic.

The new forms have begun to dribble through - I have a new CLS Claim 1A and an EC Claim 1 in front of me and I have just spoken to someone who has sight of a CW1 PL too. They are not on the web site as yet.

The CW1 PL (for Level 2 Family Help in Public Law when acting for a parent or someone with Parental Responsibility) makes clear one of the controversies identified during our sessions. The LSC line seems to have been more robustly expressed as their concurrent briefing sessions rolled out to whit - you must have written confirmation of the Local Authorities' intention to issue proceedings before you can complete the CW1 PL. Or as someone in Wales paraphrased "there will be no level 2 claims". Apparently there have been national negotiations with the LAs to ensure even operation of this protocol however this does not look likely in the immediate future.

Staying with Public Law can we reconfirm that the escape multiplier at level 3 is 2 times the anticipated graduated fee.

Don't forget the 21 day "cooling off period" before claiming settlement fees and neither the 6 month claw-back rule for the same in Level 2 private law work.

Finally we also promised to pass on information of as to what constitutes a "substantive benefit" outcome code - so here they are.

P.S. As the practicalities become apparent, on the receipt of the forms etc. (check your master-pack updates and guidance), would anybody be interested in a shorter than usual course for those practically involved in billing/reporting? Shout up or I will happily avoid the pain this will certainly involve.

Lets get straight to the chase.

Personal Injury is an "exclusive" franchise category.

There is no "tolerance" standard fee for Legal Help work under the new scheme.

You can therefore not do CICA claims, without a PI franchise, from October.

One of the side benefits of training tours, in addition to the odd bit of juicy gossip, is a chance to get a feel for issues of concern to the profession and to get a first feel for likely unforeseen consequences of LSC proposals.

As ever, from the speakers vantage point, it is always interesting to watch lawyers minds whirring when confronted with a new set of payment regulations. The most immediate example relates to claiming the Level 2 Public Law standard fee for support of parents (or those with parental responsibility).

The level runs from the point at which the Local Authority issues notice of intention to issue proceedings. Now in contract it suggests that this should be in formal written form and yet any number of delegates are indicating to us that their LAs never issue such notices or make such an indication in correspondence. We will obviously get a feel for this across the UK over the next two weeks, and feed that back to the powers that be, however your thoughts and experience of this issue would be very welcome either in the comments box below or directly.

Sorry, this has passed us by (we don't get the same correspondence suppliers get).

You seemingly have until this Friday, 31st August, to make your last ever claim for Civil File Review. The claim should contain all actual claims from 1st October 2006 plus an estimate of any others yet to be done before 30th September 2007. The form to use is the FR1.

We have been alerted to this deadline by an observant client from the North East Region who received correspondence from that Regional Office. Some feedback from other areas would therefore be appreciated especially if this is, perversely, only a little local problem.

Further to yesterdays post there is no corresponding notification of this deadline in the "What's New" section of the LSC web-site.

We thought the addition of the "What's New" front page to the LSC Web-site was a good idea; one central place where you can find the latest publications without the need for a detailed search of the site. Consequently, being the anorak I am, I check it most days.

Today, nothing new. Or perhaps not. Steve, delving somewhat deeper found this.

Published today, it is the "Final Evaluation of the FAInS (Family Advice and Information Service) Pilot".

Perhaps paragraph 23 of the LSC Summary explains why.

"The research concludes that FAInS does not appear to have effected much change in family law practice. Although there have been some subtle shifts in the approach adopted by some FAInS practitioners, they have not been substantial enough to be able to detect any major change on the behaviour of solicitors or their clients".

This and, (if my guess is correct), Preferred Supplier down the tubes, in one summer?

UPDATE

It went on the front of the site today! Was this a response to our post or just coincidence and us being pre-emptive? You can be the judge.

P.S. I think the latter.

I am preparing my September Training course. It predominantly deals with changes to the civil scheme, though will touch on issues relevant to CDS firms. The Unified contract is now in force for Civil firms (with further changes due in October) and will impact on Criminal Defence practitioners next April. One of the changes is a move from "equal opportunities to "equality and diversity" with new requirements in this regard.

If you want a model policy to muse upon here is one the LSC prepared earlier.

"We remain firmly committed to introducing fixed fees to cover certificated private family work, including the final hearing, as soon as is practical and we urge lawyers to make early preparation for this." (Emphasis mine).

Early preparation?

What like moving out of legal aid work?

I do not have time to Fisk the latest claims of an expanding CLS from the LSC. Fortunately Mr Miller is on hand to help out.

LAPG response to LSC press release.

Director Richard Miller said, "While it is good news that the number of people being helped is rising, the extent of the help made available is also significant. The value of claims by solicitors for legal help has, on the LSC's figures, dropped from almost £190 million last year to only £160 million this year, while the number of hours reported by NFP agencies has increased by only around 50,000, which represents about £2.5 million worth of work.

"Since April, the public has had well over 200 fewer places where they could access the help they need, and the numbers continue to drop. West and Central Berkshire and East Yorkshire are both now without any solicitors providing social welfare advice. Telephone advice is fine for some cases and some clients, but it is often insufficient. Where face to face advice is not available locally, many clients with anything more than the most simple needs cannot get help."

He continued, "We see a role for technology here to ensure that the expert advice which clients need can be provided from a central location to a client assisted by a local adviser. This will need Government investment in a videolink network. Unfortunately, specialist services are being lost rapidly by attrition. They are gone before a replacement is available,leaving people who need help to fend for themselves. The Government needs to invest more to preserve current services until it can undertake a sensible phased reorganisation."

The BBC are runining this story quite heavily today. Marilyn Stowe has just been on Five Live reinforcing the Judges views and also contributing that the crisis in Legal Aid is not helping.

A cheery distraction from Carter don't you think?

If the letters QPR put you in mind of his favourite football team you can be excused. If this is the case have a quick look here.

You might however, like me, find this a little short on interpretative detail. This more so if you have a couple of asterisks against the numbers in the middle column of your firm's profile. Want to know how to avoid this in the Family category? Give us a ring.

If you are yet to see a QPR you should request one from your Account Manager along with a CMRC (Contract Management Review Criteria). Fax them through to Middlesbrough and we will ring you back with an explanation as to what these somewhat impenetrable documents mean.

Given this story today might not be the best time to speak to me, so direct you calls to Andy!

Would you like an increase in Civil contract rates somewhere between 20-37% and the ability to reconcile you contract to 85%? Thought of becoming a Not for Profit Organisation (NfP)? Perhaps on Solicitor rates you already are!!

Regulars here will know that we refer to our CPD training activities as "shouting". If therefore you have been a recent "shoutee" you will possibly remember our advice to maintain a log of rejected and refused applications for substantive legal aid certificates (family and civil). There is, of course, a related CMRC indicator and now, it seems, this is something the LSC are interested in at audit.

Worth remembering that "reject" means a technical mistake on form completion and "refusal" for failure on merits grounds.

Start monitoring.

If you have heard me shouting (training in JRS speak) regarding Carter you might recall my mention of the congruence with the training market. By this I refer to the delivery of Government training initiatives aimed at assisting the unemployed into work. I have a mate who has done this for years and have watched his increasing despair with policy development over a 15 year period.

If you have really been paying attention you might remember CLACs and CLANs. If you don't have the time to read the entire link these are the Community Legal Advice Centers and Networks which it is hoped will ensure delivery of Civil legal aid in the post Carter world.

How can these two paragraphs possibly interrelate you ask.

CLACs are being piloted in Gateshead and Leicester.

Yesterday we were made aware that a major supplier of training contracts in now attempting to make a tender for the Leicester CLAC and is inviting local firms to participate. We assume that ultimately this will involve a sub contractor arrangement with the training agency providing "management services" and presumably for a fee.

The shape of things to come?

We will see

Our phones, if not quite on fire, have been at least warmed through with the latest round of Tailored Fixed Fee (TFF) amendments. Those today involve reductions in the ongoing fee because annual average reporting has dropped by over 20%.

If its happened to you and you want to talk about possible angles of defence give us a ring.

The Gazette (sorry no link as ever they are a day behind on the web site) reports on the Law Society Access to Justice Committee's concerns over UPOA. That is, if you've not had to deal with it, unaccounted for payments on account on long dead certificated cases. We have experienced clients being asked to go back and find evidence of what happened on cases closed in the 80s as well as the LSC being almost entirely wrong in their recollections of unbilled cases.

We even had a short held victory in the County Court over limitation, many of these go back over 6 years, but lost on appeal.

Consequently we've been shouting about this for years however nobody was listening. The Law Society now apparently is so if this is happening, or has happened, to you let them know.

Those submitting claims for "exceptional" Legal Help matters (over 3X your TFF) know that these are subject assessment. On the basis of yesterdays experience this "assessment" is not a standard line-by-line taxation but rather a very broad brush "Singh" assessment. Oh yes you have a right of appeal but only to a CC at Liverpool or Nottingham. How to reduce a right to appeal to a simple commercial decision.

It never rains etc.

UPDATE

Guess what "TFFECDU" stands for.

If, in the Tailored Fixed Fee scheme, your average reported profit costs slip 20% below your fixed fee the LSC can reduce this, with retrospective effect. Monitoring your average against the TFF is therefore vital.

We have observed this occur on a couple of occasions now.

The first tip is simply to argue your corner. The scheme was sold to the profession on the basis that you could increase profit on Legal Help by making "efficiency savings" in the conduct of cases - but obviously not more than 20% efficiency savings. A client has however now successfully argued this point, having made more than 20% efficiency savings, and their TFF has been left alone.

The second remember WIP and those larger files yet to be billed in the contract period - not always conclusive but potentially effective.

Unsurprisingly Immigration suppliers also face new and demanding statistical hurdles under LSC Corporate Targets which can be read in summary in Focus 48.

A target of a 40% "success" rate in asylum cases, by April 2006, is to be "explored in discussion" with underachieving firms with the aim of agreeing an "action plan which will lead to improvement". The worst sanction identified is calling in the Peer Reviewers.

The first practical translation of this is a unilateral decision by the LSC to withdraw, in two weeks time, essential devolved powers. The only “exploration on offer is a discuss the validity of the “success” rate the devolved powers are going it seems.

We are of course keen to hear any similar interpretations of these new targets - the comments boxes can be used anonymously to protect the innocent.

By chance, and a third party, I received a copy of the LSC’s latest consultation document Making Legal Rights a Reality. You can read the associated press release here.

They don't seem to be posting it to firm's, you can however download it from their site. The early impression, on a quick scan of the document and summary, is an emphasis on "joined-up working" with other agencies to provide a "seamless" service for clients currently falling through the advice net. The strategic vision for individual, independent Law firms is less immediately clear.

As ever your take on this initiative are welcome.

In a post entitled NfP (not for profit) below we discussed an interesting development regarding reporting the statutory charge in tailored fixed fee cases. The LSC seemed to be advocating an approach which, in certain circumstance, meant that they were enforcing a charge against the client which is more than they were paying the supplier.

This now seems to have been confirmed in correspondence between a client of ours and their Regional Office. They are considering an Internal Review. We will keep you posted.

Any other profit making initiatives which could assist in supporting the CLS/CDS should be posted in the comments boxes we will forward them to Grays Inn Road.