David Pickup's blogs

My first jumbo
David Pickup
Friday, 11 May 2012

I was reading one of those booklets that get sent out by indemnity insurers to remind us how to avoid claims. Most of them are very good. They are readable and clear and will not give you too many nightmares. No one likes waking up in the middle of court one day screaming after a bad dream. It upsets the judge.

This edition included an article on initial interviews - six key objectives. It is so helpful that I am going to shamelessly use the ideas in some in-house training. It is one the rare things in life which are equally appropriate for any firm. Whether it's a builder suing for a non-paid bill of £400 or someone buying a jumbo jet for millions the same principles apply. Basically - do I know what to do, will the client pay me and do I really want to do this? (Yes I know that is not six key objectives but you know where I am going).

It is only with experience you can tell the answers to these questions. If you work in a high street firm you often get people with different problems phoning or calling for advice. They always end the message, 'I don’t mind if I have to pay'. Presumably this is some added incentive for me. I do not understand it. If I go to a shop to buy a television i do not say to the youth selling the things, 'Please I would like a television... Oh and I don’t mind paying'.

Hopefully as our careers progress we develop a sixth sense about prospective clients. The builder could probably go to the small claims’ court. He will not want to get a bill from me for £400 or even £40. We then find that he has been to the small claims’ court, and lost because the only evidence in writing was the telephone number of the customer written in biro on his shirt sleeve.

I must stop writing now. A client has come in wanting to buy a jumbo jet. How much shall I charge, I wonder?

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury-based Pickup & Scott

0 Comments     Add comment


The right kind of feedback
David Pickup
Monday, 23 April 2012

This week in a gap between seeing clients I went to buy a light bulb for my car. I had noticed I had not been very bright (if you see what I mean). It is the sort of thing you usually never get around to sort out. Buying a new one is complicated by having to know exactly what year your car was made; if not the month, and the precise model, and having bought the right thing it is virtually impossible to fit unless you have eyes on stalks and at least three multi-jointed arms.

The point of this story is on the way out I was given a slip of paper with a picture of a cheerful car-parts person explaining how I could win money by completing a feedback form. You had to go online to fill out the questions. I, in fact, had a good service and was pleased to rate them highly. The questions were designed to make you think you - the customer - are the store’s best friend and you would shortly be invited to tea by the staff.

I then went back to my office and compared this to my feedback form. Several years ago we dutifully adopted the standard design and questions. The term feedback itself is not particularly impressive. The questions asked are really a suggested list of reasons to hate solicitors. 'Were we slow, could you understand us, did we treat you unfairly, and you wouldn’t recommend us to your dog would you?' I exaggerate but by giving complaints information you are often pointing out shortcomings rather than reasons to be cheerful.

We send these out to all clients and get a small number returned. Fortunately most people are fairly positive. People usually hate us or love us. You rarely get people saying they liked parts of the case and not others.

My experience of going to the shop was the staff were friendly but not intrusive, they knew what to do and had been trained to make the customer feel important. It was not cheap but I felt it was worth it. Do we as solicitors do this? Are we trained in how to handle customers? Not really.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

3 Comments     Add comment


Green forms and fixed fees
David Pickup
Wednesday, 4 April 2012

I am impressed by the number of people who fondly (I think fondly is the correct word) remember Green forms. I wonder how many of you recall five-pound fixed fees. It had a certain ring to it. If your client was not eligible to sign the Green form then you'd offer them this fee. The idea was to get people into the office, give them some advice and either sign them up if it was something worthwhile or take five pounds off them, open the door and wish them good day.

The only drawback was that the people rarely had five pounds on them. They would offer to drop it in later, and sometimes they did. I say only downside but the additional downer was the fact that the five pounds included VAT. I forget what the rate was then but there was not much left over. What was worse was if you did not know the answer and had to do some research or the prospective client brought in pages of papers you were expected to read. Even worse I remember someone bringing in a box of these papers.

The Green form scheme was set up in 1973, possibly as a response to the law centre movement which the Law Society was concerned about. Parts of the profession noticed how Law Centres were springing up, which were not organised on traditional partnership lines. In those days it was the Law Society that administered legal aid and they continued to do so until 1988.

I went to an LSC Provider Reference Group Meeting recently. These regional meetings cover developments such as tenders, changes to scope and the introduction of online systems. All good stuff and everyone is doing their best in difficult times but going to these meetings is a good opportunity (for me) to feel old and long for simpler times.

The Green form scheme delivered a service to the community which the profession no longer can do. I say bring it back.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

5 Comments     Add comment


Bring back Green forms
David Pickup
Tuesday, 6 March 2012

Those of us of a certain age will remember 'Green' forms. They covered legal advice and meant that virtually anyone could get advice on anything, from any solicitor, if they could not pay for it. You filled in the client’s means on the front and you had something called a keycard which I think was pink or lilac to work out if they were entitled to free advice.

At the end of case you wrote brief details of the work done and sent them off every month with a consolidated claim form, which was a buff yellow (how colourful the law was!), listing all the green forms.

You had to keep a copy of them as the Legal Aid Board would just pay you the total. Sometimes they would reject one or several and not tell you which. You had to work out with the firm’s bookkeeper which had been paid and which had not. Hours of harmless fun. My point is that specialisation has been a good thing because the Legal Services Commission wants value for money but it may have gone too far. Many legal aid areas are highly technical and need lawyers who know the ropes. The clients are often vulnerable. Basic advice usually meant a few letters and meetings.

However, the profession has lost the ability to give basic advice to people who need it and cannot pay for it. This is particularly clear in areas like where I practise such as small market towns with limited numbers of lawyers who offer legal aid. Specialists are few and far between. Most clients struggle to come from the streets around Aylesbury let alone are willing to get the bus to Luton or Oxford to get specialist help.

The not-for-profit sector has not been able to bridge this gap. They are facing similar funding cuts to lawyers. There are less benefit, housing and debt advisers. I was at a hearing recently in the West Midlands and the person before the tribunal had some debt problems. Nothing serious to you or me, except they were very vulnerable and demands from debt collectors are frightening.

It just needed a few letters and the help to complete a budget form. When I asked about debt advisors or any advisors the social worker looked blank and explained there were none.

So bring back the green form. I do not even care what colour it is this time.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

10 Comments     Add comment


Witnessing financial documents
David Pickup
Tuesday, 7 February 2012

A lady comes to the office clutching a mortgage and says it needs witnessing by a solicitor. She explains she is raising money to pay off the victims of her husband’s fraud. The solicitor advises her not to sign it and she goes off. The solicitor is later sued (probably successfully) for negligence.

A recent Court of Appeal case considers a solicitor’s duty when certifying a mortgage. A financial consultant persuaded his wife to sell the family home to repay money he had defrauded from his clients. She wished to avoid her children seeing their father sent to prison and she was advised to get independent legal advice but told to ignore any advice not to give up her rights in the family home. The lady went to another solicitors’ firm and was advised not to proceed with the transaction. This advice was given free of charge. A few weeks later she visited another branch of the same firm and a solicitor witnessed a document certifying that the wife understood her obligations. The husband later was sent to prison, owing considerably more than first believed. They divorced and she sued the solicitors for negligent failure to give proper advice.

The case was unsuccessful at first but the Court of Appeal ruled the there was a case to answer. The solicitor ought to enquire what was behind the wife’s intentions. The duty was the same irrespective of whether there was a charge for the work. Interestingly the advice not to sign was insufficient to discharge their duty. The solicitors should have investigated the true extent of the man’s fraud and advised that the wife’s actions would be insufficient to save him from prison.

We should not witness any financial document such as loan agreement, mortgage, deeds, etc. If we witness such a document it is implied that we have advised the client on the terms of the agreement and the implications of the agreement i.e. you could lose a house if you do not make payments.

To do the job properly would take an hour or two’s advice which we would have to charge for.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

3 Comments     Add comment


Money and clients in 2012
David Pickup
Tuesday, 17 January 2012

There has been a bit in the press recently about the rush of clients we get the first day back at work after Christmas. It is a busy time for family lawyers as sadly there are many people wanting advice about divorce. I do not think it just that people are forced together for a long period. It is also that people have time - perhaps too much time - to think about their lives. It is not only divorce but other types of work increase. The dark days and ice bring accidents and there are sudden deaths as well as more criminal work.

None of this January rush changes the fact that this year will be tough for lawyers. We have the legal aid cuts and the fact there is less going on. Fewer people are moving house, setting up businesses, doing deals and getting married which will all produce work in the future.

Money is the root of all evil and the source of many problems for us lawyers. We need to increase money coming in, get it more quickly and more of it, and try to reduce the haemorrhaging away. Easier said than done.

Governments can make 'efficiencies', meaning cuts, but it is difficult for small firm to make savings. We have all for years been trying to save money on stationery, post, insurance and the rest. The biggest bill is staff and we know too well that it is not just wages but all the extras like training, NI, holiday and leave cover. In a small firm everyone does a slightly different job. If you have 10 conveyancers it is easy to cut two but if you have 10 people doing different work it is more difficult.

I have not noticed a rush to merge like in previous times of recession. I do not really think there are economies of scale in the legal profession. What I have noticed is that firms work more closely together. We do one type of work that next door does not, and so we send clients there, and they send us work back.

What we cannot plan for is the unexpected. This year we have already had problems with the Legal Services Commission paying the contract money. We were notified after 4pm the day before the money was due in. If we had been told 30 minutes earlier we could have delayed the payments which we needed to make. It is all reminiscent of the problems two or three years ago when firms had drastic reductions in their money at very short notice. I have been reassured this was a one off problem.

Let’s hope so. Anyway, happy new year.

0 Comments     Add comment


New year resolutions
David Pickup
Tuesday, 3 January 2012

I was ill just before Christmas, which is not a good time to be off for various reasons. I will not bore you with the details but it was unpleasant. However, it gave me a chance to get up to speed on the mysterious world of daytime television. Most of the advertisements are for people who, well, put simply, are stuck at home. There are plenty of advertisements offering advice on the various ailments that persons of a certain age are likely to suffer - mostly toilet related.

There are also lots of advertisements for making claims of different types of claims. I expected that but not the number of different claims firms. I could not tell which were solicitors and which were another breed of claimers. I am sure they are fine upstanding firms in many ways but they all look the same and have similar sounding names. If you have had an accident, or been mis-sold something how does the victim decide which one to use?

Fortunately I recovered to enjoy more festive television, which in the lead up to Charles Dickens’ anniversary featured lots of Dickensian lawyers. Grim-faced men with lots of facial hair, quill pens and simpering clerks. How things have changed. We now have computers not quill pens.

My point, if you were wondering, is that the public’s concept of lawyers is either claims firms or Great Expectations. An exaggeration I know but there is some truth in it. Doctors have exciting, glamorous programmes about emergency units; even vets get a better press curing cuddly animals. Which brings me to resolutions. Scrooge in A Christmas Carol vowed to live in the past, present and future.

So those are my resolutions. Firstly the past: I will prepare for Christmas better next year. I will give more time, write cards, see people and all the rest. I know I will not but I ought to. I will also enjoy the heritage we have as lawyers. We have a history of service and occasionally as a profession, firms, or as individuals, get it right and make a difference to someone’s life.

I will live in the present. I will plan better and work efficiently. I will say 'no' when faced with a client asking me to handle a case in an area I am unfamiliar with. I will know what is going on, what is in colleagues' in-trays, filing cabinets etc. I will encourage an atmosphere of openness. Yes, dear reader, you do all those things now.

I will live in the future. I will think how IT, whatever that is, can help. I will ponder about what services the public want. I will encourage youngsters to enter the law if they really want, not because it is a quick route to fame and fortune but because it is a great profession.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

0 Comments     Add comment


A Christmas carol for solicitors
David Pickup
Wednesday, 14 December 2011

It was Christmas eve and I had invited the staff to have a festive drink with me. Sadly those who were still left in the office seemed to want to go as soon as possible so I decided not to waste the cooking sherry, and instead had value packets of nibbles which I enjoyed alone. I dozed off and was woken by a shadowy figure standing over me. He seemed unhappy so I thought it was a dissatisfied client but he looked strangely like a former colleague. He said he had been sent to warn me of my bad deeds. I explained I do not do conveyancing and that we have few deeds in the office at all. He explained he meant deeds in a wider sense. He told me I would be haunted by three spirits.

The first visitor was the Ghost of Clients Past. He came without an appointment and I tried to get my secretary to ask him to come back after Christmas or go because I would not be able to help him. Could he try a pro bono advisor or advice agency? Sadly she was packing up to go home and I had to deal with him. The spirit took me back to a time before fax, email and computers and when I was in articles (or a training contract as it would be called now). Times were better. Fees were high, time was charged in hours if at all. Conveyancing was profitable. Legal aid was something that was done by a few firms mainly in towns. Indemnity insurance was expensive but there was only one provider.

It was a time at Christmas with parties thrown by police, prosecutors and estate agents. Solicitors were welcome at banks who would lend money. Solicitors were called 'sir' by their clients. Solicitors were given gifts. And here were my first clients; my first divorce, my first appearance at court, my first conveyance. They did not seem pleased to see me. They were shaking their heads and complaining.

I fell asleep and was woken by the second spirit, the Ghost of Clients Present. My desk was loaded with all the work left undone before I went on holiday and not looked at again. I was shown all the clients I had not seen as often as they wanted throughout the year or returned their emails, telephone calls or replied to their letters instantly. All the clients I had met in the street but forgotten who they were were crowding around me. Then I was surrounded by men and women with stopwatches in their hands, new rule books and manuals, shaking their heads and tut-tutting about expected outcomes or some such. Then my partners appeared holding up time sheets. Time is now charged in minutes.

There are no parties to go to. Indemnity is expensive but there are loads of providers. There is no time for Christmas parties. Solicitors are not welcome at banks or anywhere else. Solicitors call clients 'sir'. Solicitors give gifts. Legal aid is something that is done by a few firms in towns. The clients did not seem pleased to see me. They were shaking their heads and complaining

I dozed off once again and was visited by the third spirit, the Spirit of Clients Future. I woke to find I was in a large supermarket pushing a trolley around. I went past the still fresh counter, the buy one get one free counter and on to a display of solicitors, all packed up with cellophane like joints of meat. 'Buy one lawyer; get one free', said the Tannoy. Time will be charged in seconds. Indemnity insurance will be expensive and there will be no providers. Solicitors get part-time jobs working at Christmas parties. Solicitors have no clients, they have customers.

Legal aid will be something that will be done by a few firms in towns. Yes, even in the future there will still be a few clinging on to legal aid like dear life. The clients will not seem pleased to see me. They will be shaking their heads and complaining. I will be acting for the grandsons and granddaughters of the first clients.

I woke to my desk and my office. I will amend my ways: I will live in the past present and future. I will see all my clients, read all the rule books and keep up with the law. I will provide a quality service at a cheap price that clients want. I will be nice to staff, fellow professionals, the courts and everyone. Fortunately it was all a dream.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

3 Comments     Add comment


Recruiting staff
David Pickup
Thursday, 24 November 2011

We recently went through the process of advertising a vacancy. No really, we had an opening for another member of staff.

We advertised online and in print. One of the main reasons to advertise a vacancy is really to advertise the firm. It tells people that you are, a) still there and b) trying to expand when everyone is laying off people like mad.

We only got a few decent responses. There were many cvs from ex-students looking for training contracts although the advertisement did not give the impression that is what we wanted.

Can I just say that there may be people who are impressed by these personality self-analysers but I am not. You may be a 'people person, good team builder/player, goals oriented' or whatever. Everyone always considers themselves to be that. Of course those qualities are important but these phrases are meaningless.

I am looking for someone with experience or qualifications. If I want a conveyancer there is no point applying and saying, 'choose me I want to sell and buy houses'. It is better and more honest to say: 'I don’t have any experience of property law but I have found some excellent courses that are available at a reasonable cost and I have a noddy guide to conveyancing and I think I could use my skills [say what they are] I have acquired in whatever law to good use.'

What is interesting is there has been little response from agencies. I get some emails with lists of people looking for jobs in other areas of the country. Most contact from them is half-hearted.

It used to be that agencies would phone up. They were obviously expecting a rough time from me as they would always introduce themselves by saying 'I hope you do mind me calling but I see you have a vacancy. Don’t worry; we are not an employment agency...' and then go on to say they do find people jobs and charge for it.

In a small firm it is difficult to say what a vacancy is. You do not have a team of 10 conveyancers and one goes and you get another. In a small practice you have a number of good people and if someone comes along who can fit in and possibly bring something new, then fine.

3 Comments     Add comment


Trusted advisor
David Pickup
Friday, 28 October 2011

Judging from the reaction to my blog on the new outcomes-focused regulation the profession is not overwhelmingly optimistic about this. However, one positive thing to hang on to in troubling times is the solicitor’s traditional role as a trusted advisor and how that concept is enshrined in the new rules.

The introduction to the code of conduct states, 'Those involved in providing legal advice and representation have long held the role of trusted adviser.' And Principle 2:2.6, Personal integrity, is central to your role as the client's trusted adviser and should characterise all your professional dealings with clients, the court, other lawyers and the public.

That is clearly what the public expects from us as a profession. They want us to be a traditional adviser and not a mere technician of the law. Legal knowledge and information is freely available in 101 “How to...” books and websites. What the public want is our judgement, not our knowledge. I write that admitting that sometimes our judgement is fallible but judgement laced with commonsense that we specialise in as a profession.

I suspect too that that is what we want as solicitors. We all secretly desire to be the man or woman of business like Soames Forsyte's character in The Forsyte Saga novels; giving sage wisdom to people in trouble. This role fits all lawyers whether high street, commercial or niche. Whether you are advising on the purchase of a jumbo jet, or a second-hand car, it is judgement we are asked for and not just the nuts and bolts of the law.

The skills necessary for that role - whether confidentiality and impartially - are all valuable skills. They are increasingly important in a diverse and changing society. To some extent the public have lost those skills themselves and the availability to access them. The traditional roles which were the remit of the parish priest, teacher, GP, bank manager - have all gone to some extent. The traditional closely knit large families with such resources and experience is disappearing. If that is what the public want are they prepared to pay for it? Probably not.

It remains to be seen whether the new rule regime will enhance this role or diminish it. Hopefully if we are encouraged and allowed to regulate ourselves we will have at least a chance. I do not think it is relevant whether this service or role is performed by large branded or franchised firms or independent solicitors. The public and profession will still want the same thing.

David Pickup is a partner in Aylesbury based Pickup & Scott

3 Comments     Add comment