Morale has never been lower in legal aid
Over the last couple of years covering legal aid for the Gazette, I have got used to writing stories of the doom and gloom facing lawyers and their clients, as fees are cut and bureaucracy increased.
But I have not seen the mood as low as it is now, and that mood will only be worsened by the anticipated quarter of a billion cut to the legal aid budget that the justice secretary is expected to propose to the Treasury, as part of the Ministry of Justice’s measures to meet the government’s spending cuts.
At a meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Legal Aid this week, lawyers from across the legal aid spectrum gave accounts of the impact that fixed fees, the Legal Services Commission’s payment regime, and the recent tender exercises have been having – and will continue to have – on their work and ability to stay in business.
The regime, they say, is driving many quality providers away from legal aid, while the payment mechanisms incentivise poor quality providers to take on easy cases and do as little work as possible.
The unanimous message the lawyers wanted to get across to MPs was that the cumulative impact of the whole regime is driving down the quality of service available to clients who are often very vulnerable.
They noted that spending money appropriately on legal aid saves money elsewhere in the system. For instance, the cost to the taxpayer when someone is evicted is estimated at £35,000, while the legal aid fee paid to a lawyer to keep someone in their home is £174.
And they highlighted the false economy of a legal aid system that contracts with poor quality providers, which inevitably costs the public purse more as a consequence of the outcomes, or to correct wrong decisions.
The lawyers present were not fat cats who have got rich by taking speculative cases on behalf of have-a-go clients at public expense, as some critics like to portray them.
They are committed, hard-working people who have dedicated their careers to providing voices to help the voiceless secure justice. And they are angry and deeply saddened that the mismanagement of the legal aid scheme and short-sighted, misguided budget cuts will deny justice to many vulnerable people.
In a system that many say is already pared to the bone, it is hard to see where further savings can possibly be found, other than in very high cost case work or experts’ fees.
There is much speculation that a large chunk of the savings will come from limiting face-to-face advice at the police station – a move that would not only have a severe impact on the viability of many criminal law firms, but also provide scope for numerous miscarriages of justice.
But as the Law Society head of legal aid policy Richard Miller observes, tinkering with the legal aid system is not the way to save money from the legal budget. What is needed is a more strategic look at addressing the things that drive the demands on the budget in the first place.
Surely justice demands that those in power listen and take notice of those in practice. But something tells me there will be more doom and gloom to come.
- For more news blogs go to http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/blogs/news.
Comments
Legal Aid
In the UK Legal Aid System violates equality before the law, access to the Law is restricted to those upon whom the Executive favours with Legal Aid.
Reducing legal aid improves justice for the 95% of the population of the UK who, because of cost, have no access to the Law.
Stefan Kisco did not have
Stefan Kisco did not have legal advice at the police station. He ended up doing 18 years for a crime he didn't commit. That cost the taxpayer a lot more than than simply paying £300 for a lawyer.
Legal Aid
The mood is really really low and what is even more discouraging is that legal aid firms/providers are terrible employers!!! It really does not help the situation!! Members of staff are so demoralised, frustrated, overworked, awful working conditions, extremely low pay and treated so badly by their employers. On top of all the above!!!
MOJ just do not know WHAT they are doing!!
I believe that the MOJ do not realise...nay have forgotten what was the whole ethos behind the Access to Justice Act was - TO ALLOW ACCESS TO ALL!!! The only thing that makes being paid a ridiculously low wage and working all hours, including weekends, is the fact that I am helping those who have honest claims and not the means of pursuing them. By bringing in these 'cuts' what will happen is that those who really need access to justice, those who cannot afford to pay, will be simply kicked to the curb, excuse my phrase.
Yes, I have worked in other
Yes, I have worked in other industries. yes I have worked in several legal aid firms (the same crap!). Forgive me for choosing to work in legal aid because I believe it is rewarding to help people. People who otherwise can not afford to pay for a solicitor but like everyone else have a right to legal representation...ofcourse, that is not character. I will only show character if I quit and go against what I believe!?!?!?!?!?
Access to Legal Aid
There is another hurdle to access - a private charge of £450 (plus VAT) for completing and submitting the form. This form can only be submitted via a solicitor.
This is more than many firms charge for conveying a house and bears no relation to the work involved.
How can this be justified?
Access to Legal Aid
I do wonder whether "Ex- Solicitor" ever, during his/her time in the profession, completed an application for a public funding certificate on behalf of a client.
Many cases are complex, factually and legally. An opinion on prospects of success must be provided to the LSC. If done properly this involves detailed investigation, often after having considered substantial volumes of documentation, especially if instructed in the middle of exisiting proceedings.
How much does "Ex- Solicitor" say should be charged for that, when everyone who has the temerity to repay their mortgage early is not only charged an early redemption fee but is also charged £50 by the lender for retrieving the title deeds from storage and £75 as an administration fee?
Clients have the ability to impose fee limits on all private work done for them by any Solicitor. If they are asked for £450 in return for investigating the case and applying for legal aid, and think this is too high, they have a choice not to pay, or to go elsewhere.
The work done bySolicitors in publicly finded cases is often seen by those who have an axe to gring or are simply woefully ill-informed as somehow being of less importance, difficulty or value than privately funded work. This is inaccurate.
I specialise in representing children in care proceedings, when the most draconian intervention possible by the state in the life and future of any person is at stake. I don't know about "Ex- Solicitor", but for me that is far more important thanconveying a house or advising, for a fee I could only dream about, on a multi-national merger.
Legal Aid
I have completed many applications for public funding.
Legal Help should be available for this work. If an applicant qualifies for legal help but it is denied as the firm 'does not have enough of it' (yes that is an actual quote) how can the applicant afford £450 plus VAT for a solicitor to do it?
This is a bar to access to justice. They can't afford to pay a solicitor and are not allowed to do it themselves.
Child Care Public Funding
It is my understanding this is not means tested and granted as of right so I assume this problem does not arise.
It could happen that a party is granted public funding to be represented in care proceedings and can't afford to apply for it to stop an eviction from their home.
Access to Legal Aid
Solicitors are not charities or not for profit organisations.
Ex- Solicitor's complaints are being raised in the wrong forum - I trust he/she has raised the matter with his/her MP and the MOJ.
I have.
Public fundinng for those who are children or who have P.R. is not means or merits tested, but only in relation to applications for care or superivision orders (and not, for example, for discharge applications or secure accommodation orders.=, which are of equal importance to the welfare of children)
The level of fixed legal help fees is a joke, and the LSC changes the rules on when level 2 can be claimed as often as the met office changes the weather forecast, so much work goes unremunerated.. There is no legal help available for children pre-proceedings.
I repeat, Ex-Solicitors' complaints should be directed to the LSC/MOJ - unless he/she thinks we should conduct this work for a bigger loss than we do already.
Legal Aid
I would never suggest that solicitors are charities but the powers that be treat them as if they are and solicitors are harangued for not doing more.
What other profession is expected to do so much pro bono work, to the point where there is an annual award for the firm giving away the most? This hurts the profession as it enhances the expectation that work is not charged for.
The State too thinks that publically funded work should be subsidised either by the firm or its fee paying clients. Every fee paying client thinks they are a special case and they too should get special rates.
When there was money in lawyering then fine, but now duty solicitors work for less than the minimum wage They do a great job and so do lawyers generally, however they are seen as money grabbing scum for daring to expect be paid at all.
It is not a hobby of the rich but a vital service. It is a service of huge value to those receiving it, whether it is care proceedings or conveyancing.