Legal aid bid turned down over ‘basic transcription error’

Topics: Legal aid and access to justice

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comments (13)
  • Save

Related images

  • Paul Harris

A London criminal law firm says it lost out on a new legal aid contract as a result of a ‘basic transcription error’ in the marking of one of its bids.

Edward Fail Bradshaw & Waterson (EFBW), one of several firms challenging the Legal Aid Agency’s tender process for new crime duty provider contracts, today filed an application for a summary judgment in a claim challenging the contract decision. 


The firm was unsuccessful in its bids for duty solicitor work in the London boroughs Hackney, Newham and Tower Hamlets.

A press release issued this afternoon by London firm Bindmans, which is acting for EFBW in the litigation, states that the LAA has ‘now admitted that it made a basic transcription error in scoring at least one of EFBW’s bids, and that consequently EFBW should have been awarded a contract in Hackney’.

According to the press release, Bindmans identified the possibility of such an error in October but this was not addressed by the LAA in pre-action correspondence and a formal offer of alternative dispute resolution was not taken up.

Bindmans says the error was only then able to be confirmed following early limited disclosure of the marking documents ordered by the High Court in November in respect of EFBW’s Hackney and eight other claims.

‘Even after disclosure, the LAA ignored Bindmans’ requests to settle EFBW’s claim and proceeded to file a defence that admitted the error but failed to acknowledge the consequences,’ the press release continues.

‘Only after further correspondence did the LAA acknowledge that if the error had not been made, EFBW should have scored higher than at least one of the purported successful bidders.

‘The LAA has, however, refused to settle the claim, despite the fact that it should never have had to be brought.’

Bindmans partner Jamie Potter said: ‘The error in this case may have been small but its consequences were extremely serious. The lord chancellor and the LAA must look for a way out of this litigation outside of the courtroom.’

EFBW managing partner Paul Harris (pictured) said the number of contracts the firm was awarded ‘significantly affects the extent to which we are able to continue as a business, including the number of staff we can employ.

‘Can the LAA realistically say that such errors have not been made in respect of other bids by us or by other firms?’

‘In the absence of such an assurance, surely at least a wholesale review and/or remarking is required instead of continuing to pursue inevitably costly litigation.

‘Livelihoods should not be undermined by the typing of a “1” instead of a “2” and firms should not be required to bring legal challenges to uncover such errors.’

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice told the Gazette it was 'defending the legal challenges to the procurement process and it would not be appropriate to discuss individual cases that are subject to ongoing litigation in the courts'.

The spokesperson said: 'We still have one of the most generous legal aid systems in the world, with £1.6bn spent last year alone. The spending review settlement we have reached with the Treasury for the next five years leaves legal aid almost untouched.'

The Law Society said the latest news 'seriously undermines the confidence of those firms that have secured contracts as it creates doubt as to whether they will still have a contract once the litigation is concluded'.

It urged the MoJ to take up its call for an independent review of the tender award process, 'instead of proceeding with expensive and time-consuming litigation'.

Readers' comments (13)

  • Tut-Tut -Tut

    "And the Band went right on playing, as the ship went down"

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How can the MOJ et al suggest that ADR should be used by Solicitors to reduce costs and free up court time but when the boot is on the other foot, they continue with costly litigation.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • They can, because your purported professional bodies (Bar and Claims Handling Society), have allowed it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Exactly Hotep.

    I hadn't read your observations.

    The Executive and Legislature are now ... ahem ... untouchable ...

    Independent Legal / Adjudication System .... what Independent Legal / Adjudication System ...?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @ Raynor Goddard And precisely how do you suggest the professional bodies could have forced the MoJ not to defend this litigation?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well the law society were willing to go along with the consolidation as they termed it.
    If those who are entrusted with leading the profession ,do not lead this is the situation we are left in.
    We should have refused to have had anything to do with this flawed scheme from the outset.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • But surely no-one could have anticipated legal action by some of the 1200 firms of litigation solicitors they were trying to put out of business?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • As a disinterested observer I have to wonder how much all this litigation is costing, and where the money will come form to pay for it. Will the MoJ raid the Legal Aid coffers to pay its costs, or will it raid some other part of its services? Either way one feels there is a better way to use public funds.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ian, are you suggesting the Govt should not be challenged when they make mistakes? It is clear that they, not the solicitors, have chosen to avoid mediation. Remember; first they come for the lawyers....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Tip of the iceberg, please MOJ put everyone out of their misery, stop defending the indefensible and give us a plan B. It will save everyone money and you face.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10per page20per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

  • Print
  • Share
  • Comments (13)
  • Save

Supreme Court

Leigh Day prepares for Supreme Court battle with MoD

24 October 2016By

One-day evidence hearing will focus on safeguards over detention in Afghanistan. 

Northern Rock

Eversheds faces £100m Northern Rock negligence claim

24 October 2016By

International firm says it is ‘vigorously defending’ claim by Northern Rock Asset Management.

Andrea nollent

University of Law appoints third chief executive in a year

24 October 2016By

Stelios Platis replaced by Professor Andrea Nollent.


Sign up for email news alerts

Daily Update. Keep abreast of the latest developments that affect the profession

Legal Services

Browse the magazine

Current Issue

The Gazette offers you up-to-the-minute national and international news, opinion, features, in-depth articles plus a jobs and appointments section.

Please click the link below for a digital edition