Law firms plan to escalate LSC tender challenge nationwide
The Legal Services Commission can expect a ‘nationwide’ challenge to the lawfulness of its recent tenders, according to an alliance of 12 family firms which plan to take the fight to the agency.
The firms, based in London, Exeter and Hull, all failed to get new contracts. They have combined to seek a judicial review of the family tender exercise, which saw the number of firms with contracts slashed by 46%.
A pre-action letter, sent this week to the LSC’s chief executive Carolyn Downs and seen by the Gazette, says they are also ‘liaising’ with 31 firms in the north-east and ‘seeking to coordinate what we anticipate is likely to become a nationwide action or series of actions’.
The move comes hot on the heels of similar challenges by the Law Society and Birmingham housing specialists The Community Law Partnership.
Led by Derek Reynolds, a solicitor at London firm Children & Families Law Firm, the 12 firms claim the tendering process was ‘unlawful’ and that therefore the decision not to award them contracts was also ‘unlawful’.
They ask the LSC to suspend the completion of the tendering process and extend the current contracts until the conclusion of any negotiation, comprehensive review or litigation. If it does not do so, they intend to seek a declaration from the court that the process was unlawful and ask for the outcome of the tender to be quashed.
The firms claim the selection and scoring criteria adopted were arbitrary and irrational, and that the tendering process breached The Public Contracts Regulations 2006 in that is was discriminatory, lacked transparency and failed to accord equal treatment to the different firms and organisations which submitted bids.
The pre-action letter states that the LSC’s process ‘was wholly inconsistent with its own policy’ and says ‘the individual decisions were not only irrational but were also disproportionate’.
The other 11 firms included in the action are: London firms Barnet Family Law, Creighton & Partners, Dundons, Dunning & Co, IBB, Lomax Lloyd-Jones & Co and Wainwright & Cummings; Hull firms Burstalls and Stamps Family Solicitors; and Exeter firms Cartridges and Ford Simey.
Comments
For years these same
For years these same solicitors have held these lucrative contracts, their statistics would be interesting as to how many cases did they win for the families they represented
In family Law - how would you
In family Law - how would you define "win", particularly in a children case?? Representation and the outcome in these cases cannot be judged on a traditional winner & Loser. Quality of representation cannot be judged on a set of tick box outcome codes. Such ignorance is what is creating this mess.
@ annon 7.15 WIN as in
@ annon 7.15
WIN as in honesty, justice and openness in these family court family v state cases, there are rules ie beginning of case the childs name the basic rule of format is set out on all court applications, 1989 Childrens Act 33 (7) While a Care Order is in force with respect to a child no person may a) Cause the child to be known by a new Surname
Judgement High Court of Appeal 25th July 1997 Accommpanied by Court of appeal Certificate 3370
whilst the judgement refers to Child as Child B for annonimity purposes, the certificate refers to a childs name that has never existed was not registered either at the hospital stated or the registry office in this name, judgement is public
http:www.bailii.org
England & Wales Click
England & Wales court of Appeal Civil Division Click
Scroll down
25th July 1997
B (A Minor) (1997)
EWCA Civ 2190
My Grandson was 10 Weeks old the Video mentioned caught an unexplained worrying action that child had from birth of jerking head backwards, and the conversation between parents about how worrying and concerns as to why he did this, and return to family GP, this was only one of the concerns for him related on several occassions to GP and Child health Clinic