LSC extends family contracts pending judicial review hearing
The Legal Services Commission has confirmed that all current civil contracts will be extended for one month, after the Law Society won an expedited hearing of its judicial review last week.
At a directions hearing last Friday, the High Court granted the Law Society’s application for an urgent hearing of its legal challenge to the LSC’s family tender process.
The full hearing will take place on Tuesday 21 September. The judge ordered that the new contracts should not be issued pending the hearing, although the LSC’s work on appeals and verification will continue.
Following negotiations this week with the Law Society and other interested parties, the LSC has confirmed that the current contracts will now expire on 14 November, with the new contracts beginning immediately.
To cover the one-month extension, current contract holders will receive an additional one-twelfth of their new matter start allocation.
Law Society president Linda Lee said: ‘We are pleased that our request for an urgent hearing has been granted by the High Court.
‘The significant reduction in the number of firms assigned to undertake family legal aid work will affect the most vulnerable in society. Family law work is a difficult and sensitive area, and these changes will cause more distress for families already under pressure.’ (see Comment).
LSC executive director Hugh Barrett said: ‘The LSC is committed to completing this round of tenders. We will be as flexible as possible to ease the process for our providers, and we are doing everything possible to resolve matters to secure quality services for our clients.’
Practitioner groups gave a mixed reaction. A spokeswoman for family lawyers group Resolution, which had not supported delaying the new contracts or the Law Society’s judicial review, calling instead for certainty, said its position is under review.
Director of the Legal Aid Practitioners Group Carol Storer said: ‘There are three categories of legal aid providers now – those who were unsuccessful in obtaining contracts, those who have been awarded a contract or contracts but with insufficient cases to be sure that they will be able to make the service viable, and those who were awarded a contract of sufficient volume to make it viable.
‘All three categories of provider now face more uncertainty, and we hope that there will be a resolution that does ensure that clients can access quality services and that quality providers continue.’
Comments
DELAY IN START OF NEW CIVIL CONTRACTS
Writing in the Gazette of the 9th September the President states that "Our action is focused only on the family tender exercise. We believe that the LSC can restrict the short contract extension to family law only." The reality is that the Law Society agreed to a directions order in the judicial review worded in such a way that the LSC has been able to justify the contract delay in all areas of civil law. The not for profit organisation I work for has obtained new community care contracts in order to provide for the needs of our extremely vulnerable client group - children in need and vulnerable adults. In order to comply with the LSC validation process it has employed a suitably qualifed team to deliver those contracts. The charity is now faced with a month in which it will have 8 new legal help matter starts to cover those extra costs when it should have had 120. If the contracts are delayed further it is unlikely that it can continue to employ that team, or take up the new contracts leaving our client group without a service. How does this tally with the President's expressed concern to ensure access to justice for every citizen? It seems that the Law Society's action will benefit one part of its membership, and one group of clients whilst seriously prejducing others.
Legal services commission family tender
"Utterly absurd and totally irrational".Even for that bastion of maladministration that is the LSC that is some going. The irony of that crew preaching about the importance of procedure. Is there any prospect of any accountability ? If the LSC was anything other than publicly funded not one of them would have a job. Great stuff Carolyn and the team.