Oversupply of lawyers to drive down costs, says Green
The oversupply of qualified lawyers denied entry to the profession has led to a ‘burgeoning body of paralegals’ that will have a profound effect on solicitors and barristers, former bar chairman Nick Green QC said last week.
At a conference on legal education in London last week, Green said the paralegal market, which is ‘burgeoning at an alarming rate’, is one of the biggest challenges to face the professions.
He said: ‘The burgeoning body of paralegals is already affecting the structure of the profession, and will do so increasingly in the near future.’
Green said the rise in paralegals was due in part to the oversupply of qualified people, who had completed the bar and solicitor training courses, but are unable to get a pupillage or training contract.
He said around 6,000 ‘enthusiastic and able’ qualified lawyers are feeding into the paralegal market each year, and working at rock bottom prices.
Typically, Green said freelance paralegals charge as little as £15 per hour for tasks such as issuing documents or taking notes, and £30-50 per hour for application to a district judge.
He said clients have become aware of this, and will increasingly scrutinise solicitors’ and barristers’ fees and consider whether they can get better value for money from a paralegal.
Meanwhile, Allen & Overy’s former senior partner Guy Beringer QC, a solicitor, called for greater collaboration between the two branches of the profession in the future.
Beringer told delegates the boundaries between barristers and solicitors are ‘becoming blurred’, citing the practice of advocacy by solicitors as an example.
He called on the Inns of Court to open their doors to solicitor advocates. Otherwise, he suggested that the solicitors’ profession would try to create a model to mirror what the Inns do.
‘The sensible way forward is collaboration, which requires changes on both sides,’ said Beringer.
Comments
This may all come to an end
This may all come to an end once tuition fees are raised to £9,000 per annum.
Surely no law student would be stupid enough to spend that amount of money and then spend £10,000 on the LPC to become a paralegal?
Or am I wrong and there is still a willing supply of lemmings?
What happened to propsals
What happened to propsals requiring students to secured pupillage before undertaking the bar exams? Also, I work as a 'solicitor's agent', equivalent to court paralegal described above. Our expertise is only suited to certain cases up until small claims. Barristers are still required for fast and multi track claims. Until the rights of audience change for paralegals that work isn't going anywhere.
Paralegals Rights of Audience
In all professions there are some that make and some that don't. When Nav says that 'until the rights of audience for paralegals changes...' is he/she implying that they should change? If so, then I simply don't agree.
The rights of audience hierarchy is designed to ensure quality of advocacy in the courts so that the public can receive a high quality service. A high quality of service can only be ensured if the advocates meet the required standards and are adequately trained.
If paralegals want to exercise rights of audience in matters other than small claims then should qualify as solicitors or barristers.
We shouldn't dumb down our profession to satisfy the ambitions of those that have not been able to hold a practicing certificate.
There are problems at NQ Level too
Unfortunately it is not just people who have completed the LPC and are now unable to get a training contract that is the problem. Even after you have successfully completed what is considered the 'holy grail' of a training contract, you still face difficulties. I completed my training contract in March 2010, but was then told my firm only intended to offer NQ positions to two of those that qualified and the rest of us were made redundant.
Since then I have struggled to find suitable permanent employment. I interview for a NQ position and often find I am the only NQ there. Due to redundancies at other firms, solicitors with 2 or 3 years PQE are going for roles advertised as NQ, as there isn't anything on offer at their PQE, so naturally they have the edge due to greater experience.
If I interview for a paralegal position I am told that I am over qualified, and the firm has concerns that I would leave as soon as an NQ position becomes available somewhere else.
The end result is that I have only been able to secure temporary employment through an agency in a non legal capacity, which I suspect is also now beginning to count against me.
Well you should have thought
Well you should have thought about all that before going down the legal route.
Everyone knows law is a very high risk career choice.
Even when you get past 4 or 5 years PQE then you become too expensive to employ because cheap paralegals will do the job for nothing.
The problems in law just never go away. It's a constant battle to survive so you have to ask yourself is that how you want to live your life???
I made a choice not to go into law. I went into medicine instead (though I still keep informed as to whats going on because I nearly went down the legal route)
I have a good and protected salary, job security, final salary pension and the list goes on. Plus I can go to any country and practice. I can also get as much overtime as I want and get paid for it unlike solicitors that stay late for nothing.
In comparison going into law is a mug's games.
Going into law should require a green cross code: STOP, LISTEN AND THINK. if people just did this they could save themselves a lot of pain.
Having said all this if people are desperate to go into law, I guess nothing can prevent the misery that awaits. Some lucky few will get the right opportunty though, but that is not the norm.
I just urge graduates to think very hard before paying £10,000 for the LPC which some of my friends did and regretted significantly.
Sympathy
To 'you should have thought'
Nice to see a fellow professional offering so much sympathy and support to someone who is clearly trying their best. Also, far from being naive, they seem to be very realistic and understand what they are up against. Frankly, they sound like the type of young lawyer a firm should hire.
Good luck to them
Support is being
Support is being offered.
I.e. it time to face the truth about the legal profession and then make much smarter decisions about one's future.
"Trying their best" as you put it; what does this mean?
I can try my best to be a formula 1 driver but that doesn't mean it is a sensible career choice.
If I sell the family silver to try and become an F1 driver, then regardless of how much I try my best it is a silly thing to do.
It may seem harsh but graduates do need to think much harder about the future and how markets are changing for goods and services. There's no point making a decision to go into a industry just because it was lucrative in the past.
Those days have gone.
For a start, no graduate should be self-funding the LPC. That is so stupid. If that stopped then some of the issues of oversupply might be resolved.
The legal sector is not a future growth industry. Pointing that out is obvious.
Supporting young students and lawyers must involve telling the truth rather than perpetuating myths about the profession. The myths are the reason these people are in bad situations.
I don't think I need to add
I don't think I need to add anything else to what you have said because it was so succinct. I have been a solicitor for over three years now and I can easily say that the road to get this qualification was not easy. It was not worth the stress and discrimination I faced from people in the profession. I can honestly say it is the worst decision I have ever made in my life.
You should have thought!
A little harsh and self congratulatory but sadly true. Speaking as a law teacher I have warned students for the best part of a decade that supply far exceeds demand in legally qualified jobseekers.
Still the law schools recruit them.
The majority of law students are still commencing their undergraduate education direct from school where they are given shoddy advice on entering the legal professions. Universities rarely warn students about the job lottery they face when they finish their studies but to a large extent the students should take some initiative and make their own enquiries before embarking on lengthy and very expensive study to be a lawyer.
Legal practice requires 'person skills' that many law students do not possess, it is not in the law teacher's power to supply them with these skills although some Universities might think so.
Another failing is not engaging in work experience. All of my successful former students (in terms of now being in practice) did extensive and usually unpaid work in their holidays. This work experience is absolutely invaluable, it is often this experience more than the teaching of law that convinces many it is not the job for them. The earlier they were to do this the less expensive and heartbreaking might be the experince.
The commentator is right in this respect...those who do not get placed perhaps "should have thought", rather than expecting others to do it for them.
"Everyone knows law is a very
"Everyone knows law is a very high risk career choice."
Everyone that is except the 10 million or so people who read the red tops-and much of the so-called "quality press". To them we are all "fat cats".
You can often see some of those deluded souls` postings on this very site.
(Just one of the myriad ways the mass media in this country deliberately cripple a real debate about vital issues.........)
Deluded Souls
I am one of those deluded souls Anonymous refers to.
Solicitors are obsessed with money. I have just been looking at a country solicitors £8,000 bill. £240 an hour for everything, including all travelling and waiting time. Plus £20 for every letter sent and every phone call. Plus plus plus.... The hours claimed are probably arbitrary anyway - there is no way to check. My gardener is at least as skilled in her work than this solicitor in his, but she charges £10 an hour, she under-estimates the hours and would not dream of charging £10 an hour for travelling or waiting. If she was a solicitor she would be specifically be allowed by a remuneration order to charge extra depending on the value of my garden or if my garden is important to me.
Could someone please explain to me why £200+ an hour is not obscene remuneration?
Obvious isn't it? Because
Obvious isn't it? Because your gardener has no overheads
But high street solicitors
But high street solicitors don't get that much work these days.
I'm guessing that this is a probate file or contentious family matter.
The run of the mills stuff (conveyancing and wills etc) are so cheap that they barely even break even on this.
It can take many months to complete a probate or family matter so £8,000 over the whole duration doesn't start to look that good. When you consider that an estate agent can get much more than that for not doing very much and having no education, then it looks good value.
Mortgage brokers also make thousands for doing very little apart from "arranging a mortgage"
Bankers get millions for gambling.
Footballers get millions for kicking a ball around a field.
So the truth is solicitors don't get that much when one considers the length and cost of training, lack of high value work, costs of running an office and high level of competition.
What purpose does this website serve?
I am sure that this website produces some income for the Law Society. But by and large it is populated by members of the public who feel, perhaps rightly for it is impossible to say, upset with one aspect or another of what we do as professionals. We therefore offer any person who feels the inclination to spout off on a website funded by US the PC paying masses. WHY? Is it just me?
Why £200 is not obscene
DEMAND
In my opinion the only reason why £200 per hour is not obscene is because you accepted to pay for it. The solicitor will only be able to charge what the client will accept.
SUPPLY
Second, high hourly fees are due to a policy to charge high. This policy is only possible because of insufficiant competition among the surviving/well known law firms.
....your post misses the
....your post misses the point entirely. For the reasons below:-
1. You are not deluded in the sense implied by the previous post - from what you write you have merely been unable to see the wood for the trees. Most solicitors are not fat cats in the same way that most actors are not Tom Cruise - many are getting by, and are not poor.
....But to imply they`re all rich is vacuous, childish tabloid nonsense and insults the intelligence of anyone trying to have a serious debate about legal costs.
2. You do not do yourself any favours comparing solicitors to gardeners. With all due respect to gardeners and their skills, their overheads are unlikely to be as high. Many gardeners do not run their own office premises for a start . As for skill-sets, whether you think it is money well-spent or not, legal training is rather more expensive than gardeners` training...and gets paid for in post-qualification work, like any job that has to be trained for.
Call-out plumbers often charge £135 an hour as I know to my cost. £240 an hour starts to look good value in that context.
4. No one is pretending that Solicitors, (like dentists), come cheap to the average citizen if you pay privately. BUT:
It is significant that you have no comment to make about legal aid solicitors whom the Government thinks, most certainly DO come cheap. If they were fat cats they most certainly are not now. Would you work in a job where there has been no pay rise for 12 years ?
Overheads?
My gardener has overheads and she does not charge for them. Solicitors charge for their overheads and exaggerate them - in the case I have here they charged £20 for each and every phone call - thats at least 10 times and possibly 100 times the actual cost. I'll bet there is enough profit in these phone calls alone to pay for the office and secretaries.
But high street solicitors
But high street solicitors don't get that much work these days.
I'm guessing that this is a probate file or contentious family matter.
The run of the mills stuff (conveyancing and wills etc) are so cheap that they barely even break even on this.
It can take many months to complete a probate or family matter so £8,000 over the whole duration doesn't start to look that good. When you consider that an estate agent can get much more than that for not doing very much and having no education, then it looks good value.
Mortgage brokers also make thousands for doing very little apart from "arranging a mortgage"
Bankers get millions for gambling.
Footballers get millions for kicking a ball around a field.
So the truth is solicitors don't get that much when one considers the length and cost of training, lack of high value work, costs of running an office and high level of competition.
Report abuse reply
I agree with your comments
I agree with your comments and with your comparisons of other professions.
You like many that share your
You like many that share your blinkered views do not appear to know the worth of a service, only the cost. Like any other service you can shop around, negotiate fixed fee agreements in advance or indeed given the tone of your comments, not seeing the worth of the service provided, why do you not do it yoursel. Typical attitude of a whingeing malcontent. Grow a pair and do it yourself / negotiate terms or stop whining about an agreement you voluntarily entered into after the job has been done.
You like many that share your
You like many that share your blinkered views do not appear to know the worth of a service, only the cost. Like any other service you can shop around, negotiate fixed fee agreements in advance or indeed given the tone of your comments, not seeing the worth of the service provided, why do you not do it yoursel. Typical attitude of a whingeing malcontent. Grow a pair and do it yourself / negotiate terms or stop whining about an agreement you voluntarily entered into after the job has been done.
I have just purchased a pork
I have just purchased a pork sandwich for £2.40. A sandwich I could have made for a farction of the cost. But I did not. I used their service, paid for their service and received a decent sarnie. The price I paid went towards the ingredients, staff, energy, cleaning products, satisfying Health & Safety regulations, equipment, maintenance etc.
I have also just received a funeral account in an estate I am dealing with for over £3,000.....that will be twice the fee I will charge for administering the estate, which will take a lot longer.
I have received an auctioneers statement for selling some of the deceased's contents with commision on each sale. The same company cleared the house.......the estate still owes them money as the sale proceeds do not cover the cost.
Your gardener sounds good. Your solicitor probably was too. You could do either your self if you wanted to.....but you don't.
With reference to a post above, I hope your boiler is ok.....a plumber will charge £150 just to come out before he has even located the problem. Then he will charge parts and labour. Ouch, could be pricey....but then you could do it your self....but hold on, you won't. Becasue you have neither the skills or time to do it.
Solicitors are not all driving around in fancy cars wearing pin stripe suits. You have been watching too many Agatha Christie's. I drive a T reg Golf and live in a terrace in an 'ok' area. Def not some tree lined gated community.
Enjoy your garden....
DIY
Anonymous says "why do you not do it yourself".
Another anonymous says "You could do either your self if you wanted to.....but you don't."
You anonymous people are making invalid assumptions.
It is perfectly valid for you to challenge me to either stop complaining or do the work myself and I accept the challenge without hesitation.
I have not used a lawyer for over 30 years, I do all my own legal work and others should too. The bill I referred to was not mine and I neither said nor implied it was.
Makes your whole point even
Makes your whole point even more bizarre if it was not even your bill. Complaining about something you have absolutely no knowledge about?
May I point out that when
May I point out that when applying for the LPC most people do not intend to be a paralegal when they complete the course. The reality is that the paralegal route is their only option.
Is this why I qualified
Peter Seaman may well get his wish whereby everyone does their own legal work. Just wait till the so-called Tesco law swings into effect - that will be interesting to see.
There is little point in trying to justify what solicitors charge. Presumably the person who received the £8,000 bill was given a Rule 15 letter before he agreed to it. If he's not happy with the bill then he could have challenged it but, as Mr Seaman says it wasn't his bill, so why is he so bothered? The fact others use solicitors would seem to suggest they understand that they are paying for their expertise, and this does not come cheap. Time is money - we don't live on fresh air.
In the real world, Mr Seaman, lots of solicitors have lost their jobs, and firms have folded. I haven't worked for two years, and have now exhausted my savings. I tell any child of mine not to bother qualifying as a solicitor, as this is the type of diatribe we now have to put up with on a regular basis.
To the bill whinger
To the bill whinger above, a typical client who sees the cost of everything and the value of nothing. I suppose the lackey who does your ironing and charges £6.00 per hour is too expensive as well. Here is an idea. Why don't you do the legal work you are paying your solcitor to do yourself?
Oh no you can't can you? Because you lack the requisite skills, qualifications and experience. Quite apart from the overheads you are paying for somebody who has completed years of training and experience to do something you cannot do yourself. That's capitalism for you.
I suggest if you want lower legal bills spend four or five years at university and law school, two years training and then ten further years getting post qualification experience. You'll probably just about be able to do the job that your solicitor is currently charging £240 per hour for.
You are also paying for the risk we take in advising you. As we are now held to a ridiculously high standard of care it is only right we charge appropriately for that standard.
I do wonder why non lawyers post comments on this website to expose themselves as clueless.
Is this why I qualified
Oh and I totally agree with 'is this why I qualified'.
A respected profession?
Constant abuse more like.
Give it ten years there won't be any problem with costs being driven down. Solicitors will be as rare as rocking horse muck.
Can the last solicitor please turn out the light?
Valid point
I do not understand why everyone is being so aggressive in their responses to Mr Seaman and I think this is one of the biggest problems our profession faces.
I work in a small town high street firm and although our partner does charge in the region of £200 plus VAT, even I can understand a client's frustration at the cost.
Yes we train for many years at significant expense to qualify, but the average client does not see that. The 'average' client still thinks of solicitors as overpaid rich probably older menin stuffy offices who drive expensive cars and own large properties (and probably more than one) as that is how we are portrayed and it is fighting that rather than complaining about Mr Seaman's comments that we should deal with if we expect to survive.
Clients want value for money and I would say a large number of clients (particularly for non-contentious matters) do not care about the PQE or level of experience their solicitor has as long as they can trust their solicitor to listen to them and charge them a reasonable fee. Money is tight these days and rather than finding ways of supporting our clients you are instead having a strop over one person saying an £8,000 bill is a lot.
Personally, unless it was a complicated litigation or probate that went on for years I would be shocked to receive an £8,000 bill.
I have to say I am interested in Mr Seaman's point of view and would like to know what he thinks would be a reasonable amount for a solicitor to charge and whether it is just the cost that stops him using a solicitor.
Are you equally shocked by
Are you equally shocked by footballers being paid millions to kick a ball about or estate agents getting ten of thousands for doing nothing.
The point is solicitors are significantly underpaid for what they do and this is because of the massive over supply.
Value for money should be considered in the context of the cost and education of providing the service or goods in question.
The cost of providing a solicitors service is massive. The PC alone is over £1,000.
If your argument is that solicitors should be renumerated at a low level then this would be at odds with the costs of providing the service.
Why should anyone have to
Why should anyone have to justify what they charge? Do plumbers, or dentists, or indeed anyone else who runs a business? Do Rolls Royce or Jaguar receive irate letters from people complaining that they cannot afford their cars, and are forced to drive a second hand Skoda instead? Anyone, in any trade, profession or business can charge what they like. If their potential customers don't like it then they can vote with their feet and spend their money elsewhere. As you may know Sarah, running a legal practice isn't cheap, and fees for certain types of work (particularly conveyancing and wills) have dropped through the floor. Legal Aid work is being constricted severely, and firms are going to the wall on a daily basis. Why don't you suggest to the partner in your firm that he/she lower the fees? I'd be interested to see what their reaction is.
Don't get me wrong - I know
Don't get me wrong - I know that it costs a lot to run a practice and that actually we do not charge that much for all the work and effort and training that goes into it. I charge my hourly rate and clients accept that in the same way that partners and solicitors in other firms will charge a lot more per hour and clients will accept that.
I do in practice deal with some conveyancing and will drafting as well so know how little we can charge for it compared to the actual cost because that is what is expected of us and seethe when I see estate agents invoices for 5-10x what we charge.
I am just interested in an 'outsider's point of view'. The issue we are facing as a profession is that there is a real fear that some clients are going to move away from traditional solicitors firms when ABSs come in in October and I for one am interested to find out why the gentleman who posted on this thread has chosen to forsake solicitors altogether and cost is one of the factors.
When you look at a charge of £240 an hour, however justified by the position and experience of the solicitor and the cost of overheads, is a lot of money. On my trainee salary I would have to work for about 3 1/2 days to be able to afford one hour of that solicitors' time. With the economy the way it is, in smaller towns and villages that is a lot and a lot of potential clients will see the cost as a barrier as to someone on the outside they do not always appreciate the training and expense that goes into providing the service.
That is the only point I was trying to make and if you look at the point objectively to the average person that is a lot of money they have to find and we need to combat the perception of us being overpaid 'fat cats' in order to stop clients turning to ABSs and particularly the supermarkets who are going to offer value for money.
Oh and fyi I am disgusted at the amount footballers are paid to kick a ball!
Sarah, Clients can turn to
Sarah,
Clients can turn to ABS if they want to but most business actually want to make a reasonable profit so that means those ABS are likely to be charging a lot more than solicitors currently do.
High street law firms are probably amongst the least profitable businesses in today's world. So who is going to want to be a part of that?
High street firms have little to worry about from ABS. Investors with money can make much more money investing in other more profitable businesses.
Think about it. Would you risk your money and buy into a high street firm? I certainly wouldn't because it is far too risky.
So why would someone else throw money at a high street firm.
When conveyancing was deregulated solicitors were so worried about banks taking over but the banks realised there was no money it and left it to cheap lawyers.
The same will happen with ABS.
But how do we, as a
But how do we, as a profession, change the perception of solicitors? Fees in certain areas of law are already at rock bottom, legal aid lawyers haven't had a pay rise in twelve years -yet we constantly hear about legal aid fat cats. No matter how low you drive your fees, people will still complain about how expensive solicitors are!
You can't because people do
You can't because people do not think about it hard enough and why should they.
The only solution is to get out.
Lots of solicitors have retrainined to be plumbers, train drivers, teachers etc etc
What all solicitors should look to do is train to do a job that can't be commoditised or outsourced.
For example you can't outsource or commoditise the job of a parademic.
i qualified, got made
i qualified, got made redundant and am now training to be an ACA.
it was either that or become a paralegal.
Oversupply of lawyers
When I qualified in the early seventies I believe there were less than 30000 solicitors, now there are over 130000 plus Licensed Conveyancers and Legal Executives, Res Ipsa Loquitur! As W.S. Gilbert once wrote "When everyone is somebody then no ones anybody". Solicitors are now two a penny with the inevitable effect on fees and respect for the profession generally.
Accountants have the great advantage that they by and large act for businesses and wealthy individuals who need professional help to prepare accounts and tax returns. Further this work has to be done each year whereas the High Street solicitor is more involved with one off transactions. As a consequence Accountants have clients who understand the value of their work where we are usually dealing with clients who use lawyers rarely and then often regard them as an added and unjustified expense in an already expensive transaction.
It is difficult to see what we as a Profession can do about this. How many other businesses have large PI premiums to pay (ours are apparently the largest) on top of all their other expenses before they even open their doors? I do not know many High Street solicitors living opulent lifestyles, most are struggling to make a decent profit after all the overheads and staff are paid. Cut your fees to £100 per hour and then see how long you stay in business!
All of the solicitors on this
All of the solicitors on this page have made valid points, but I am afraid our days are numbered. I told my younger brother a few months ago to stay well away from training to become a solicitor. I agree with the above comment about solicitors being as rare as 'rocking horse muck' in a few years from now. There must be a better way to live and work. I am confident that I will find one.
Yes there are. You could
Yes there are.
You could probably do any job and get paid more, have a better quality of life and actually enjoy the job.
I got out a few years ago and it was the best decision I ever made.
I'm a social worker now and I get paid more and the job is so much more rewarding.
You can't outsource social workers or replace them with cheaper alternatives.
The only growth industry in law is the paralegal route.
best decision i ever made
was to become a solicitor. You guys who hate your jobs resign now -life is too short. I love the challenge of the law and being in business.Lots of people are progressing successful careers in the law.
Peter if you are able to sort your own legal work yourself great, but your friend or whoever had the 8k bill obviously chose to instruct solicitors- its their choice. As per the above comments they will have been given alot of fee info at the outset- much much more than accountants/dentists/plumbers/estate agents/gardeners etc have to or do provide so presumably you support that persons choice to hire whichever plumber or lawyer they like. I know accountants who charge £30 per hour and ones who charge £800 (seriously) so you pays your money and you takes your pick.