QualitySolicitors in WHSmith tie-up

Why don't people just go the the local law centre or walk through the door of a decent high street firm? Presumably, the people sitting in WH Smith won't be qualified lawyers. Someone fixing appointments on a i-pad and offering "loyalty cards" is the future of legal services? Let's hope not.

Presumably, this "revelation" is based upon a press release? What a scoop, eh..?

Genius! Let's dumb down 6 years of legal training to selling ourselves in smith's like the blokes selling mobile tariffs and electricity and gas. Why didn't I think of it earlier.

As I cross the street I think, ah, I'm moving house I must get a solicitor. I know, I'll go into smiths and speak to the qs representative. They should do a much better job than my tried and trusted solicitor who gives me such good service and charges so economically. This is a eureka moment, perhaps I have discovered the future of legal services!

This has been tried before (and failed) because of solicitors lack of experience in the sales and marketing arena.

Though brand exposure is good, it has to be complemented by suitably trained staff with consumer engagement skills.

Though lawyers have great analytical skills, this is often accompanied by poor consumer communication techniques (hence the substantial growth in the claims management industry).

Sales and Marketing is an industry in its own right and the large corporates such as IBM, Microsoft, Ford, ICI etc spend over 12 months teaching their graduates on the intracacies of good practice.

Mmmmm anyone remember the Accident Group? It will be interesting to see what the approach will be and I notice no one seems to be responding on whether the staff will be legally qualified?

Be interesting to see how this works in practice. It better not be some idiot who wouldn't know a legal principal if it hit him in the face trying to get as many personal injury claims as possible, or selling ready made wills without proper analysis and advice. There's good marketing, then there's cheapening of the sector and lowering standards.

Without wanting to jump onto the anti QS bandwagon I'd be interested to know what standard firms need to comply with to get involved (or is it just a fee?). Some of the QS firms I've dealt with have been awful and one in particular has a reputation for incompetency.

Spot the pattern:

I don't understand marketing/that's not for a solicitor anyway
I don't understand the implications of the Legal Services Act
Law can only be dispensed from a traditional office
I have not got a clue how QS works so I will just make it up

= Negative QS posting.

The legal profession is changing to meet consumer demand and this is just part of it. QS is a smart, pro active marketing machine. As for cheapening the sector and lowering standards?! When you become a household name you put your head well above the parapet. You'll soon get shot by the media if customers are not satisfied. A perfect incentive for ensuring excellent quality.

Another interesting move by QS, but I suggest we let them gather the low end, unprofitable work while promoting the use of local solicitors. Then the reputable local firms can retain their profitable clients that wouldn’t consider buying their legal advice from W H Smiths.

I wonder if the 'staff' will have daily targets of appointments to make, like the street walkers of PI infamy did? Are they selling or waiting to be approached. I’ll be looking out for them locally and may indulge in a little sales rep baiting, wicked but fun….

I've sat here now, at my little desk, watchig all the QS announcements coming out, and watching as people jump excitedly up and down and predict that it'll all go wrong and anyone associated with QS will end up with egg on their face. Maybe they will, maybe they won't, but if certain of the QS firms offered me a job right now I'd be very tempted.

Someone has previously talked about opticians, and how things changed when they were dergulated (or whatever it was). My step-mother works as an optical receptionist. She has some sort of qualification that means she can hold an intelligent conversation with a client who comes in through the door, she can book them in to see the fully qualified optician, and she can do some of the initial tests they do associated with your "eye health". She started doing this job maybe ten years ago, and came from a completely different field. Training and development have made her the competent and valued member of staff she is today.

The firm she works for is located in a town centre shopping arcade, and when she started there they were a little independent operation with a total of two stores. The other one was in a quite deprived area. At some point in the last few years, and following a number of advances made by various groups, her boss decided to go in with one of the "big names" who advertise extensively on the telly. It is worth looking at what has changed. The shop is still there, allbeit brighter and with more prominent signage. The shop in the "deprived area" is still going. The pre-exisiting clients still come in, and when the name of the shop changed every client got a letter telling them what was happening. No-one has been made redundant. They did, admittedly make her and her colleagues wear a horrific blouse thing with the corporate logo on it - the problem with it was the material, which was apparently not conducive to a busy day in a non air-conditioned building - they've changed the material since in response to these comments. Yes, she now has to work the occasional Sunday (about once a month - they pay her more for it), but her boss is still her boss, her colleagues are still her colleagues, no-one from the Big Name comes round snooping or trying to trip them up and staff development is still encouraged. She actually gets a lunchbreak, I believe there is some sort of pension scheme (how many private practice solicitors have one of those?). And the firm is stronger for it. They've survived the recession, the constant TV advertising drives people to their door, and I recomend her specific branch to my friends because I know she does a good job.

If QS does for law what Specsavers, Vision Express and Dolland & Aitchinson have done for the Opticians profession, is that such a bad thing? High profile advertising, the likes of which individual firms could never afford, can't be a bad thing, surely? A recognisable brand name which people will see wherever they move to can't be a bad thing (and think about the number of elderly clients you have whose children live at the other end of the country, wouldn't it be great if you were in partnership with another firm they could go to, so that you kept all the work in your group, rather than them taking it to "a factory"/the co-op/ whoever?). I'll predict that the people in WH Smith will be sales people who have been specifically recruited for the role. They'll be paid at least partly on a commission basis, but will also have had training on the "products" involved (you don't honestly thing that the people in WH Smith selling Gas/ Electricity/Make-up etc actually work for that company, do you?). The training will have told them enough to get by, and rather like when a client comes into your reception and starts trying to explain the intricate details of their problem to the receptionist, the client will understand when the person takes down what they're saying and says something like "well, you can discuss that with Miss X when you see her, and I will pass this on, but I can't advise you about this, because I don't know enough about the relevant law" - and the clients are, 99% of the time, absolutely fine with that!

Good luck to QS. I await the gathering "perfect storm" of criminal and civil legal aid cuts, ABS and the current proposed amendments to PI and other work with interest. Those of us with an ounce of sense in our heads can see that big changes are coming, and many firms may not survive. If QS can survive or even thrive, where will the nay-sayers be then? Will they be so foolish as to refuse to work for the firms involved? I won't, and I would wager that many other solicitors, licensed conveyancers and legal execs in firms up and down the country are brushing up their CVs "just in case".

This partnership should bring business to each of the companies involved. QS will gain more clients since they will have so many more locations and availability to leads. WHS may start getting people in their stores who intended to only go to QS. Once they are in the store, half the battle is over. Should probably be a good partnership, but we will have to wait and see how things turn out.

Read some of the comments with interest and some amusement . I hope those who knock the QS Brand will not be sat in very quiet offices in a few years time . We joined the QS Brand because we knew it was bold but built on very sound strategies and we could see what was coming to the legal market .

You can bemoan the sort of business model that is coming but its coming nonetheless and this is a fantastic tieup which will work for WHSmith and will also work for the QS firms and the brand .

We are proud to be a QS Firm and look forward to our continued growth and next ground breaking strategies .

See you in WHSmith soon !

I don't think spectacles are any cheaper than before deregulation, so maybe the new way has been good for opticians. I expect that they don't scratch each other eyes out like lawyers!

Great blog about QualitySolicitors by Rachel Rothwell! See 'Blogs' tab at the top! Goodluck to QS and all QS firms!

If solicitors understood, knew how to market and how potential clients would look for services - be it top end cases or 'the dregs' then CMCs, introduction services and QS wouldn't exist. You'd all be getting in the work they are taking from you and charging you for.

This might not be the future of legal services but is a wake up call to the profession if anything.

Plus, shouldn't it all be about greater access for justice and understanding for the general public as to what is involved in a legal issue rather than a solicitor deciding if something is profitable? That way the 'time wasting' cases wouldn't take up so much of your day.

Those who bad mouth QS and think they will only take on 'the dregs' need a reality check and realise you cant just expect work to appear on your desk because you consider yourself to be a - quality solicitor - yourself.

I would like to add though I dont think this will be a very symbiotic relationship, the only one who I can see benefiting is WHSmiths who get a nice lump of cash to replace the demand for their products.

I am not part of QS and my firm doesn't plan to be and things like this do make me sceptical about it.

Good luck to them if it works and more fool the rest of us, but I one particular issue with it.

One of the points of QS as far as I have seen is that there is only supposed to be one in a particular area/region. I live in the South West in a small town and down here we have one WHSmith in the town and one QS. Effectively that firm will be having a representative in that branch of Smiths to say to go to them which looks almost a bit desperate from the outside. Objectively if I went into Smiths and either saw a local firm or was pounced on by a local firm offering appointments I would be wary of them and think that they can't be doing to well to have to tout.

My local M&S forever has a person in there trying to catch you to discuss M&S Energy and although a few people stop most just avoid. For someone like M&S that might not be so bad but for a local firm if people want to start avoiding that should be ringing alarm bells!

I think it needs some very careful treading and I am not sure whether it will work in smaller areas or just destroy reputations, but good luck to them.

As the closed shop that is/was the legal profession is opened up to competition I hope to see more of these innovations and further downward pressure on fees.

As clients become able to buy the same legal service from a trusted brand as opposed to a Guardian reading, 6 years of university studying, inefficient and highly paid fee earners hopefully a more agreeable market solution can be found.

Leave contentious issues to larger law firms. The general public want smart efficient solutions that “Tesco” and other brands are much better placed to supply in the high street. Let the public vote with their feet.

With the excellent reforms to legal aid coupled with the deregulation of the probate market and the soon arrival of ABS the future looks bright for consumers.

Well done QS.

The idea that someone is browsing in WHS for a new biro and then suddenly "remembers" they need to make a will is plain daft.

Why should the public treat any "Polo-Shirted" sales rep for QS any different to any other desperate hawker we all see in the street/shops and avoid like the plague.

You may get a few "timewaster" clients who book appts., who ultimately won't want to spend anything when they see they have to pay more than a few quid - "where's my free advice...??"...

And which poor sods will be condemned a life of humiliation, employed to stand beside the Birthday Cards, looking like a Deperate Dan salesman?

If this is going to manned 24/7 by anyone of any competence (say £20k p/a) then that is probably 2 x £20k down the plughole for starters...

In the age of new media, and client's coming to us increasingly via the web and mobile, the "manned stand" as a marketing tool seems like a risible throw-back to the 1970's.

Spend, spend,spend-away all those daft QS firms..!

I'm sorry (and I'm not from a QS firm by the way) but I just don't believe that any law firm offering general legal services can be anything over than pretty terrified about the prospect of the local WHSmith store in the heart of their high street being a place where legal services can now be accessed. Especially as they will be provided, not by WHSmith, but by a rival local law firm. If that doesn't have you rapidly revisiting your business and marketing plan locally then you are probably already way past saving anyway...

I am glad I don't work in high street law. So you want your status to be reduced to a shop worker do you, to work unsociable hours and clock on and off like a factory worker, going to like your uniform and name badge and low pay are you? "It's a game changer".

What a bunch of muppets!

What I don't get is why of the 50+ comments above, why 40 or more of them are "Anonymous". Come on people, get out of the closet, say your piece and nail your colours to one mast or the other.

For Allah's sake, there are even QS members commenting above who are not "brave" enough to put their name against their comment. So even after all that investment in their new brand, they still hide behind and "Anon" comment.

Is it a "game changer" as Craig suggested in the original "exclusive"? I'm not sure. One thing is clear, the WH Smith customer demographic is probably more like the kind that most last firms know is better for their profits. But, as people have pointed out above, will the "quality" of the staff in the stores really mean that wandering around WH Smith's on a Saturday, or buying a newspaper at a station on a Monday morning, will lead to a proper appointment and a new client...only time will tell.

One thing I could not see anyone pick up above, is what is the true cost of this kind of marketing deal. I'm 100% sure WH Smith's are not allowing QS.com this kind of access for free, which means QS.com are probably paying a percentage to WH Smith for each matter taken on.

I wonder what that number is.

Craig, perhaps you'd like to illuminate us?

Regs....David.

Like MARMITE, "you'll either love it or hate it"

I don't love it, don't hate it but it can only do well!

QS have done more in a year than what TLS have not achieved in a life time.

WHSmith is the largest retail newsagent and distributor in the UK.

As one of their lines, they sell 'self help/DIY law packs' in certain fields, the same can be easily rebranded and sold under the QS brand.

New marketing methods, products, services can only be good for business!

40 years ago under 30k Solicitors, now apparently something like 140k + Licensed Conveyancers+Legal Execs. There are now far more lawyers than the supply of decently remunerated work. We have thus created a vast pool of labour which new entrants to the legal market will be able to employ relatively cheaply compared to the past and use to compete aggressively against the High Street firm.

Quality Solicitors are at least trying to do something to fight back against the marketing power about to be unleashed upon us and may well preserve and increase participating firms business in the short term. In the medium to long term I fear that traditional High street practices are finished, primarily because we deal with routine work for the public, which others will shortly be allowed to do.

Firms that survive will be those concentrating on complicated litigation, commercial work etc. Continental lawyers seem to manage things better. Imagine if we still had say only 45k Solicitors and no Licensed Conveyancers, then we would not be having this discussion, yet thousands more solicitors still qualify each year. Frankly what the profession has been doing is training the new entrants labour force for them with the result that most Solicitors very shortly will lose control of their own destinies and be employed by big organisations on fairly low salaries.

We have not been very bright and traditionally have been much better at looking after our clients interests rather than our own. For many years High Street Solicitors have not been in it for a lavish lifestyle.

I expect that those who can build up a practice in the more complicated areas of the law will be in great demand in 10/15 years time and when most legal work is done in remote factories even the public may lament the loss of the Family Solicitor. It will be too late then.

40 years ago under 30k Solicitors, now apparently something like 140k + Licensed Conveyancers+Legal Execs. There are now far more lawyers than the supply of decently remunerated work. We have thus created a vast pool of labour which new entrants to the legal market will be able to employ relatively cheaply compared to the past and use to compete aggressively against the High Street firm.

Quality Solicitors are at least trying to do something to fight back against the marketing power about to be unleashed upon us and may well preserve and increase participating firms business in the short term. In the medium to long term I fear that traditional High street practices are finished, primarily because we deal with routine work for the public, which others will shortly be allowed to do.

Firms that survive will be those concentrating on complicated litigation, commercial work etc. Continental lawyers seem to manage things better. Imagine if we still had say only 45k Solicitors and no Licensed Conveyancers, then we would not be having this discussion, yet thousands more solicitors still qualify each year. Frankly what the profession has been doing is training the new entrants labour force for them with the result that most Solicitors very shortly will lose control of their own destinies and be employed by big organisations on fairly low salaries.

We have not been very bright and traditionally have been much better at looking after our clients interests rather than our own. For many years High Street Solicitors have not been in it for a lavish lifestyle.

I expect that those who can build up a practice in the more complicated areas of the law will be in great demand in 10/15 years time and when most legal work is done in remote factories even the public may lament the loss of the Family Solicitor. It will be too late then.

Incidentally, I believe that trials were carried and the results were better than expected. Plenty of new leads and loyalty cards given away! There is something to be said about that. It's clear that the public have been 'apprehensive' about lawyers and QualitySolicitors are evidently trying to break that mould. Good on you. Whether we like to believe it or not, things are changing and those of us that realise that sooner rather than later, the better.

The thing that concerns me is the risk management side of this. I also think that the first time there is any claim against a Quality Solicitor firm, the brand is going to be damaged and the other member firms are not going to be happy.

I think the real issue here is whether solicitors want to carry on in this environment.

The solution is to accept the market is saturated and get out.

The fact that the legal profession has got itself into this mess is sad and largely a result of so many desperate students trying to get in.

We didn't join QS last year as we only do PI and that side is (or was) covered by QSPI and being a member of QS did not mean you were a member of QSPI and visa versa. I dont know if thats the same now or if not, would the WH Smith legal Rep refer the PI work to the local QS firm or to a central office. Anyone know ? Also as the proof of the pudding is in the eating can any current QS members confirm here that they are receiving significant extra work as a result of their membership ? I would be really interested especially re PI.

This wont be the last solicitor big brand to emerge from all this and in the end it may not be the winner but on the other hand those that do nothing will defintely be the losers.