Report comment

The system is a shambles, and a very expensive one at that. In addition to the slow speed of the site generally, it is fractious and unstable. I would summarise the problems we have experienced as follows:-

1. The speed of the CCMS website is very poor (we have no broadband speed issues. Set against a paper application for Legal Aid, we estimate that it is taking around 45 minutes – 1 hour longer to complete an application via CCMS. .

2. “System Busy” messages generated after trying to submit various pieces of information. One such message was given at 6.30am on Christmas Eve 2014 – on taking this up with the LAA, we were advised “There are lots of injunctions over Christmas”. Yes I laughed too. Through gritted teeth.

3.The system frequently logs people out of the system with no warning.

4.The problems are encountered whether Internet Explorer or Google Chrome are used. On taking this up with the LAA technical support team, we were advised that that there was an ongoing issue with Google Chrome logging users out of the system and that it is unlikely to be addressed any time soon. We were further advised that the system couldn’t possibly take account of all internet browsers to ensure functionality and were unhelpfully advised to try browsers interchangeably and then stick with the one that works.

5.It is not compatible with Microsoft Word. It is a complete mystery as to why the CCMS designers have decided that the system should not be compatible with the most widely used word processing package in the world.

6.The system will not allow you to use certain alpha-numeric characters though its only known dislike is of “smart quotes”. We raised this issue with the LAA several months ago and have not had a satisfactory response.

7.The technical support offered when these problems occur is bit part. It often takes several days to get a response; several weeks for a remedy. Each time we have discovered a CCMS error, it has been reported and eventually dealt with by the LAA, usually after a significant delay, only for something new and different to arise. CCMS users are having to chase responses from different teams within the LAA to resolve the problems. It is time consuming and takes us away from actually giving advice/progressing cases.

8.When a document is requested by the LAA via CCMS to support an application for funding, the user has to upload the document and submit it. The user then also has to send a separate message to advise that the document has been submitted.

We have been making significant effort to ensure that our practice manager and our first batch of fee earners currently using CCMS became familiar and experienced with it. Among the first batch of fee earners, we have someone with the quickest keyboard skills in the firm and someone with experience of software technology, programming and various databases spanning over 20 years in practice. Our strategy was to ensure that the first batch of fee earners were instilled with the necessary knowledge and confidence to continue to use CCMS, and to ensure they could use their experience to support other fee earners when they begin to use the system.

Unfortunately, our experience of CCMS has been beset with technical problems from the start. Each application seems to generate a new problem. My colleagues and I have little confidence in CCMS in its current form; going forward I am very concerned that the system has now been mandated from October 2015. While we are willing to continue to work with the LAA upon the development of CCMS, I fail to see how legal aid can be administered properly, effectively, and at the intended cost savings for the LAA, when the system intended to be used to administer it is so fractious, dysfunctional and error ridden. In short, Jo Edwards is absolutely right and I fully concur that the system is not currently fit for purpose.