ALISON CLARKE DISCUSSES THE PRACTICES OF RUNNING AN AGENCY BUSINESS WITH FIRMS WHICH HANDLE AD HOC WORK It is not often that solicitors give work away to competitors.

But when their office is miles from the court which will hear a client's case, or they are unfamiliar with the workings of a specialist jurisdiction, then they may have no choice but to instruct another firm to act as their agent.

Min Saiyid, a partner in the specialist agency department of Kingsford Stacey Blackwell, which covers all divisions of the Royal Courts of Justice (RCJ), explains: 'Many solicitors all over the country have work that has to be done in the High Court in London.

It is too expensive for them to come and do it, so they instruct us to do it for them'.

But geography is not the only reason for appointing an agent.

Steven Rothwell, a legal executive with London agency Moon Beever, said that his firm spotted a gap in the market.

'We aim to help provincial solicitors who are unfamiliar with the idiosyncratic workings of the High Court,' he says.

'We saw it as a chance to share our expertise of a specialist court.' Elizabeth Montgomery, a partner in the litigation department of London firm Blake Lapthorn which also specialises in all aspects of RCJ work, agrees.

She says: 'Occasionally, a professional client will even recommend their lay client to us if they feel they have not got sufficient expertise for a case running in, say, the construction and technology court in London, if they are based in the provinces somewhere'.

However, the traffic is not all one way.

Solicitors in London are equally dependent on provincial firms offering a knowledge of local courts.

The Wilkes Partnership, for instance, is an agency operating from Birmingham.

Tessa Rhodes is the legal executive who does virtually all its agency hearings, be they in the magistrates' court, county court, High Court or employment tribunal.

She says the firm started offering an agency service because the work is varied and offers another source of fee income.

But there are drawbacks as well as advantages to agency work.

Adrian Fawden, a partner in charge of personal injury at Simpson Millar in London, says: 'One of the difficulties we have is in the instructions given to us, which are often insufficient.

For instance, the judge will ask for something and we do not know the answer because the instructions are not clear.

If we receive the instructions in good time, we can ring beforehand, but they often tend to be at short notice'.

Mr Rothwell has come across the same problem.

'We ask for two days' notice from our instructing solicitors, but sometimes that is just not possible,' he says.

'We have had papers at 10.15am for a 10.30am hearing which means you just have to grab the papers and read them on the way.

You develop a thick skin as an agent and accept that sometimes you will be the sacrificial lamb.' But what about the Woolf reforms which stipulate that the solicitor with conduct of the case should keep control of it at all times? Adrian Fawden says that the changes will have an effect on agencies because solicitors cannot risk instructing an agent who is unable to answer the judge's questions.

However, not everyone agrees.

Jane Hardy, a partner in the litigation department at London firm Bates & Partners, says: 'There will still be room for agencies.

The High Court in particular is conscious of the commercial reality that people in the midlands will have to instruct an agent as you can't always have the case on your doorstep'.

Mr Saiyid goes one step farther.

He argues: 'So far judges have been understanding about agents and have realised that it is not reasonable to ask people to come for a 15-minute appointment from somewhere like Blackburn.

In any event, one of the aims of Woolf was to make justice more accessible and cheap.

It is more cost-effective to instruct an agent than to travel yourself, and the use of London agents -- at least well known ones -- advances the cause of Woolf'.

Ms Montgomery agrees.

'Solicitors in Cornwall possibly should be coming to the RCJ, but if an agent can be fully briefed, then those solicitors who travel might be criticised on costs,' she says.

She has noticed a slight reduction in their work since the Woolf reforms were implemented, but speculates that there may be other factors to explain the downturn, not least the fact that August is historically a quiet month.

One firm that does not subscribe to the Woolf downturn theory is Jess UK Ltd, a company which is not a law firm but which offers some basic agency services.

One of its directors, Bob Thompson, explained that: 'The company came together in April this year because of the Woolf reforms.

We saw a gap in the marketplace that witness statements would need to be Woolf compliant.

Our agents will go anywhere in the country and take statements on behalf of any company in the new Woolf format'.

The company has a proactive marketing strategy which, Mr Thompson says, has brought it work from some major companies, such as insurance firm Hill House Hammond.

This approach contrasts with that of well established agencies which operate almost entirely by word of mouth.

For instance, Mr Saiyid of Kingsford Stacey Blackwell says that although they advertise in the Gazette and at local law society level, a lot of work comes from client recommendations.

Likewise Mr Rothwell from the Moon Beever agency who says that they get so much work, they hardly need to advertise.

In some cases, the courts themselves make recommendations to solicitors -- Blake Lapthorn is on the House of Lords list of agents, and Simpson Millar is recommended by the Mayor's and City of London court.

ALthough it is hard to predict the long-term effects of Woolf on agency work, it is unlikely to have much impact on the well-established agencies.

However, some of the smaller agencies may find it more difficult to survive.

MATT BARNARD FINDS IN-HOUSE LEGAL DEPARTMENTS PREFER TO INSTRUCT AGENTS WHO KNOW THEIR COMPANY WELL By using sector- and business-specific knowledge, the in-house lawyer is able to use the law as a tool for enhancing the efficiency of the business rather than the law becoming an end in itself.

This is never more true than when it comes to litigation.It is perhaps no coincidence that it is in the US, where the role of the in-house lawyer is most developed, that litigation is most prolific.

Litigation is an inherently risky process, and good businessmen and women are skilled at minimising risk.

Even the most adventurous entrepreneurs are trying to get shorter odds than their competitors.

So for business people, a good in-house lawyer can be worth their weight in Internet stocks when it comes to litigation, which is why more companies are keeping their litigation in-house.

However, because of the ebb and flow of work, in-house legal departments are limited in size and so cannot always deal with all litigation matters.

This means that in-housers are increasingly adding the agency lawyer to their armoury.

As with private practice lawyers, in-house lawyers will use agencies when circumstances dictate that it is not cost- or time-effective to represent the company in person.

This can happen in a range of circumstances, from simple procedural matters to more complex and substantial cases.

But the in-house lawyer always has to weigh the advantages of using an agency lawyer against travelling to the court in person.

Lex Vehicles Leasing has dealings with clients all across the country, and has a substantial number of actions throughout the UK, predominantly dealing with debt collection and repossession.

Martyn Rodmell, head of legal at Lex, explains the balance he has to strike when using agency lawyers: 'We always prefer to go along ourselves, but it is a question of a cost and benefits analysis.

If it is a major case, either in financial terms or in PR terms, then we would want to have some of our own people there to actually deal with the case.

On the other hand, if it was run of the mill or small value, it wouldn't make sense to travel or take the time to go to court'.

Mr Rodmell's analysis is shared by other in-house lawyers, including Edward Smethurst, legal director at British Nuclear Fuels and chairman of the Law Society's Commerce and Industry Group.

He explains: 'For example, we had proceedings issued against us in Colchester.

The amount involved didn't justify getting in a car and driving down there, so we could instruct a local firm who did it for something reasonable like £75 plus VAT'.

The situation is simplest, of course, at either end of the scale.

If the action concerns a small amount of money, it is clearly sensible to use an agency solicitor.

On the other hand, when it is a major piece of litigation, it is equally clear that the in-house team will want to keep a close eye on the process and often employ a firm specialising in that particular type of litigation.

The more complex situation is when the case in question is between the two extremes.

It is here that tension between in-house departments and agency lawyers can arise, and also where good agency lawyers really come into their own.

Lex Vehicles's Mr Rodmell comments: 'The main problem with the system is unfamiliarity with the case and the way we do things.

What I see as one of the strengths of our team is having an understanding of our business, because they can make a decision there and then.

What I don't want is someone to vacillate; I want someone who is able to make a strong recommendation on the spot'.

This means that best agency solicitors will tend to get repeat work as the client trusts them to do a good job and prefers solicitors who are already familiar with their business.

With the new civil litigation procedures, the pressure is on all parties involved in litigation to settle more quickly and, if they must resort to using the courts, to be increasingly efficient.

In the future this will put more pressure on in-house lawyers to represent the company in person as they know the case best, and can make personal contact with the other side giving them a chance to settle.

However, it may also mean that the best agency firms pick up more work if they have a reputation for efficiency.

Ms Montgomery explains: 'We get to know how things work, and obviously that can be of great assistance.

All courts have their own funny little ways of doing things, and you get to know the system.

If I went to a court up north, I would know in principle what to do, but I 'm sure that somebody used to going to court on a daily basis would do it a lot more quickly and efficiently than I would'.

But whatever the outcome, the increased emphasis on cost-effectiveness and efficiency means that in-house lawyers and agency lawyers must ensure that they communicate properly.

Mr Rodmell of Lex Vehicles concludes: 'The key to being a good agency lawyer is to spend sufficient time understanding the instructions, and not picking up the file two hours before you go to court and sending somebody junior down.

It is a two-way thing.

We need to ensure that proper instructions are given, that we don't just send a file down and say please represent us.

You're doing you're own client a disservice in that situation and an agency lawyer should turn round and say we need detailed instructions, because if you don't do it correctly, the whole thing can be blown out the water'.

CASE STUDIES BY GILL WEBSTERCASE STUDY ONE: EMMA WILKINSEmma Wilkins is 28 years old and works for London law firm Blake Lapthorn.

She says: 'Virtually all my work is agency and I must say I prefer it.

We have probably the biggest agency department in London with seven to eight people on the team.

I probably do the most agency work though'.

Ms Wilkins took an LLB honours law degree at Birmingham Polytechnic and then followed with her legal practice course (LPC) at Cardiff Law School.

She did articles at London firm Belmont & Lowe and qualified in September 1996.

In March 1998 she saw an advertisement from Blake Lapthorn for a civil litigation solicitor to work in its agency department.

She was delighted when she got the job.

'The good thing is that you must keep on top of court procedure and practice which has been even more important since Woolf,' she says.

'As a result we are often used in an advisory role by other solicitors.

Because we are in and around the courts all the time, we know what is expected.

It's challenging and I have become a specialist in what I do and often go to court once or twice a day -- sometimes we can have three hearings in a morning.

You must be highly organised and have a good diary.

You are probably the nearest thing to a junior barrister.

'As a result you can never get bored.

It can be stressful but it is also very rewarding.

Probably the nice thing is that your clients are other solicitors and you can speak the same language.

If there is a down side, it is that you are not usually dealing with a case from start to finish.

And as hearings can be the most difficult part of the job, you are dealing only with the difficult parts.

'With all the changes in civil litigation, it has also been necessary to attend a large number of courses to keep up to date.

But that's all part of the job.

I thoroughly enjoy it.

Many of my solicitor friends say they are bored and not using their training.

This is what being a solicitor is all about -- and you get out so much.

But then you must come back and write your report.

We give a verbal report immediately and a written one within 24 hours.' CASE STUDY TWO: PETER DORANPeter Doran can be described as a true agency man as he is a sole practitioner and also does wholly agency work.

He is 41 years old and formed Cheshire Solicitors just 15 months ago.

He did his articles before his LPC course and qualified six years ago.

He says: 'I worked in a local law firm for three and a half years but I always wanted to set up my own practice.

I almost did it once with a friend, but the cost put us off.

Then at a wedding I met someone who was an agent and decided that was the way fo rward.

As an agent you deal with the law without all the bureaucracy, Legal Aid Board and administration.

You also get a result immediately.

It's pure law.

'I cover the north west of England and have been occasionally down to London for a case.

The most stressful part is being in a traffic jam.

I am four miles from the Welsh border and can get anywhere in north Wales in an hour and a half.

It's a useful niche to be in and although I have been an agent for just 15 months, I have built up a good amount of work.

I really enjoy it.' CASE STUDY THREE: DENNIS LYNCHDennis Lynch is 46 years old and qualified in 1982 when he worked as an assistant solicitor for a firm in london's west end.

He became a partner in the mid-80s.

The partnership was dissolved in 1995 as the partners wanted to go different ways and Lynch & Co was set up.He says: 'We deal solely with criminal and Children Act and children cases, and are franchised for legal aid.

We just specialise in the child aspect of matrimonial cases'.

The firm also has three solicitors who are members of the Law Society's children's panel.Although he did not act as an agent in his previous partnership, Mr Lynch said he was getting referrals within a few weeks of leaving.

'People have different reasons for choosing a firm,' he says.

'We do agency work because we aim to do a good job and as a result get many re-referrals.

We believe we provide a good service.'The work can be harder because you are sometimes getting other solicitors and their clients out of difficult situations.

Most of the time we find we are doing the work at the coal face and in criminal cases, if a client is in custody, it means dealing with him or her and their problems directly.'We have a policy that when we represent a client or firm, we give a detailed written account to the client.

This comprehensive report gives the solicitor notice of what he or she needs to think about next.

the solicitor relies on the agent and most of our time is spent in court.'We saw a niche market but the flow of work is erratic.

It's all or nothing.

Some weeks we have four or five cases, then we have no agency work for a couple of months.'