I agree that lawyers are going to have to find better ways to operate than the traditional and arguably anachronistic method of charging their clients with reference to six-minute units of time. It is not the case, however, that ‘either the lawyers are experts who know what they are doing and know... the time it will take... or they don’t...’, as Christopher Digby-Bell contends (see [2009] Gazette, 7 January, 9). Would that it were so simple.

I am an employment lawyer with over nine years’ experience and I know what I am doing. Yet, in advising a senior executive on their exit from an employer, for example, I can only speculate about how reasonable (or not) the employer (or their lawyers) will be, and how responsive (or not) they are when I am giving my client a pre-estimate of fees.

If I spend weeks in chasing progress and negotiating with a recalcitrant opponent, is it Mr Digby-Bell’s assertion that I should be penalised financially? I think not. Sometimes, the time it takes is not simply a product of the nature of the work, but also the parties involved and how reasonably they behave.

While the profession needs to work hard at identifying ways of charging clients that ensure value for money, what we do needs to be recognised as difficult to commoditise in its entirety. Our efforts should attract fees that reflect the work undertaken.

Natalie Saunders, Director, Berwins, Harrogate