Report comment

The whole idea of charging a fee is utterly wrong and opens a corridor for the exploitation of the gullible, unsuspecting and vulnerable people who turn to McKenzie friends because they can not afford in the first place.

Charging a fee is a small barrier to access to justice and a paradox to cuts in legal aid if thats how the watch dog looks at it. On the reverse side, providing a low quality service by McKenzie friends who are under no obligation is not in the interest of the client. Removing regulatory barriers and opening the door for all and sundry clearly compromises the interest of the client. I was in first year of law school when my advice which I have always provided free of charge had been sought simply because I was in law school. Then LPC and LLM as the demand for such a free service increased.

Whilst many are competitively struggling to get on to the threshold of the professional ladder, and providing a free service to build on experience, charging a fee will kill competition.

Let's not forget; the Legal Service Consumer Panel was created within the new regulatory framework; the prime objective-promoting competition within the legal market which then trickles down to providing the best choice to the client. Charging fees is a bad idea and compromises the very essence of competition within the new regulatory framework.

Every qualified person purporting to be a McKenzie friend simply because they do not want to be faced with the strict regulations in the competitive legal market should be prevented from carrying the professional titles. They should be called McKenzie friend if their services are free. If the want to charge, they should join the competition. The services of a McKenzie friend should be absolutely free.