Report comment

LAPSO forced a class of people outside the legal aid structure, in many cases that class of people are inherently vulnerable, added to that they are then involved in court proceedings, which are stressful and often difficult to understand, they hence became more vulnerable , and it is this class of people at which in general the MF service is aimed. Its not therefore just an issue of unqualified uninsured people offering legal services, they are offering them to very vulnerable people desperate for help . I can not believe that much of what MFs do is not in fact ( or should in truth be considered as ) 'regulated ' legal services .Part of the problem of clearly identifying what is 'regulated' is that the definition of 'conducting litigation' is so vague - I say this as I work in a barristers chambers dealing with direct access, and the issue of what can, and what can not be done as direct access ( barristers can't normally 'conduct litigation' ) is a constant problem . There is a huge grey area which permits exploitation . The best way the Law Society, the SRA and the LSB ( surely they must be good for something) could protect everyone is to lobby for amendment to the definition of regulated services that creates a presumption that anyone charging a fee for services to parties to proceeding is presumed to be selling regulated legal services unless they can positively prove otherwise .