Skip to main content

Welcome Learned Friends

I would just like to take a moment to welcome My Learned Friends at the Bar of England and Wales to the officious world of the Legal Services Commission - a true bureaucracy that has no purpose other than to create more red tape and expense.

Quite recently, the LSC took over the handling of the Advocates Graduated Fee Scheme (basically how the Bar gets paid for Crown Court work).  Previously, such things were handled by a single or sometimes small team clerks at the Court where the work was conducted and payment would be authorised and made within a short time-scale of a few weeks in most cases.  From my own experience, the court staff were usually efficient, friendly and made few mistakes - if they adjusted a bill they were right 9 times out of 10.  My own experience of the LSC (who have been handling all types of solicitors claims for years) is that they are almost never efficient, staff may or may not be friendly and they make a huge number of mistakes - for example, I recently had a bill reduced because the page count was reduced "as per the evidence YOU sent us", so said the scawled note on my bill.  I returned it pointing out that they had failed to include two whole schedules of evidence when they did they sums.  That bill was originally submitted in January and as we approach May I am still waiting to be paid!  This is normal.

I am now hearing lots of complaints from the Bar that their bills are not being paid and that they feel like the LSC are calling them liars... all I can say is welcome to my world where solicitors have put up with this attitude from the LSC for years.

Members of the Bar, just wait until the LSC starts telling you how to do your job despite not having any legal qualifications or ever having stepped foot inside a court room, because they love to say that whatever you do for your clients was unnecessary (like reading the evideince against them, taking their instructions, etc).


Popular posts from this blog

Ched Evans

Before I begin, I will say that at around 4,500 words this is probably the longest blog I’ve ever posted but I think it’s all necessary to set the scene for this case and explain the background that has been largely ignored or airbrushed in the press. Despite its length, I have not attempted to include every little detail of either fact or law but have done my best to provide a balanced picture of the Ched Evans case, what happened and why the courts reached the decisions they did. There has been so much written about the Ched Evans case over the past weekend, much of it based on a very shaky grasp of the facts and law, that I decided I would read up about the case and weigh in (hopefully on a slightly firmer footing than most of the articles I’ve read so far).

Broadly speaking there seem to be three groups who have opinions on the case:
1.Sexual violence groups (including people describing themselves as “radical feminists”) who appear to take the view that the case is awful, the Court o…

How do the police decide whether to charge a suspect?

A question I’m often asked by clients (and in a roundabout way by people arriving at this blog using searches that ask the question in a variety of ways), is “how do the police decide whether to charge or take no further action (NFA)?”
What are the options?
Let’s have a quick think about what options are available to the police at the end of an investigation.
First, they can charge or report you for summons to attend court.  Charging means that you are given police bail and are required to attend court in person.  A summons is an order from the court for you to attend or for you to send a solicitor on your behalf.  In many cases where a person is summonsed, the court will allow you the option of entering a plea by post.
Second, you may be given a caution.  These can be a simple caution, which on the face of it is a warning not to be naughty in future, or it can be a conditional caution.  Conditions could include a requirement to pay for the cost of damage or compensation, etc.  Either…

Bid to prevent defendants knowing who accuses them of a crime

When I read The Trial by Kafka and Nineteen Eighty-Four by Orwell, I took them as warnings of how a bad justice system wrecks lives of those caught up in it. Sadly, some Members of Parliament and the House of Lords seem to view the books more as a guide to how they would like our Criminal Justice System to run. Today, I read of plans to hide the names of accusers and witnesses from defendants in a large number of cases. Victims of sexual offences, such as rape, have had the right to lifelong anonymity for many years now. This means that it is a criminal offence to publish information that will lead to a complainant being identified. A Bill currently being considered by Parliament would extend that anonymity to bar defendants and their lawyers knowing the name of the person accusing them. This would apply not only in sexual offences, as has been reported in the press, but also in violent offences.
The anonymity currently offered to victims of sexual offences is not total, the complainant…