header-logo header-logo

28 November 2017
Issue: 7772 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Campaign for early advice

A study into legal aid has concluded that cutting state funding for early legal advice proved to be a false economy.

Consequently, restoring it through legal aid could actually save the taxpayer money.

The research, conducted for the Law Society by Ipsos MORI, was published this week. It reveals a statistical link between getting early legal advice and resolving problems sooner.

‘Without early advice, relatively minor legal problems can escalate, creating health, social and financial problems, placing additional pressure and cost on already stretched public services,’ said Law Society vice president Christina Blacklaws.

‘Anyone who can't afford to pay for early legal advice may struggle to identify solutions—meaning simple issues spiral and can end up in court bringing unnecessary costs to the taxpayer.’

Early legal advice for most areas was removed by LASPO (the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012). For example, it is no longer available for family breakdown and child custody, which has led to fewer mediation referrals, which in turn has increased pressure on the courts.

However, the study shows that, on average, one in four people who receive early professional legal advice had resolved their problem within 3-4 months after it had first occurred. After nine months, three-quarters had resolved their issue.

The Law Society this week launched an early advice campaign.

Blacklaws said: ‘We are calling for legal aid for early advice from a lawyer to be reinstated for housing and family cases. We are keen to work with the government to address this issue.

‘The current situation is unsustainable. If early advice was available to those who need it, issues could be resolved before they worsen and become more costly for the individual—and the public purse.’

Issue: 7772 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Legal services
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

Senior appointments in insurance services and commercial services announced

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Aviation disputes practice strengthened by London partner hire

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Residential property lawyer promoted to partnership

NEWS
he abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll