header-logo header-logo

Co-op launches media ad campaign

11 June 2013
Issue: 7564 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Marketing
printer mail-detail

 Modern market in legal services demands "transparency & flexibility"

Co-operative Legal Services (CLS), which is introducing “unbundling” for its family law services, has launched a major TV, radio and mass media advertising campaign.

The adverts play on the way many consumers feel baffled by legal jargon and intimidated by solicitors. They are to be broadcast on stations across London as well as nationally on Sky and satellite channels as part of a wider campaign that includes social media, press adverts and PR.

The Co-op has also launched a YouTube channel, The Practice, with 17 videos offering practical legal advice on issues such as divorce and separation.

The firm is also considering how to introduce “unbundling”—providing legal services on a partial retainer, where the client chooses which elements to purchase.

Christina Blacklaws, CLS director of policy, said: “In light of the impact of the civil legal aid changes, [the Co-op] is set to expand its current range of fixed and transparently-priced family law services to include an additional range of unbundled legal services.”

David Greene, NLJ consultant editor and partner at Edwin Coe, said: “There is nothing new in unbundling. A fancy name given to a way of delivering service to cash strapped clients that many solicitors have practised for years. In litigation, for instance, it is by no means uncommon that solicitors may allow the client to remain on the record but assist with pleadings, disclosure and trial preparation on set fees.

"We are likely to see much more of this with an increase in the small claims limit. Similarly fixed fees for certain stages of the litigation process are increasingly common. The modern market in legal services demands providers be transparent and flexible.”

Last month, the Law Society published a Practice Note on unbundling, noting that it can operate on different levels such as providing clients with self-help packs, providing discrete advice or checking documents.

In March, Yorkshire firm Oxley & Coward launched a “pay as you go” family law service. Clients take on some of the tasks normally undertaken by the solicitor, such as dealing with documents and administration, and only pay for advice when needed.
 

Issue: 7564 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Marketing
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll