header-logo header-logo

The merits of unbundling?

17 September 2015
Issue: 7669 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Law firms should embrace unbundling and do more to market it to clients, according to the Legal Services Board (LSB).

The LSB and Legal Services Consumer Panel, its consumer wing, published new Ipsos Mori research with consumers, lawyers and judges this week.

Unbundling is where legal services are broken down into separate parts, which are then shared between the lawyer and the client. For example, a client could opt to save money by preparing their own evidence and instructing a barrister for representation.

The research, Qualitative research exploring experiences and perceptions of unbundled legal services, found that clients’ primary reasons for choosing unbundling were reduced cost and greater control.

Unbundling is increasingly offered by solicitors. However, whether or not unbundling was an option tended to be identified during the initial client interview rather than being actively marketed. The research highlighted some concerns, for example, the client receiving advice based on limited information or there being a lack of clarity about the scope of work involved.

Members of the judiciary also highlighted these potential difficulties but said that, if full representation could not be obtained, some legal assistance ought to be beneficial.

Legal Services Consumer Panel Chair, Elisabeth Davies, says: “We've known that the unbundling of legal services has been going on for some time.

“This research supports the view that unbundling can be used to broaden access to justice, and it's reassuring to see this method of service provision working hand in hand with DIY law. It's a natural response to the cuts in legal aid funding and wider financial struggles, and is indicative of the profession adapting to meet the needs of today's consumers and helping to empower them.”

She adds: “It is crucial that the more vulnerable consumers, including those who lack the confidence or knowledge to unbundle, are taken into account in other ways. Unbundling is an important part of a wider solution.”

Issue: 7669 / Categories: Legal News
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
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
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
back-to-top-scroll