header-logo header-logo

Out of order

03 May 2018 / Steve Hynes
Issue: 7791 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail
nlj_7791_hynes

Steve Hynes takes time out to explain the complexities of the tendering process for legal advice telephone services

It appears that the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) is having problems finding enough firms willing to take on civil legal aid work. It has been forced to re-advertise a number of tenders recently, including the telephone service in discrimination law. There is a suspicion that it is trying to fix the process for this as it is not prepared to pay the market price for it.

Ring the changes

As part of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) changes, the government introduced a telephone service for some areas of law. Members of the public wanting advice on debt, discrimination, and education cases under the legal aid scheme have to use the service. It is a bureaucratic process, as getting help requires people to first contact an operator who carries out a means, merits and scope test to determine if they qualify for legal aid. If they do, they are then

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll