Hitler discusses the legal aid reforms
Discussion
Jasandjules said:
singlecoil said:
You are mistaken. When I said gravy train I was in no way whatsoever referring to Legal Aid.
HTH
So then what is the issue with lawyers earning say 60-80k? As noted above and/or in other threads a good plumber will make more than that.....HTH
legal aid is another example of welfare designed to reward those who live off the state with yet another free service at the expense of taxpayers who cannot afford the same service for themselves. i'm sure that such a benefit would be lovely if the country could already meet its spending obligations. good riddance. i'm sure the poor lawyers will find a few whiplash cases to pay the mortgage
singlecoil said:
Who said I had an issue with it? By all means take me up on what I have said, but don't take me up on what you thought I said.
If not then what are you referring to when you state the Gravy Train? And what is the issue with it? Once you've clarified I can seek to address it, or it may be you are well informed and hold a view I cannot dispute. Let us find out shall we?Jasandjules said:
singlecoil said:
Who said I had an issue with it? By all means take me up on what I have said, but don't take me up on what you thought I said.
If not then what are you referring to when you state the Gravy Train? And what is the issue with it? Once you've clarified I can seek to address it, or it may be you are well informed and hold a view I cannot dispute. Let us find out shall we?plasticpig said:
The second problem with a large increase in litigants in person is the courts spend far more time on such a case. Everything has to be explained to them and they may well be dealing with people who speak very little English or who are only semi literate. This is going to jam up the court system so justice will be far less swift than it is now. There is no fast track for people who have money so they will have to wait along with everyone else. It will be a far longer wait for the father who is applying for an access order to see his kids and it wont matter if he is rich or poor.
Some mothers are able to drag the process out for far, far, longer than it should last precisely because they are in receipt of legal aid.
Whilst I am in favour of access to justice for all, I feel very strongly the state should not be enabling and funding that particular misery.
Justayellowbadge said:
plasticpig said:
The second problem with a large increase in litigants in person is the courts spend far more time on such a case. Everything has to be explained to them and they may well be dealing with people who speak very little English or who are only semi literate. This is going to jam up the court system so justice will be far less swift than it is now. There is no fast track for people who have money so they will have to wait along with everyone else. It will be a far longer wait for the father who is applying for an access order to see his kids and it wont matter if he is rich or poor.
Some mothers are able to drag the process out for far, far, longer than it should last precisely because they are in receipt of legal aid.
Whilst I am in favour of access to justice for all, I feel very strongly the state should not be enabling and funding that particular misery.
singlecoil said:
Well, having had a look at a couple of on-line sources, it would seem that what I meant by it was pretty much what any other English speaker would mean by it. And in this particular case, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that most lay people would consider the better paid lawyers to have a favourable remuneration to risk/effort ratio.
Please, for the avoidance of doubt, make it expressly clear.In terms of fathers accessing children however, there are monumental failures (in my view) with Family Law which are nothing to do with receipt of Legal Aid. That could be swiftly changed (and should be!).
Jasandjules said:
singlecoil said:
Well, having had a look at a couple of on-line sources, it would seem that what I meant by it was pretty much what any other English speaker would mean by it. And in this particular case, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that most lay people would consider the better paid lawyers to have a favourable remuneration to risk/effort ratio.
Please, for the avoidance of doubt, make it expressly clear.In 2015 if you are a criminal or unfortunately accused of a crime the legal advice you will get is to plead guilty. This is no different than before and is the same advice you would have got 10 years ago. Now though your counsel will not get paid a bloody fortune for giving you non advice.
If your in luck the CPS case will collapse as far too many do, the name in the profession for this is a cracked case, look it up, means the opposite of what most people think it means, too many police dramas...
Then again Barristers seem to set themselves up in the most expensive to rent properties in town, i.e. chambers.. maybe one day they will discover the internets and work from home...
If your in luck the CPS case will collapse as far too many do, the name in the profession for this is a cracked case, look it up, means the opposite of what most people think it means, too many police dramas...
Then again Barristers seem to set themselves up in the most expensive to rent properties in town, i.e. chambers.. maybe one day they will discover the internets and work from home...
What quaint views! My chambers, in common with most of our main competitors, have had a network since the mid 90s and working from home via the net is normal. I work from home on two or three days of an average week if not in court or going to meetings. In theory, a great many businesses of all kinds could operate without permanent office spaces, and this has been the case for many years, but still most businesses have permanent offices. A permanent physical base for any business provides somewhere to meet clients, and somewhere to maintain the collegiality of the organisation. Barristers traditionally had cheap office space, and it was often rather grotty, but the rents went up at about the same time as the internet happened along, and the facilities are now more modern, at least at the mid to upper end of the market.
I don't do criminal cases, but, if everyone is advised to plead guilty, how come there are so many trials and so many acquittals?
I don't do criminal cases, but, if everyone is advised to plead guilty, how come there are so many trials and so many acquittals?
singlecoil said:
This is a very good point.
It isn't, really. Mothers and Fathers won't be able to come to enforceable agreements. Mothers will say no access and Fathers will have to lump it (and vice versa). The courts will find themselves full of desperate parents, lacking objectivity, bickering in court at a much slower pace they would have done with representation.People don't go to court through a perceived choice.
10 Pence Short said:
It isn't, really. Mothers and Fathers won't be able to come to enforceable agreements. Mothers will say no access and Fathers will have to lump it (and vice versa). The courts will find themselves full of desperate parents, lacking objectivity, bickering in court at a much slower pace they would have done with representation.
People don't go to court through a perceived choice.
I've never been convinced that the state should have to pay the costs of sorting out people's broken marriages. There's got to be a cheaper and easier way of sorting out such bickering without resorting to £250 per hour solicitors.People don't go to court through a perceived choice.
RYH64E said:
I've never been convinced that the state should have to pay the costs of sorting out people's broken marriages. There's got to be a cheaper and easier way of sorting out such bickering without resorting to £250 per hour solicitors.
Emotions are strong things. Eventually you may have to get to a point where someone says "comply with this or you go to prison" to make it happen. I wouldn't be happy giving that power to anything less than a proper court which, inevitably, means invoking the services of those who know the operation of the law and the courts.10 Pence Short said:
Emotions are strong things. Eventually you may have to get to a point where someone says "comply with this or you go to prison" to make it happen. I wouldn't be happy giving that power to anything less than a proper court which, inevitably, means invoking the services of those who know the operation of the law and the courts.
I guess we'll find out, I believe that there have been sweeping changes to legal aid for divorcing couples in the last month or so. I've no first hand experience of this, just office gossip at work.
RYH64E said:
plasticpig said:
Average is around £25K for a legal aid solicitor. A senior partner in a small town firm will make around £45k. The big money is in corporate stuff.
My brother-in-law is a solicitor, he's in his late forties and a partner in a small London firm... ...he often takes home less than I pay some of my production workers. His wife earns more as a teacher.I used to have a criminal legal aid firm in a small town in the NW of England.
Newly qualified solicitor would get just over £20k.
A typical thirty year old with 5 years PQE would get about £35k.
Equity partner income varied hugely. Was typically £80k, but could crack £100k with a few big cases on the books.
But all of that is history.
In the last 18 months a lot of effort has been made to keep criminals out of court.
The police are using cautions and fixed penalties much more.
People aren't being charged unless the evidence is very strong indeed.
The charges are generally softer. Many serious assaults are prosecuted as common assaults to keep cases out of the Crown Court and to keep prison numbers down.
Courts are closing, probation officers are being laid off, the CPS is culling lawyers and defence solicitors are staring into the abyss.
And it is going to get worse. The govt is has published a consultation on reforms. If passed, there will be a 60% reduction in the number of high street firms offering criminal defence services. Tenders are to be invited starting with a 17.5% reduction in fee levels and working down.
Your typical equity partner in a criminal legal aid firm has seen his profit halved with the prospects of worse to come.
Two or three years ago, most partners in criminal firms would have snorted at the prospect of being paid a teachers salary. These days many would jump at the chance.
No one is really bothered about the quality of representation afforded to your typical smackhead shoplifter, especially when the cash can be better spent in the NHS.
I was never really bothered that I was only paid half what I might get as a commerical lawyer. Criminal advocacy was a vocation that I enjoyed.
Representing child molesters was never much fun, but looking after society's lost souls was quite satisfying. The mentally ill, the addicts, those with learning difficulties etc all needed a voice, even if their behaviour was often reprehensible.
I've been doing it for the thick end of twenty years.
But a couple of months ago I cashed in my chips and walked away from it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff