APIL, dumb lawyers & civil justice reforms: seeking efficiency but at what price?

From Claims Council.org 18/04/11:

The new president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) today warned of the emergence of a new breed of ‘dumbed-down, legal-lite’ lawyer following the introduction of alternative business structures.

Oh God... that sounds horribly like Mr Bean in a pinstripe suit. Not a pretty sight.

Addressing APIL’s annual conference, David Bott predicted that ‘potentially massive’ new entrants to the personal injury market will be ‘very efficient’, but ‘process-driven’, voicing fears that these ABSs will not prioritise the needs of injured people.

’How much free thought, intellect and empathy will be used by this process-driven lawyer?

Good question. I should imagine that clients want a lawyer who will really cut loose occasionally, undo their top button, loosen their tie, slip on some flip flops and exercise some hardcore lateral thinking – legal style. In all seriousness, though, the personal, professional touch is important in legal services. Claimants don’t want to be kept on hold for twenty minutes listening to Night Fever by the Bee Gees on continuous loop, only for some hopeless moron with a script card in front of him to finally respond to their query with ‘computer says no’ type of answer.

’Ironically, claimants might at first prefer to deal with this new breed of legal-lite adviser, but that happiness may only last until the claimant has a problem, or until their particular, individual injury does not fit into the rigidly defined, immovable process being used by the ABS.

I think this has been a well-established phenomenon. For instance, large ‘wholesale’ businesses handling mass conveyancing services have been slated by many in the past for being cheap and cheerful, but everything can go horribly awry and prove more costly (in time and money) if a curveball is ever thrown their way.  Isn’t this just more of the same?

‘Because these new firms could be like hulking steam trains; fantastic at moving ahead but useless at moving in any other direction.’

Pursuing the analogy, I think the new plans have all the makings of an epic legal train-wreck, and we’re careering towards disaster.

Well, maybe. 

’The only party to benefit from these proposals is the negligent defendant, or moreover his insurance company, which has collected a premium to pay out in the event of a claim.

‘At the heart of these proposals is a movement of costs away from the negligent defendant and on to the innocent claimant. That is just plain wrong.’

And there end’th the lesson for today, children.

Amen.

Lawyers – the circle of life

From Calamities of Nature 15/04/11

That’s aaawwwful! 

Granted, law is supposed to be one of the most despised professions of all, but there are surely worse things someone can do in life.

For instance, your child might always come to you one day and proclaim that they’re not interested in being an astronaut any longer but instead want to be a:

- car salesman,

- estate agent,

- insurance broker,

erm, prostitute ?

In all seriousness, though, is choosing a career in law really that bad?

I was astounded talking to some colleagues recently who, it turned out, a) wouldn’t choose law if they had their time again and b) would definitely discourage their kids from choosing it.

I know Tesco Law ABS might shake things up a bit, but surely the future isn’t THAT gloomy?

Scrap in-store legal reps – bring on the embarrassing legal problem roadshow

From The Law Society Gazette 07/04/11:

Today’s news that QualitySolicitors is to put a member of staff in WHSmithstores throughout the country has provoked a strong reaction from the profession; as any regular visitor the Gazette site would expect.

So how significant is this move to place QS staff in WHSmith stores?

Frankly, QS boss Craig Holt hits the nail on the head when he points out that the deal will ‘fast forward QS to “household name” status years ahead of target’. You bet it will.

True, but that’s not to say it will be a ‘good’ or ‘positive’ household name. Clearly they’re banking on the maxim that all publicity is good publicity will hold true. I’m not convinced it always does for the legal profession.  Heck, just look at Andrew Crossley & ACS:Law.

One of the biggest problems solicitors face is that many people who might want to use their services are actually a bit scared of them.

A consumer research project conducted by the SRA recently found that consumers are ‘in awe’ of the profession.

That might sound complimentary, but in practice it means they are too intimidated to walk into a solicitors’ office and finally get that will written up.

In one canny move, QS has eliminated that problem. Instead of trying to entice reluctant clients through a law firm’s doors, now the brand comes to them instead – in among the two-for-one chocolate deals and paperback books, a place where a smiling employee in a black and pink polo shirt presents customers with just the perfect opportunity to do something about that nagging legal problem.

And that’s the very problem. WHSmith tried placing reps from utility providers in stores a while ago who generally milled around annoying customers who had just popped in for a porn mag copy of the Daily Telegraph. I hate sales people and I know I’m not the only one; most people seem to welcome them as they would a bad case of haemorrhoids.

It doesn’t matter whether that person is a lawyer or not – and in fact will probably work better if they’re not.

It is more important for them to be approachable than knowledgeable (I know commentators won’t like this). All they need to do is tap that appointment into the iPad, and let the qualified lawyers take it from there.

I’m not sure two wrongs make a right. If it takes someone being hassled by a salesperson to realise they need access to justice, their need can’t have been very great in the first place.

But it is hard to see how this deal can be anything other than a very smart move for QS firms; all the better, because now QS has really stolen a march on the non-legal brands that will be looking to exploit their own high street outlets and branches come October.

Boooo, I say.

I’m all for improving transparency and accessibility, but this is terrible.  I think the ‘I need somebody’ billboard campaign for solicitors ran by the Law Society is a good idea – for what that’s worth.   As a campaign it was clear, dignified and relevant.  But placing salespeople in shops to grab customers by the elbow while they’re standing in line to buy a completely unrelated product most certainly is not. 

If it’s suddenly so important to take legal services and the profession to the client, perhaps roadshows for embarrassing legal problems a la the Embarrassing Bodies doctors on Channel 4 would be a better idea. At least that wouldn’t involve getting your naughty bits out on national television, as you lay back, your legs in stirrups, whilst the cameraman pans up towards your nether regions. 

Well, I guess that could be optional. 

Heck, for the overseas episode, you might even persuade a solicitor to take off his Oxfords and socks, roll up his trousers, and walk across the beach looking for clients with a dire legal problem.

Think it’d be a goer?