Pupillage Portal ‘clearing’ removed.

According to the Pupillage Portal, the ‘Clearing’ has now been removed because it was not being used by chambers to recruit pupils. Any unfilled vacancies will be advertised for candidates to apply directly to chambers.

Personally, I didn’t think it would work anyway.

Also, the 2012 timetable has now been published.

The Portal will be open for submission of applications between 11am on 29/03/12 and 11am on 26/04/12. The updated pupillage adverts will be displayed.

03/05/12-06/09/12 – pupillage providers will be able to access applications

02/08/12-06/09/12 – chambers can make pupillage offers

Another new feature is that candidates will now have two weeks to consider any last minute offers after the season closes.

The old sample application form can be downloaded here, but I’m not sure whether there will be any changes to the form.

Good luck to everyone applying this year!

AD1 form sent off!

As the title of the post says, I submitted my AD1 form for the admission to the Roll today, along with certificates, CRB check results and the completed Experience Evidence Form (and the fee, of course).

AD1 was a lengthy form, but nothing complex. Experience Evidence Form, on another hand, was a real pain. I’m just hoping that it will go through!

More areas of practice recognised under QLTR

Just went to check up on the different areas of practice on the SRA’s website, and… I couldn’t believe my eyes… They have listed Clinical/Medical Negligence as a separate area!!!

This means that by 5 February 2012 I will have satisfied the 3-area requirement for my Certificate of Eligibility!!! Can this really be happening?!

So basically to satisfy the QLTT experience requirement, you need to gain experience in at least 3 of the following areas of practice (however they say that other areas will also be considered; the newly added ones are highlighted in bold):

• Banking
• Civil Litigation
• Children / child care
• Clinical / medical negligence
• Commercial law
• Commercial litigation
• Commercial property
• Company law
• Construction
• Consumer law
• Criminal Litigation
• Domestic property
• Employment
• Environmental law
• EU law
• Family
• Housing
• Immigration
• Insolvency
• Insurance
• Intellectual property
• Local government / public law
• Magisterial (removed)
• Pensions
• Personal injury
• Planning
• Professional negligence
• Property (removed)
• Regulatory
• Shipping & aviation
• Tax and financial planning
• Welfare and benefits
• Wills, probate and trusts

For more information, visit the SRA’s website.

Whiplash Scammer? You will be Found out.

Whiplash is caused when the head experiences sudden, usually violent or forceful movement, causing the muscles, tendons or ligaments of the neck to sustain damage. What constitutes damage or injury in this context is the cause of much concern among insurers, solicitors and medical professionals. The problem is that the symptoms of whiplash can be difficult to properly diagnose; thus, a claimant with a legitimate claim might be accused of feigning injury whilst a fraudster might get away with it.

According to the ABI, around £2 billion is spent by insurers on whiplash claims every year, yet only £8 million is spent on treating whiplash injuries by the NHS. This discrepancy can be interpreted in several ways, but in essence either the NHS is not investing sufficient funds in treating, diagnosing and researching the condition or fraudulent claims exist in abundance. Compensation claims perhaps ought not to be worth 250 times the cost of treating the associated injury, so it could be argued that whiplash fraudsters exist at all levels of the claims process, from claimants to solicitors. Speculation aside, whiplash fraud is a serious problem affecting the motor insurance industry, so efforts to reduce its impact must be given full consideration by those in a position to make a change.

The only reliable measure of whiplash is a doctor's examination, but this too is not perfect. Doctors can diagnose obvious signs of injury such as bruising, swelling and dislocation, but stiffness, weakness and pain can occur without significant signs of injury. An accident victim is not necessarily faking an injury if they report feelings of discomfort without there being a tangible or visible problem. Of course, the absence of certainty surrounding whiplash injuries means that many are faked by fraudsters who are intent on receiving compensation for which they are not entitled. So, what can be done to address the problem?

Reputable law firms and insurance companies employ various measures to identify fraudulent claims. Though limited, these measures are often successful in weeding out the bad apples, the majority of whom exaggerate their injuries. Independent medical reports tend to be very useful in establishing whether a claimant is telling the truth about their whiplash injury, which is why solicitors usually forward cases on to trusted medical professionals for more detailed analysis.

A GP might be content to diagnose or refer a case of whiplash with several dozen patients waiting in the queue, but an independent medical examiner will take their time to ensure that an alleged injury is properly diagnosed. Most personal injury claims involving whiplash hinge on the evidence provided by independent medical examiners, so this represents the highest level of scrutiny prior to a claim being settled.

Fraudsters who have managed to fool doctors and solicitors should not rest on their laurels, however, as many firms follow up claims for some time after settlement. If, for example, a fraudulent claimant has successfully received whiplash compensation worth several thousand pounds, claiming a long-term injury, the solicitors or agents involved in the case might instruct private investigators to keep tabs on them. Fraudsters who one day claim that they can hardly move their necks only to be observed playing football the next are likely to find themselves in a spot of trouble.

People who are found guilty of defrauding others in this manner may be asked to pay back any compensation awarded to them and they might even face a custodial sentence. Fraudsters rarely prosper, regardless of what insurance companies might lead people to believe.

This guest post has been written by Denver Burke on behalf of Ead Solicitors. He has been writing articles and content on a variety of topics across the web and is hoping to share his enthusiasm and knowledge on the subject.

Perfect Job Ad.

Dear Readers,

What would you think if you saw the following job ad?

Are you seeking a career as a Paralegal in a little friendly firm? Look no further. The ideal candidate will be self-motivated with excellent communication and organisational skills and possess the ability to work in a fast-paced, deadline-driven environment with a high degree of accuracy, professionalism, and close attention to detail, willing to work late hours and weekends, as well as taking work home.

Key responsibilities:

• Managing your own caseload of around 60 files of varied complexity, including litigated cases
• Answering external telephone line and screening incoming calls
• Dealing with new client enquiries and setting up new cases
• Providing technical support to all staff
• Creating the firm’s advertising and marketing material using graphic editing software
• Negotiating advertising deals with newspapers and magazines

As no admin support will be provided, you must be self-sufficient and be able to do your own filing, post, photocopying and faxing, to name a few tasks.

There will be no printing facilities in your room, therefore candidates must be physically fit to run up and down the stairs to fetch print jobs throughout the day (NB: please note that employer accepts no responsibility for any tripping/falling accidents).

Crazy, right? Jobs like that do not exist!

PIP Implants.

Personal Injury solicitors are going crazy about the potential claims resulting from the PIP implants scandal.

One firm is said to already have over 600 potential clients on their books!

If only they could find someone to sue...

QLTR Application - CRB Check & AD1 Form

Once you have passed the QLTT and gained the relevant work experience, you need to request the AD1 form for Admission to the Roll of Solicitors and a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) application form from the SRA.

SRA can be contacted via email: contactcentre@sra.org.uk or phone: 0870 606 2555 (why can’t you just download these forms on the internet?!!).

It would appear that you need to complete the CRB form first and send it to the SRA with a £42 cheque (the SRA will then submit it to CRB). Registered trainees would get the CRB form about 12 weeks before the scheduled end of their training contract.

Once you have the CRB check results, you can apply for admission using AD1 form (associated fee is £100).

I have only just requested these forms from the SRA, so will blog in more detail once they are to hand…

Useful links:

• SRA’s guidance on completing the application form for CRB check
• Directgov guidance
• Criminal Records Bureau

Calling names on Facebook.

Flint Bishop Solicitors have come up with the following catchy banner:

I wonder if their service extends to ‘colleagues’?

Annoying clients etc

Sorry I haven’t posted for a while.

Whenever I think of a post idea, I immediately fear how it’s all going to be misinterpreted and taken out of context by certain people. I said previously that I didn’t care about losing my anonymity, but now I wish I had it.

Anyway, until I figure out what to do (or come up with a ‘safe’ idea for my post), I wanted to share this great blog that I came across, called ‘I do not want to be your lawyer’. Despite being written by an American Personal Injury lawyer, I wish that some of the posts were made into leaflets for our clients, because they are spot on.

There’s loads of funny stuff there, so it’s definitely worth a visit. Here’s an excerpt from a particularly accurate post entitled ‘5 Ways To Be An Annoying Personal Injury Client’. I couldn't have put it any better myself (and I hope that the author won’t mind me reposting it here):

1. Annoying Clients Call Way Too Often

Clients have the right to be kept apprised of the status of their case. However, there will be times during your case when there is nothing new to report. Calling every day or even every week is excessive unless your case is at a critical point, like right before your trial.

It is in your lawyer’s best interest to let you know when something important happens. He’s not going to sit on settlement offers (he wants your case to settle, too). He’ll tell you when depositions or mediation are approaching, as he’ll want you to be prepared. But if you haven’t even reached MMI yet, your lawyer will probably not have anything new or important to report for quite some time.

By all means, if you have new information for your lawyer, such as a new medical provider or a change in your condition, call and let him know. A lot of information can just be given to his paralegal and won’t require your attorney’s direct attention. Calls to give your lawyer important information are never annoying. Calls asking for a status update more than once a month risk being annoying. You will begin to sound like the kid in the back seat asking, “Are we there yet? Are we there yet?” A client who calls way too often takes time away from the lawyer working on his case and those of his other clients, and he also makes the lawyer feel untrusted. Don’t be one of those clients.

2. Annoying Clients Bring Their Lawyers Legal and/or Medical Research

Nothing makes a lawyer roll his eyes more than a client walking into his office with a phonebook-sized stack of “legal research” the client has done on the internet. Your lawyer knows how to do his own legal research. He will very likely have better research tools than you. He will know which cases are controlling in your jurisdiction, and which cases are applicable to the facts of your case. No matter how smart you may be, or how good a legal researcher you may fancy yourself, you hired a lawyer for a reason — he’s better at it and knows more than you.

You may think you’re being helpful. You aren’t. I guarantee that the moment you leave your lawyer’s office, your hours of legal research are going directly in the trash bin. Expecting your lawyer to sift through an amateur’s stack of legal research is annoying.

While not as annoying as bringing your lawyer legal research, bringing your lawyer stacks of medical research from the internet can be pretty damn annoying. Unless you’ve got some bizarre condition that no one you know has ever heard of, odds are that your attorney is familiar with your type of illness. We don’t need articles on back injuries, knee injuries, torn rotator cuffs, post-concussion syndrome, fibromyalgia, RSD/CRPS, depression or a host of other ailments. If your lawyer is unfamiliar with your type of medical problem, he will ask you (or your doctor) about it.

3. Annoying Clients Ask Their Lawyers for Loans

We’re lawyers, not banks. Your lawyer is already risking his time and money by taking your case on a contingency basis. Don’t ask him to increase his risk further by giving you a loan you may never be able to repay. Aside from ethical concerns about engaging in such a transaction with a client, business concerns will almost always cause your lawyer to decline all loan requests. If you are in dire financial straights, there are lawsuit loan companies that may be able to help you.
 
4. Annoying Clients Tell Their Lawyers About How Much a Friend or Family Member Recovered in a “Similar” Lawsuit

No two lawsuits are alike. This fact is lost on annoying clients, who will invariably ask why their case isn’t worth as much as “so and so’s”, who had the same type of accident and injuries. Really? The same exact accident and the same exact injuries? Did they also have the same job and make the same amount of money? Did they have the same amount of medical bills? Did they live in an area with the same type of jury pool? Obviously not.

When you try to increase your lawyer’s valuation of your case by referring to some other person who recovered more money, you are implicitly questioning your lawyer’s abilities and experience and frankly, insulting him. There are a host of factors that go into your lawyer’s evaluation of what your lawsuit is worth. These will never be the same from case to case.

The more money your lawyer recovers in your case, the more he makes. He has no incentive to take a lowball offer. If you think your lawyer doesn’t value your case highly enough, ask him why. Just don’t try to persuade him by referencing some other case that is likely quite different from yours.

5. Annoying Clients Think Their Lawyers Are Also Their Therapists

Personal injury clients are often emotional, anxious and depressed. Lawyers understand this and most try to be compassionate. Unfortunately, some clients interpret this compassion as an invitation to air all of their personal problems at length. There is a reason therapists charge by the hour for this type of service. Lawyers do not have the time to act as their clients’ therapists, and most would not be very good at it anyway.

Lawyers anticipate that some “hand holding” will be required when representing a personal injury client, but clients who take advantage of this rapidly become annoying. If you call your lawyer for no other reason than to cry and complain about how miserable you are, you’ve crossed the line.

Call a friend. Call family. Call your priest or therapist. Don’t call your lawyer when you just need a shoulder to cry on. The fact that you would even consider such a thing (given lawyers’ reputation) just shows that you probably need professional help.

Source: idonotwanttobeyourlawyer.com

Legal Cheek

I’d recommend that you bookmark the new addition to the blogosphere – Legal Cheek (header image may be NSFW ;D)

From the blog’s description:

Legal Cheek reports on the colourful goings-on in the legal Twittersphere, hosts the most talented up-and-coming law bloggers, and is home to the #RoundMyKitchenTable podcast with Guardian law columnist Alex Aldridge and corporate lawyer Kevin Poulter.

You can also read my post on office politics & bullying in law firms there. :)