Spring 2016

Spring has sprung!

With Easter behind us and chocolate egg supplies running low, Spring is officially here. In the spirit

of the cleaning season, its time to dust off those legal brains and polish up on the latest in the

world of the trainees and newly qualifieds.

In this issue Lauren Hancock brings us the latest on the Solicitors Regulation Authority proposals

to overhaul the training of Solicitors, in particular the criticism these proposals have faced. Jason

Torrance provides his insight following a transition from in house to private practice and Ties

Bouwmeester offers helpful advice for those who have failed modules of the LPC.

Legal Laughs offers up some of the funniest and most bizarre things to be heard inside of the

courtroom…You will not be disappointed.

In February FLOCC had the opportunity to

network with members of CILEX at Missoula in

Chelmsford and it was great to see so many new

faces. In March we held a joint social with the

Junior Lawyers Division of Suffolk and North Essex

Law Society at the Slug and Lettuce in Colchester

which was a resounding success. We can’t wait to

see all of you again soon.

Next on FLOCC’s agenda is a charity quiz in June

of this year, in aid of Kids Inspire who offer

support and therapy for children in Essex who

have experienced trauma, neglect or abuse, to

transition into healthy adults who contribute

positively to society. We are very excited to

support this worthy cause; for more information

see the leaflet attached to our email. We hope to

see many of you there!

Feel free to visit www.fjg.co.uk/site/floc for

information on future events, contact details and to review previous editions of our newsletters.

Finally, as always, please contact us with any questions or suggestions you may have!

Welcome Back

Contents

2 Welcome Back

3 Another qualifying

hurdle for aspiring

solicitors

5 Failed LPC assessment

– what next?

6 Private Practice vs

In-House

7 Who am I?

8 Legal Laughs

9 Useful Information

2

FLOCC QUIZ

The Bunting

Rooms

Essex Street

Colchester

CO1 1NF

7:00pm for a

7:30pm start

Friday 10th

June

Another Qualifying Hurdle for Aspiring Solicitors

There is no question that the period of education and training essential to qualify as a Solicitor requires a

great deal of dedication and drive. Traditionally, a candidate will complete an undergraduate law degree,

the Legal Practice Course and then, with any luck, locate a

firm willing to offer a training contract before qualifying.

Those who study alternative courses at undergraduate level

will also face at least a further year studying the Graduate

Diploma in Law, or for those choosing the CILEX route,

numerous years of both academic and worked based training.

Despite this, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA)

believes that there is currently a lack of common basis for

assessing the quality of aspiring Solicitors.

In England and Wales, over 100 institutions offer Qualifying Law Degrees, over 25 the LPC and over

2,000 firms offer traineeships. The SRA, in their December 2015 Consultation “Training for Tomorrow:

assessing competence” propose that a common professional assessment, The Solicitors Qualifying

Examination (SQE) will ensure a consistent level of competence in qualifying Solicitors across the board.

This proposal has, thus far, been met by significant criticism.

The SRA submit that, focus on overall knowledge and competence through the implementation of a

common exam, rather than concentrating on a candidates qualifying route will increase diversity within

the profession. Whilst they recognise the necessity for all intending Solicitors to “demonstrate a high

level of legal knowledge” equivalent to at least that of a graduate, they propose that some hopeful

candidates may demonstrate this level of ability without obtaining any undergraduate degree.

The SRA perceive that, a greater number of routes into the profession for non-graduates will remove the

financial barriers faced by many school leavers. With undergraduate tuition fees of up to £9,000.00 per

year and some LPC providers’ fees exceeding £15,000.00, the inspiration for this proposal is clear. The

practical application of such a proposal is more dubious.

In the year ending 31 July 2014, 5,001 new traineeships were registered with the SRA; in the same year

21,775 applicants were accepted to study law at undergraduate level. More staggeringly, in 2014 only

42.6% of law graduates entered full time employment following graduation. By way of comparison,

92.5% of those graduating with a degree in medicine attained full time employment. In a market that is

already saturated it seems inevitable that, regardless of changes to the training process, many recruiting

firms will continue to filter applicants based on their achievement at undergraduate level. In the

circumstances another hurdle to gaining employment could deter some aspiring Solicitors, rather than

encourage diversity within the profession.

3

In any event, the barrier which this aspect of the proposal seeks to overcome has arguably already

been eradicated. It remains possible for a qualified Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Legal

Executives to be admitted as Solicitor, having never completed an undergraduate degree. Any change

to the training of Solicitors is likely to encompass a significant degree of work based training, as with

the CILEX route. Perhaps encouragement or greater publicity of this route to qualification, rather than

a complete overhaul of the training process is a simpler means of achieving greater diversity within

the profession.

The Law Society believes that the proposed change may in fact lead to a decrease in diversity.

Jonathan Smithers, Law Society President, notes that a centralised exam would only decrease

qualifying fees, and thus improve diversity, if education providers chose to develop training courses

which were cheaper and more flexible. In order to pass any standardised exam, it is likely that

additional preparative courses would need to be undertaken and as with the LPC, it is unlikely that

such fees would be covered by student loans, further limiting the candidate pool rather than

increasing it.

Notwithstanding the issue of diversity, The Law Society also raised concerns that the new proposals

may damage the global competitiveness of UK Law, a stance supported by many critics of the

proposals. In his paper “Dumbing Down the Law”, which focuses on the SRA’s proposals, Professor

Anthony Bradney points out that, in a Country where it is necessary to posses a degree to become a

nurse or teacher, it would diminish public confidence in Solicitors if this requirement were to be

removed. By direct comparison, the Bar Standards Board continues to require a lower second class

degree for all qualifying barristers and is presently consulting on increasing this requirement.

The SRA’s contention that a qualifying exam will ensure proficient candidate knowledge and

competence across the board has too been rebuffed. There are concerns that many universities and

legal course providers will develop programmes which teach candidates only how to successfully

complete the examination. This does not guarantee a full and competent knowledge of the law but

rather an ability to learn the minimum required to overcome this new and potentially costly obstacle.

Regular and thorough regulation of Universities and legal course providers could prove a more

effective means of ensuring a consistent level of knowledge is held by those qualifying.

Although the aims of the SRA’s proposals are praiseworthy, whether the implementation of a

qualifying exam will achieve these seems unlikely. Whilst an increase in diversity can only be a good

thing, if recruitment on the basis of undergraduate degree qualification continues, which seems

inevitable, it is difficult to see how a qualifying exam will provoke any improvement. The risk of

increasing costs for school leavers wishing to practice and diminished reputation of Solicitors in

general, seems to far outweigh any benefits.

By Lauren Hancock

4

FLOCC QUIZ

The Bunting

Rooms

Essex Street

Colchester

CO1 1NF

7:00pm for a

7:30pm start

Friday 10th

June

Failed LPC assessment – what next?

I, like many other LPC students, recently completed my final exams and was delighted (and lucky enough)

to call myself a Trainee Solicitor as of March this year. I studied the LPC part-time and long distance at the

University of Law. The two years have flown past but I was still relieved when the final exams were over in

January.

That’s all well and good, but what happens when come results day you’re greeted by a bold, red F in relation

to one of your assessments? Whilst your eyes frantically search the page for an explanation, your mind starts

spinning. Goodbye training contract? Goodbye qualification? How much to resit? Is a resit even available?

How do I tell people I failed? Hours of searching on ‘studentroom’ forums and reading the assessment

regulations (lets be honest you gave them but a glance, if that, prior to the exam) don’t help. What a

horrible situation, a situation a friend of mine on the course recently found himself in.

If I’m honest, I became rather lax with exam preparation throughout the course. Open book exams and

consistent strong grades tend to lead to this lack of preparation, however much you know the situation

should be otherwise. My friend also found himself in the same situation. The final two exams in January were

electives and whilst we were not studying the same ones, we both felt confident that we had a strong

understanding of the subject. Come results day, he found

out that this was not the case.

My friend was so annoyed with himself. He missed the pass

mark by just two percent. Having never failed any

academic assessment, this result hit him hard, but what

next? He had already started his training contract and was

concerned that this would be terminated. He was also

concerned that even if he was allowed to resit, his mark

would be capped and he would miss out on the

commendation he was working towards.

After letting the news sink in, he spoke with the University and the firm he was working for. Both

discussions made him feel considerably better. The University explained that they provide detailed feedback

to anyone who fails an assessment – useful in preparing for the resit. You are given three attempts for each

assessment (two resit attempts) and the mark you get in the resit stands, it is not capped – it will, however,

show as a second attempt. He was also relieved to hear that the resit fee was nominal in comparison to the

cost of the course. The firm he works for was also very understanding. They are allowing him to continue

the training contract and have helped restore his determination to smash the resit in the Summer!

The thing to remember if you are unlucky enough to find a bold F on your results sheet is that you must

treat it as a small setback. You are not the only one in that situation (my friend has found out that it is more

common than you might think!). Celebrate the exams you have passed and turn the upset into

determination for success come the resit! (Alternatively…..do more revision in the first place!!)

The information regarding exam resits is correct at present for the University of Law but may differ for

other institutions.

By Ties Bouwmeester

5

My route to a training contract has been far more scenic than some and probably than I would have liked,

but it has also given me experience of working in different types of legal environments and the opportunity

to develop professional legal skills that I would not have otherwise had going straight into a training

contract. My first role out of university was in a London firm, after which I moved to an in-house legal team,

also in London, before working for Fisher Jones Greenwood LLP. These have all been challenging in different

ways and have certainly provided breadth of experience.

Whenever I told someone previously that I worked for an in-house legal team, particularly those who

worked in private practice, I was given envious looks and told how lucky I was. In some respects this is

probably true, but working in-house has pressure just like private practice, perhaps it is just a different type

of pressure.

Private practice is, of course, driven by clients. Obtaining clients and then keeping them is a key aspect of

being successful in private practice. I have always been told when working in private practice that repeat,

long-standing clients are the foundations to the firm. Every new client is another opportunity to build a

relationship and have another repeat client. But you should take this a stage further because there are other

key “stakeholders” who are not actually clients. I am currently doing a seat in commercial property and

have already experienced first hand how big a role organisations including banks and estate agents can play.

I am sure this is not surprising to anyone. Another thing that I have taken on board since starting this seat is

that generally both sides are working towards a common outcome so you will achieve far more through

being helpful and assisting the other side where possible than being confrontational.

My experience of in-house is not too dissimilar to this. I

spent over 5 years working in the Legal Department at

UK Anti-Doping, which for those who are not familiar

with the organisation govern anti-doping in sports in the

UK. Whilst the key difference between working in-house

and in a private law firm may be that private firms have

greater competition for work and clients (UKAD, for

example, is the only organisation that does what they do

in the UK), the emphasis on good stakeholder relations

remains very important. As a public sector organisation,

UKAD were funded by the government and were ultimately accountable to them. However, the work was

primarily “sourced” from National Governing Bodies. So there are clear similarities here between private

practice and in-house legal teams in what is arguably the most important aspect for both.

One thing that did always strike me whilst working in-house were the number of restraints imposed or the

amount of red tape, although this may well have been exaggerated by working in-house for a public sector

body. Whilst private practices are quite rightly regulated in a number of ways, for example by the Law

Society, it also feels as though they have more autonomy to run their business as they see best. At UKAD,

funding was determined by the government and even though certain services could be bought, for example

a body could pay for increased testing above what was their allocation, it was ultimately a not-for-profit

organisation. Private businesses clearly want to make profit. The benefits for a private firm here are

obvious – if there is an IT upgrade required that will make work production more efficient, there are fewer

restraints to go and obtain it. But then again I always felt at UKAD the systems were good and things felt

new and up-to-date.

Looking back then, maybe the differences between the two are not actually that great at all?

By Jason Torrance

6

Private Practice vs In-House

FLOCC QUIZ

The Bunting

Rooms

Essex Street

Colchester

CO1 1NF

7:00pm for a

7:30pm start

Friday 10th

June

7

FLOCC on

Social Media

Be sure to

check out our

Twitter feed,

Facebook page

and our

LinkedIn group

@future_lawyers

Who Am I? - Naomi Bridge

Naomi joined Fisher Jones Greenwood LLP’s Chelmsford Office in February 2016 having previously worked as a Circuit Judge Court Usher at Chelmsford County Court. Naomi graduated from Coventry University with a 2.1 honours degree in LLB Law in 2015 and is planning on commencing her LPC in September 2016.

Naomi has been working towards her career in law since 2009 and has since sought a career in Family Law. Naomi is very passionate about human rights and animal welfare and in her spare time, volunteers and fundraises for various charities through sport and hands-on volunteering.

Who Am I? - Thomas Lee

Thomas graduated from the University of Kent in 2013 then completed an MA in Continental Philosophy before joining Birkett Long in 2015 as a paralegal working in the dispute resolution team and debt recovery. He has since begun the LPC part-time at the University of Law, London Bloomsbury.

When asked about FLOCC, Thomas said: “FLOCC presents a great opportunity to meet those in a similar situation career-wise to yourself. Should we all remain in the area, it is likely that our careers will progress together, so it is good to be familiar with your peers of the future. It is also beneficial to hear of others’ experiences and gain a helpful insight from those further down the line than myself.”

Who Am I? - Katie Gibson-Green

Katie studied law at the University of Westminster followed by studying her LPC at the College of Law part time, graduating in 2011. From there, she worked as a personal injury paralegal in a North London firm, before starting her training contract in January 2013, and qualifying as a solicitor in July 2014. Katie Joined Birkett Long in August 2014 where she works as a private client solicitor, specialising in Will drafting, lasting powers of attorneys and administration of estates. She also works closely with the Rural Business Team and advises agricultural clients on

Legal Laughs

8 FLOCC 2015

Lawyer: "What is your date of birth?"

Witness: "July 15th."

Lawyer: "What year?"

Witness: "Every year."

Lawyer: "Now, Mrs. Johnson, how was your

first marriage terminated?"

Witness: "By death."

Lawyer: "And by whose death was it

terminated?" Lawyer: "Can you describe what the

person who attacked you looked like?"

Witness: "No. He was wearing a mask."

Lawyer: "What was he wearing under

the mask?"

Witness: "Er...his face."

Lawyer: "What was the first thing your

husband said to you when he woke that

morning?"

Witness: "He said, 'Where am I, Cathy?'"

Lawyer: "And why did that upset you?"

Witness: "My name is Susan."

Lawyer: "How far apart were the

vehicles at the time of the collision?"

Lawyer: "I show you Exhibit 3 and ask

you if you recognize that picture."

Witness: "That's me."

Lawyer: "Were you present when

that picture was taken?"

Lawyer: "What gear were you in at the

moment of the impact?"

Witness: "Gucci sweats and Reeboks."

Accused, Defending His Own Case: "Did you

get a good look at my face when I took your

purse?"

The defendant was found guilty and

sentenced to ten years in jail.

Lawyer: "How many times have you

committed suicide?"

Witness: "Four times."

Lawyer: "Now sir, I'm sure you are an

intelligent and honest man--"

Witness: "Thank you. If I weren't un-

der oath, I'd return the compliment."

Lawyer: "Have you lived in this town all

your life?"

Witness: "Not yet."

Lawyer: "And lastly, Gary, all your

responses must be oral. Ok? What

school do you go to?"

Witness: "Oral."

Lawyer: "How old are you?"

Witness: "Oral."

FLOCC QUIZ

The Bunting

Rooms

Essex Street

Colchester

CO1 1NF

7:00pm for a

7:30pm start

Friday 10th

June

Academic:

www.bpp.com Website of the GDL, LPC, Degree and Legal Careers courses

provider and more!

www.university-of-law.co.uk Website of the alternative provider of the GDL, LPC, Degree

and Legal Careers courses and more!

www.lawcareers.net Very useful for the latest vacancies and training contract

information

Resource and Legal Research/Information:

uk.practicallaw.com Database for legal precedents, commentaries, reports and

many more extensive legal resources

www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal Provider to the Legal Profession for precedents, resources

and the most extensive online knowledge repository

directlaw.co.uk Remote client access to legal documentation, including

precedents and information

www.jordanpublishing.co.uk Specialist website resources for family lawyers including

precedents, journals, commentary and more

General Legal Information:

www.lawgazette.co.uk Great for all the latest news and vacancies

www.familylawweek.co.uk The Family Law Weekly website, useful for the latest judgements and case summaries

www.lawsociety.org.uk Information on news, events, support and training for all lawyers

www.juniorlawyers.lawsociety Additional news, reviews and resources for all future lawyers. org.uk

www.sra.org.uk Useful information, guidance and explanations in relation to the regulations governing both future and lawyers

www.fjg.co.uk Useful information on a wide variety of areas of law and a selection of blogs, videos and other useful resources.

FLOCC:

www.fjg.co.uk/site/FLOC Don’t forget to follow us on social media and check the FLOCC website for info on further socials, newsletters, events, videos, podcasts and more.

Useful Information

10 9

Your FLOCC Team