Read on Twitter
Many immigration barristers announce they will refuse to take on asylum appeal cases under the new appeals procedure, which has been imposed without ensuring proper legal aid arrangements for lawyers to be paid. The changes to the legal aid fixed fee for asylum appeals create yet
another threat to survival of legal aid practitioners. Although it looks like an increase in the fee, this is for significantly more work.
It leaves NO guaranteed payment for a barrister drafting an advance skeleton argument. It creates extra work
It leaves NO guaranteed payment for a barrister drafting an advance skeleton argument. It creates extra work
and complexity as solicitors and barristers - both financially pressed already - have to negotiate sharing the losses.
It massively increases the financial risk for all practitioners, by expanding the 'risk zone' of unpaid work between the standard payment and hourly rate
It massively increases the financial risk for all practitioners, by expanding the 'risk zone' of unpaid work between the standard payment and hourly rate
payments, so they could lose up to £1,200 per legal aid case, compared with an already-frightening £400.
Imposing a new fixed fee, based on guesswork, means the Legal Aid Agency will never get accurate data on how long it takes to do these cases properly, because many firms
Imposing a new fixed fee, based on guesswork, means the Legal Aid Agency will never get accurate data on how long it takes to do these cases properly, because many firms
will (have to) limit their work to what they are certain of being paid for.
It means the firms who already do poor-quality work will get paid more for work of little value, while the really expert, committed lawyers who already lose out on every legal aid case they do will be
It means the firms who already do poor-quality work will get paid more for work of little value, while the really expert, committed lawyers who already lose out on every legal aid case they do will be
forced to take on ever fewer legal aid clients. That's a loss for everyone - client, lawyer, courts, taxpayers.
The @LegalAidAgency and @MoJGovUK and @HMCTSgovuk need to slow down and rethink what SHOULD be a positive reform, if properly funded.
Ideally, hourly rates for the
The @LegalAidAgency and @MoJGovUK and @HMCTSgovuk need to slow down and rethink what SHOULD be a positive reform, if properly funded.
Ideally, hourly rates for the
first year at least, to obtain robust data about in-case demand and cost for the new procedure (and avoid paying the higher fixed fee for low value work);
Failing that, a new bolt on fee for barristers for the new procedure;
In any case, reducing the hourly rates threshold to
Failing that, a new bolt on fee for barristers for the new procedure;
In any case, reducing the hourly rates threshold to
double the fixed fee, to protect the provider base from crippling financial losses on individual cases.
Arguably a long enough thread already, but more on the barristers' statement here: https://www.freemovement.org.uk/legal-aid-changes-for-online-immigration-appeals-will-do-irreparable-harm/
Even legal aid lawyers can't live on goodwill alone!
Arguably a long enough thread already, but more on the barristers' statement here: https://www.freemovement.org.uk/legal-aid-changes-for-online-immigration-appeals-will-do-irreparable-harm/
Even legal aid lawyers can't live on goodwill alone!
