I haven’t blogged much on here recently, partly because of being busy at work but also because I have been setting up two other blogs and a podcast.

The first blog – ukblawgroundup – I’ve mentioned on here before.  This is the name of the blog carnival for UK Lawyers which reviews the UK legal blogging scene.  The next edition is published on the 31^st March, with submissions due by 17^th.  Peninsulawyer will be hosting it.

The other new blog I am starting is one that focuses on the Legal Services Act 2007 and the whole debate over Tesco Law.  I’ve lectured on this recently and I’ve due to start a series of lectures (to solicitors) for MBL Seminars the week after next. Much of my time over the last couple of weeks has been spent preparing the notes.  Whilst doing that it occurred to me that it would be a good plan to start a blog specifically devoted to legal deregulation, rather than putting it up on this blog as I have been to date.  I have created a blog called “There may be trouble ahead” and it will go live shortly.  URL details will be posted here.

I plan to kick off with a post on the issue of who would actually want to buy a law firm and then a guest post from Mark Greenhouse of Resq on the application of “Lean” principles in law firms.   I’ll be looking for guest bloggers to give their take on Tesco Law – please contact me if you would be interested in contributing. Other projects include a series of slidecasts (slideshare presentations but with added sound) on the basic aspects of the LSA, to give some background on the basics.   I’m hoping people will contribute and that we can have,  as Mrs Merton used to say on her show “a heated debate”.

When I’m not blogging on Tesco law I’m still going to be writing on employment issues here at Jobsworth.

Finally, I recorded a podcast with Brian Inkster of Inksters Solicitors Glasgow.  That will be up very shortly – hopefully this weekend.

Have a good weekend.

Related posts:

1. Friday waffle

News from Jobsworth originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 12/03/2010.

I recently read a post on The Client Revolution, a US blog,  called “What lawyers can learn from an Office Depot Commercial”.  It’s  about how small law firms can compete with larger businesses, not by trying to compete on price, but in other ways, namely quality of work. The post is well worth a read, and the You Tube video beneath is the one that Jay Shepherd, the author, refers to.  Next Tuesday I am speaking at Gateway Media’s workshop on “Combating Tesco Law” and this advert strikes me as containing a very useful example of how firms can strike back at bigger competitors. 

These issues are getting more relevant for practitioners by the day.  John Flood, Professor of Law and Sociology at the University of Westminster reports on his blog, RATS (take a look to see what the acronym stands for) that the Legal Services Board has announced Alternative Business Structures will come into operation from October 2011 – see the press release here. Applications for ABS status will be allowed from next summer.  John asks “will it be a matter of who gets there first or will the fast second ultimately win?”.  I would opt for the latter: being a guinea pig is rarely a route to success. 

Now that the prospect of market consolidation is getting very close, what steps should law firms be taking?  Being creative, open to change and offering the legal equivalent of fixing a cheapo haircut.  You just need to get your message out there.  

No related posts.

It’s quality, not quantity that counts originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 26/02/2010.

The headline on this week’s Law Society Gazette, the house magazine for solicitors, is “Consumers sceptical about “Tesco law” (1).  Poll research carried out by ComRes, a polling company, on behalf of the Solicitors Regulation Authority apparently reveals that 69% of its respondents have reservations about the quality of legal services that would be provided by banks and supermarkets once the legal market is deregulated, the so-called “Tesco law” scenario which has brought many high-street firms of solicitors out in a cold sweat.  Many lawyers see it as being the beginning of the end for high street firms that rely on domestic conveyancing to earn their crust as they would simply not be able to compete on price with a large scale operation that could “sausage process” huge volumes of transactions.  I haven’t seen the full report and if anyone knows the link to it please pass it on.

Most solicitors dealing with members of the public (i.e as opposed to corporate lawyers acting for large businesses) pride themselves on being able to give a personal service to clients and to empathise with them, something which Tesco law will never do.  However, people are price sensitive, especially in the current climate, and that may well be the decisive factor for many.  I think that whereas consumers may be prepared to instruct Tescos to draft their will for them, or even to buy/sell their house, they won’t be interested in using Tescos to conduct their divorce or any legal dispute where there is any emotional involvement for them (e.g a serious personal injury, a building dispute or, dare I say it, a claim for unfair dismissal).  In those cases I think most people would prefer to use a solicitor, but this may turn out to be a forlorn hope; we shall see.  

There was another heartening statistic from the report. 83% of people who had used a solicitor in the last five years was said to be satisfied with the service they received.  Call me a pessimist but I would have guessed this figure to be much lower.   It must reflect the huge focus there has been over the years by solicitors to provide a good service to their clients and to treat them as individuals, rather than cattle fodder; that’s how my firm endeavours to work and we get most of our new clients in through word of mouth recommendation.  We hardly ever advertise and do not accept or pay for work from claims farmers.  I do think though that the days of the solicitor general practitioner are over.  There is simply too much law out there for anyone to be able to cover all of it.  When I qualified, fifteen years ago, I did personal injury, crime, conveyancing, wills and probate, general litigation, and anything else that came through the door.  It didn’t really work then and it certainly doesn’t now.  These days I only do employment, related litigation and some Claimant personal injury work.  The way forward is to know your subject well and to specialise.  The fairly encouraging results of this survey suggest we might just get the chance to do this.

I feel another poll coming on, please feel free to contribute and/or to comment,

P.S The report shows ethnic minorities regard the ability of banks and supermarkets to provide legal services more favourably, although no explanation is reported as to why this might be.  Are solicitors institutionally racist?  I sincerely hope not and don’t believe it to be the case.  Does it reflect the increased chance that ethnic minorities are not as well off in comparison with the majority and thus cannot afford to employ a solicitor?  Much more likely in my view.

(1) Law Society Gazette 28th May 2009 – http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/survey-finds-consumers-sceptical-about-banks-and-supermarkets-legal-services

Related posts:

1. Solicitors get it wrong too
2. Combating Tesco Law: Prepare your Brand Presence
3. 5 steps to getting the employment law advice you need

“Tesco Law” – not the threat that solicitors fear? originally appeared on Jobsworth by Michael Scutt on 03/06/2009.