Scottish Legal Aid Board’s 2009-2010 annual report published, reveals little improvement for Scots in access to justice stakes. THE Scottish Legal Aid Board late last week published its annual review and statement of accounts for 2009-2010 which reveal little has been done by way of applying fairness to legal aid applications for tough cases such as allegations of negligence concerning Scotland’s many professions (including of course the legal profession), challenges to the way people are mistreated by public sector bodies or quangos, and of course, the way victims of injustice are themselves treated by Scotland’s internationally famed prejudiced justice system.
SLAB revealed the cost of legal aid in 2009-2010 was £150.5m, almost the same as the previous year. This figure was around £3m less than it would have been because of the reduction in the VAT rate which came into effect in December 2008. The net cost of civil legal assistance – after taking account of contributions and recoveries – increased by 9.5% to £47.2m, which includes £0.9m additional targeted funding by the Scottish Government for work associated with the economic downturn. The increase in civil legal aid applications will lead to further increases in civil legal assistance expenditure in future years.
SLAB did however claim they were “increasing access to justice” in their report, stating : “The Scottish Government increased financial eligibility for civil legal aid so that those with disposable incomes of up to £25,000 could qualify albeit with contributions. As a result, we granted 616 more applications for civil legal aid last year. This change particularly helps those with more expensive cases who previously would not have qualified for legal aid and would not have been able to defend or pursue cases.”
However, of some 25 cases currently known to me of persons seeking legal aid to recover financial losses attributed to their solicitors negligence, or theft, either little progress, considerably difficulty, or general refusals for legal aid funding appear to be more the order of the day. In essence therefore, nothing much has changed with regard to how Scots who are victimised by their legal representatives can attempt to use the justice system to put right the wrong done to them.
Additionally, the Scottish Legal Aid Board has apparently increased availability of in-court advisers across Scotland (if you find any, please report back on your experiences)
Commenting on the Scottish Legal Aid Board’s annual report, its Chairman, Iain A Robertson CBE, said : “This has been an extremely busy year for the Board with the highest number of civil legal aid applications for a decade. We have increased efficiency, reduced bureaucracy and delivered value for money; it now costs the taxpayer less in real terms to run the Board than it did three years ago, yet we are responsible for delivering much more than we were then. We are committed to providing access to justice and value for money for the people Scotland.”
Lindsay Montgomery CBE, SLAB’s Chief Executive stated, “Scotland is very fortunate to have a non cash limited system of legal aid which is able to respond to changes in people’s needs, as has happened during the recession. As a result many more people have been able to access civil legal assistance over the past year. However, a system like this can only operate successfully if there are robust controls over legal assistance and its cost. This is a key role which the Board provides. These controls become even more important with the increased pressure on public finances.”
From April 2011, the Scottish Legal Aid Board will be changing the way it accepts legal aid applications, abandoning the current paper format to go completely digital, with all applications & accounts being submitted online, a policy SLAB contends will be more efficient & economic for solicitors and SLAB, although it remains to be seen as to whether it will be guaranteed clients will receive full copies of everything their solicitor submits in the online application on their clients behalf.
Commenting on the online application development, Iain A Robertson CBE commented, “The move to legal aid transactions with solicitors being wholly online is a key part of the Board’s strategy to further reduce its running costs. We also believe that in order to deliver continued access to publicly funded legal assistance, but at lower cost, further changes will be required in the way legal aid operates. This will impact on the Board and the legal profession. The Board is already working with the Scottish Government and the Law Society’s Legal Aid Committee on proposals for how this can be achieved.”
On the issue of Legal Aid Fraud, where clients or solicitors lie in legal aid applications to SLAB, the annual report for 2009-2010 stated : “As a result of the work we did in investigating applicants, we withdrew and refused legal aid in a number of cases. This work, in addition to other proactive checks of financial eligibility, led to us recovering or preventing unnecessary expenditure estimated at over £1 million. In the most serious cases, we report the person to the procurator fiscal. In 2009-2010, we made 27 reports to the procurator fiscal where applicants did not tell us about properties they owned or money they had in bank accounts. In such cases, in addition to repaying the cost of their legal aid, the outcomes could include convictions for fraud or warnings or fines.”
However, very few law firms appear to have been prosecuted for legal aid fraud, with either SLAB or the Crown Office itself historically reluctant to send any solicitor into the dock and accuse them of fraud, a matter brought to the fore with a Press Release issued three days before the annual report was announced.
SLAB’s conveniently timed Press Release on a Kilmarnock law firm which ‘withdrew itself’ from legal aid work (pdf) just a few days before announcing it’s annual report stated : “The Scottish Legal Aid Board announced today that it has accepted the voluntary and irrevocable withdrawal by the firm of N S Lockhart Solicitors, 71 King Street, Kilmarnock, KA1 1PT and its sole partner Niels S Lockhart from the provision of all forms of legal assistance; following an investigation into the firm’s practices by the Scottish Legal Aid Board.”
“Mr Lockhart will no longer provide publicly funded legal assistance or have any involvement in any capacity as an agent or working for any other firm or solicitor in any matter which involves publicly funded legal assistance. The withdrawal follows an investigation of the firm carried out by the Board and a subsequent complaint to the Law Society of Scotland.”
“The Law Society Reporter sent its report to the Law Society in July 2010. This confirmed the concerns raised by the Board, about practices Mr Lockhart had adopted in the provision of legal assistance, which had resulted in the submission of many accounts which were not consistent with the principle of working with “due regard to economy” and were not acceptable practices for a solicitor undertaking civil legal assistance.”
“The Law Society can determine whether the conduct of a solicitor provides good reason for them to be excluded from providing legal assistance, in accordance with section 31 of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986.”
“Mr Lockhart acknowledges that the investigation carried out by the Board and subsequent report to the Society raised continued concerns about his practices. As a result of Mr Lockhart’s permanent and binding withdrawal from legal aid, the Scottish Legal Aid Board has withdrawn its complaint to the Law Society.”
A spokesperson for the Board stated, “Public money has been protected as we have only paid the firm for work which we thought to be reasonable. Any work thought not to be reasonable was not paid.”
Obviously a few blushes spared for the Law Society of Scotland there … but why no prosecution and why no publishing of the investigation & complaint ?
The Law Society of Scotland issued a Press Release in response to SLAB’s latest annual report, although strangely didn’t bother to comment on the law firm which … ‘removed itself’ from legal aid work after the SLAB investigation and complaint to the Law Society.
Oliver Adair, Legal Aid Convener of the Law Society of Scotland, commenting on SLAB’s annual report said: "The concern for the Society and our members - who deliver legal advice to people funded through legal aid - is how they continue to do that with the cuts in public funding announced by the Scottish Government last month. The Society is entering discussions with the Scottish Government and Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB) about how an 8% cut to the legal aid budget can be met while maintaining core areas of work and allowing practitioners to afford to provide a service for those who can't afford it themselves. We have asked the profession to give us their feedback before we go back to Government on how we think the saving might be reached. However, the amount of legal aid money which firms are paid should be viewed in context - it covers the costs of solicitors, support and administrative staff, and the other overheads associated with running a business."
Readers should note that currently, there are no legal requirements on the Law Society of Scotland to report any allegations of legal aid abuse to the Scottish Legal Aid Board. Discussions have apparently been going on with regard to ‘Memorandums of Understanding” to be created between SLAB, the Law Society of Scotland and even the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission for well over a year, with so far, no outcome. Just why this has taken so long is a matter of public interest in its own right, and I will report further on the matter in the new year.
For now, readers can download the latest annual report from SLAB, and find out which law firms, solicitor advocates or Advocates have received legal aid payments :
Statement of Accounts 2009-2010 pdf
Firms of solicitors - alphabetical pdf / top 20 in order of payments pdf
Payments made 2009-2010:
Advocates- alphabetical pdf / top 20 in order of payments pdf
Solicitor advocates - alphabetical pdf / top 20 in order of payments pdf
Statistics 2009-2010:
Commentary on statistics / trends - click here
13 comments:
It is shocking how corrupt Scotlands legal system is. Favouritism, and dishonesty are two criterion that apply to the treatment of lawyers, in that a blind eye is the norm with legal dishonesty.
When people listen to proceedings in court some do not realise the Sheriffs and Lawyers are probably as or ore corrupt than the person in the dock. Legal corruption is dealt with behind closed doors. If lawyers get away with siphoning off Legal Aid in public it highlights the protective culture will be strongest in private. Any rational individual knows the legal system looks after its own.
sounds like another lawyer caught with his hands in the legal aid till and yes you are right as usual Peter - we should get to know the results of that investigation and what they found out about him!
From what you say and things I've heard myself,I dont think SLAB can be trusted with legal aid when it comes to negligence cases against the professions or issues when dealing with public bodies.
A new legal aid policy is needed but who is independent enough to manage it?
You are spot on about cases involving negligence being refused legal aid - my wife was left with a broken hip after an operation went wrong.She went to a lawyer,tried to claim legal aid but it was refused even though the hospital admitted what happened.3 years on and no further forward apart from learning the lawyer we used has a wife who works at the hospital in a senior admin post.You can guess the rest we've been through with the Law Society etc
Legal Aid always has been & will be a racket for plenty crooked lawyers although strangely enough reading those payments to firms I've heard a few of those tell people they dont take on legal aid work yet there they are getting paid plenty by slab!
You are spot on about cases involving negligence being refused legal aid
NO ONE SUES FOR NEGLIGENCE, THE LAWYERS ARE IN BED WITH THE OTHER PROFESSIONS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES.
It's high time these offenders were named and shamed on the web so members of the Public could check the records of lawyers before approaching them.
As matters atand the leagl profession is just an accident 'waiting' to happen.
Gone is the time when the Conservatives just hated single mums. Now they also hate women who pretend to be single mums. As Patricia Sullivan, 53, from the former mining village of Newtongrange, in Scotland, has found to her cost.
Sullivan, aged 53, spun a real sob story to the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), saying she lived alone and had a child to support. Before you start blubbing, yes, Sullivan was fibbing.
Despite her claims, Sullivan did have a husband in the picture after all. A man who was sharing her bed and providing for her. Far from having done a runner, leaving wife and child to fend for themselves in the wilds of Newtongrange, James Sullivan was still living in the family home, providing for his family.
Suspicious
Something alerted the DWP that all might not be as it seemed. Staff became suspicious and started investigating the exact set-up of the Sullivan family. At a court hearing today Sullivan narrowly avoided jail when a judge ordered her to carry out 200 hours of community service for conning the benefits system out of £25,000.
LET ME SEE £25,000.00/200 HOURS IS
£125.00 AN HOUR TAX FREE. NOT BAD.
WELL LAWYERS CON A LOT MORE IN LEGAL AID, NO QUESTIONS ASKED.
"Obviously a few blushes spared for the Law Society of Scotland there … but why no prosecution and why no publishing of the investigation & complaint ?"
Clearly its not in their interests to publish - get digging !
I had a law lecturer who used to tell us that an individual needed a causal link to sue for negligence. Yes Lawyers the law of Delict.
Now a question for the Legal Aid Board. You provide legal aid so lawyers can take legal action for their clients. Why do you do this? You know your lawyers insurers due to the Law Society Master Policy are Marsh UK Royal Sun Alliance.
Your also know in cases of occupational injury the clients employer is insured by the same company as the clients lawyer. So your are providing Legal Aid taxpayers money to one of the Law Societies lawyers who cannot win the case because his, her insurers would be paying the clients damages.
The only winners in litigation are lawyers. The Law Society kill off Legal Aid if a lawyer is to be sued as in Mr Cherbi's case, and they do not intervene in cases outlined above because it makes a lot of money for law firms. My lecturer was wrong. The only causal links that matter are the ones that stop Legal Aid when a lawyer has to be sued and provide legal aid to pay lawyers who kill litigation cases after getting THREE years legal aid for cases they cannot win, they would still cover everything up even if the did not share the same insurers. THE LAW FIRM ALWAYS WINS, NEVER THE CLIENT.
Litigation is a lie, only lawyers, insurers, employers win. Never believe a lawyer who tells you they can sue on your behalf, they are liars. They want you to take legal action because they are making money but your lawyers insurers will be paying your damages so you WILL NEVER GET TO COURT.
I wonder how much money out of the Legal Aid figure £121,674,300 was paid to firms acting against their own insurers Royal Sun Alliance, the Law Societies insurers? This figure was taken from the table Top 20 in order of payments pdf.
Lindsay Montgomery CBE, SLAB’s Chief Executive stated, “Scotland is very fortunate to have a non cash limited system of legal aid which is able to respond to changes in people’s needs, as has happened during the recession.
It also has a cover up culture to protect lawyers Lindsay, that is why poor legal service is the norm.
It is appalling the way that taxpayers money is wasted on legal aid in Scotland. I've seen for myself time and time again that people with plenty of income can be granted legal aid in Scotland without having reasonable legal merit. And even more of a disgrace is the lack of transparency around their decisions, even with Freedom of Information they do not have to justify their decisions. The Scottish Legal Aid Board should be abolished, simple as that.
Post a Comment