Complaints against officers

[Fedster + 1,307]

'We do not leave the ill to treat themselves'.

Co-Chair of the Law Society's Criminal Law Committee Richard Atkinson

Date - 2nd November 2018
By - JJ Hutber- Police Oracle

2 Comments

 

Soon there will be no duty solicitors to call for suspects held at police stations, a leading criminal lawyer told chiefs and PCCs this week.

Rates for duty lawyers have fallen so low it is no longer an option for up-and-coming lawyers, co-chair of the Law Society’s Criminal Law Committee Richard Atkinson said.

“At present station advice is free but that does not mean that suspects can be assured that they will always have such advice available to them.

“Recent work by the Law Society has shown that the age profile of duty solicitors is high with the average age approaching 50 and the number of young people undertaking the work almost non-existent.

“In five to ten years there will be large parts of the country where there will be simply no duty solicitors to advise those who find themselves being questioned by the police," he told the National Police Chiefs’ Council and Association of Police and Crime Commissioners annual summit.

“The attractiveness of a career in criminal law is not hard to guess at when legal aid rates have not been increased for some 25 years now and even those historic rates have suffered a number of cuts.

“Salaries have fallen dramatically behind other areas of law to the point where they are simply no longer viable for the most committed young person embarking on a legal career.”

He also raised concern relentless cuts to legal aid for defendants is destroying the criminal justice system.

“We do not leave the ill to treat themselves without expert medical help so nor should we expect people to deal with legal problems and disputes without expert legal help if they cannot afford it.

“If we are to restore confidence than we must have a system whereby anyone charged with a criminal offence which if convicted of would adversely affect their reputation or result in a loss of liberty must be given the chance to be represented."

Mr Atkinson pointed out that financial eligibility threshold in courts have not been increased for a decade, despite the cost of living going up by a quarter.

And he pointed to a Loughborough University report which concluded that the criminal legal aid system may require defendants whose income is at or below a minimum level pay their full legal costs at the magistrates court.  

“This means people whose standard of living is almost below the acceptable level are expected to pay for their representation,” he said.

“A criminal trial is no longer about just turning up and giving your account for a defendant. They have to deal with complex and difficult areas of law.

“This is even before they are face with an uneven contest in court where the prosecution will be represented by a solicitor or barrister who will be an experienced advocate familiar with the process, etiquette, law and presentation of cases,” he added.

View On Police Oracle

[David + 4,981]

This is worrying. For those not used to it, an arrest can be very intimidating and even though there can be some dubious outcomes, everyone should have a right to legal representation, even if they can't afford it. Otherwise it becomes something for the rich and powerful only and that can't be acceptable.

[SimonT + 1,185]

Can anyone advise on the best way to become super rich. It seems to solve a great many issues. 

The divide in the US justice system between poor end not poor is appalling. Nice to see we are sliding in that direction. Go tories! 

[Jimbo26 + 199]

To be fair, they shouldn't be getting paid much to advise someone to say 'no comment'. No legal training required for that and any clown could turn up to offer that advice.

[ParochialYokal 1,119]

So, it seems that the current Duty Solicitors rates are lower than 2011 and equate to circa £50 per hour.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/579530/Guide_to_the_crime_fee_changes_APRIL_2016.pdf

 

If a solicitor acted as a ‘Contractor’ for a law firm then they they would need 8 call outs a week at circa and then invoice £40 per hour for it to be a viable living. 16 hours per week would equate to circa £30k per year for a 48 week year. That might be fine if you did the occasional call out on top of a main job or you wanted a part-time job and this might work in an urban area, but in a rural area there just wouldn’t be a pool of people whom would be able to do this.

 

If you spend £25k for a law conversion degree and a legal practice course on top of whatever you paid for your first degree, why would you want to go into criminal law? It is the lowest paid area of law, you have to deal with unsavory people and it must be rare that you ever get a warm feeling inside that you have done something worthwhile.

 

 

 

 

[bensonby + 3,503]

Do you need to be a fully qualified solicitor to be a police station rep though? I have a feeling you don’t. 

[Zulu 22 + 4,569]

Most solicitors have a staff of semi trained legal representative who act on their behalf at Police Stations passing on the client to the Solicitor at a later point. On retirement I was offered this job by a leading defence solicitor who was a friend having played rugby with him for years. I turned the job down and my reasons being I did not want to be representing people I had spent a career putting away. He fully understood.

When representation is enshrined in law the Government have no alternative unless they rewrite the legislation.

[Reasonable Man + 1,230]

There are very few, if any, single lawyer operations. Everyone has some sort of office to pay for and at least one secretary/receptionist to pay.
Legal Aid pays hardly anything. If it’s the same in criminal law as in family law they also argue against every bill - ‘that should have only taken three hours not five’. I have a very close friend who is a partner in a family law firm and they lose money in almost every legal aid case they do. It’s moved to more or less a ‘pro bono’ system. This is why the rich mainly get their own way in family law matters as the pay a lawyer to go against a layman, never a fair fight.
I can see criminal law going the same way, with the rich criminals staying free and the prisons filling up with the mentally ill and educationally backward.

[Beaker 817]

There are very few, if any, single lawyer operations. Everyone has some sort of office to pay for and at least one secretary/receptionist to pay.

defence Solicitor I was speaking to recently said he's a one man practice, but shares office space and a receptionist with a few others in the same boat. I was surprised as a mate who started out doing the same 25 years back was minted within a couple of years of finishing uni. He's just turned 50, and basically retired. Just picking up bits of jobs around civil law and property these days because he prefers the lower stress environment.

[David + 4,981]

1 hour ago, Reasonable Man said:

I can see criminal law going the same way, with the rich criminals staying free and the prisons filling up with the mentally ill and educationally backward.

Fully agree although  I'd query the 'educationally backward' bit. It could happen to anyone: none of them 'educationally backward'. Ignorant perhaps, but only inasmuch as being ignorant of law and how to represent themselves goes. It could easily happen to Mr Average, could happen to you, me, the poster above, the poster below, a totally innocent but struggling person unable to afford legal representation. Doesn't necessarily mean they are educationally backward.

[mla + 93]

Reduction in representation for those impecunious risks, inter alia (cheap Latin gag there):

1 someone going inside who didn't do it. When they get out compensation, rightfully so.
2 the person who did do it having freedom whilst above in jail.
3 trials take longer as defendant does not understand proceedings, badly packaged evidence, eta. Crown having to lean over and advise.
4 unnecessary trials when advice given to defendant to lead on a legal point could have negated need for trial itself. This in turn resulting in longer sentences due to lack of early plead discounting.
5 insufficient data to make sentencing decisions.
6 disproportionately affecting those with learning difficulties, addictions, etc.

Ultimately, it could be more expensive in the longer term to withdraw availability of representation at an earlier time than to have to go through the pain as set out above.

There is another good Law in Action piece on just this point. I shall dig it out for those interested.