Shock as firms fail in family legal aid bid

From today's LSG:

An unexpectedly high number of failed applications for family legal aid contracts has caused surprise in the sector.

The Legal Services Commission announced this week that 93% of those who bid for the new family law contracts had been successful. Contracts have been offered to 2,268 offices, which equates to 96% of the current number of family providers. All but three of the 134 procurement areas across England and Wales will have five or more family legal aid providers.

The new contracts will replace those that had been due to expire in November 2010, but were extended following the Law Society’s successful judicial review of the family tender process.

Legal aid consultants Vicky Ling and Simon Pottinger said they were surprised by the number of firms that failed to get a contract. Ling said: ‘I would have expected the number to be in the high 90s, with all eligible firms that applied being successful, because it wasn’t a competitive tender or one designed to reduce numbers.’

Ling said that many applications had been rejected because of errors completing the tender document, particularly relating to a question on peer review. She said the question was badly worded and ‘unnecessary’ as the LSC is aware of firms’ peer review scores.

Ling advised all firms that had failed in their bids to appeal. ‘The case law says firms can’t change answers given in a tender application if it would give them an advantage over other firms, but this was not a competitive tender, so that should not be a factor,’ she said.

Pottinger said: ‘I wish the LSC had shown common sense… Why create unnecessary hurdles when it’s not a competitive tender?’

An LSC spokesman said: ‘We made it clear throughout that the process was ­base­d on self-certification and so assessment of tenders has been made ­base­d on the information supplied to us. Before the tender process opened we highlighted the importance of applicants accurately completing their tenders.’

The contracts run from 1 February 2012 to November 2013.

Lawyers didn't fill the forms in properly ?

The initial decision was subject to a successful judicial review which demonstrates that the process was flawed from the outset.

I know of quite a few sole practitioners who have had to join forces or close their practice and seek employment due to the difficulties with operating under the new contract.

As the number of firms who undertake public funding work diminishes, the availability of public funding will also diminish. It is not solicitors who will lose out (although there are many who haven invested heavily in the system to receive very little reward) - it is the needy few who are entitled to public funding who will be at the sharp end of the cuts.

Charles