This is very interesting indeed. More than anything it reminds me of discussions I have been involved in regarding “consortia” arrangements in the delivery of Legal Aid. Though generally disallowed these formed a significant part of the integration of Social Welfare Law in the 2010 bid round. (This of course will be rendered meaningless by LASPO).

There have been nods in this direction in various previous consultations and even some covert discussions between putative consortium partners and the LSC. How well received this offer will be, in the often cut throat world of the CDS, remains to be seen however one imagines that it is one which has not been made lightly.

All applicants for the Family License Only Contract should note that the answer options for PQQ Question 1.9.2 regarding SQM/Lexcel status have changed in comparison to those in the earlier bid round. We have spoken to a number of firms who have taken the view that it is “just the same as last time” and might well therefore make an incorrect answer here.

Please do re-read your answer and make sure you select the appropriate option.

Had one of those mad phone advice days so only just got round to posting here. Things to report?

A scary CCA letter (webinar Friday)
Some scary SQM audit reports (webinar next week)
A scary SMP reduction for being 7 hundredths of a percentage point outside of the 10% threshold
Scary numbers of JRS clients

Time to go and do an “on demand” webinar

I am working on the CLS Costs Webinar for Friday. If nothing else it will help people understand what are the definitive rates.

This is the document containing all the current fees and rates, Civil October 2011 Payment Annex. Confusingly this has a different name on their website and the document itself is still titled the “2010 Standard Civil Contract Payment Annex” when printed. It does not help that they all had differing implementation dates and many claims, with earlier start dates, will be payable at a higher rate/fee. For example, though dated October 11, the Family fees contained within were only implemented in February.

Andy is in the office which means various trips to the Bistro for breakfast type products. As ever this involves an argument about what constitutes a “teacake” – as in “toasted teacake”. It is, of course a sweet bun containing dried fruit, which does not need further describing as a “Currant Teacake”. Please can you explain this to Andy next time you see him.

Back to work.

This is the LSC’s new statistical monitoring tool and is clearly only for use by those with the “Advanced Applied Muppetry” competence module.

A sole hand (to whom time is most precious) is to be held in the office, for a morning (at least), to talk about “RED” sections of the report, which relate to areas of work no longer undertaken.

As this is clearly a form of torture perhaps it should be renamed “Provider Waterboard”

17th February CLS Costs, Update Session

Following on from last weeks CDS equivalent, this is a “by request” event designed to bring you up to speed on the contentious areas of Civil billing. We will revise recent changes including Family Help Higher Standard fees, the Family Advocacy Scheme and have a look at the continuing saga of Financial Stewardship and Contract Compliance Audits. Again a must for all those involved in the civil billing and reporting process.

I have never been able to get anyone to go an see The Unthanks with me – my family and friends have a level of antipathy to “folk” music which borders on prejudice. (I do not understand this given they all like any number of Country acts). Mrs SP was going to come to the Arc in Stockton with me once but then saw them on telly, clog dancing, and broke her promise.

I heard this, as a nominee for best original song at the BBC 2 Folk Awards ,this week (didn’t win) and think it is utterly beautiful (though the video is over sentimental for may taste). If anyone can tell me what it reminds me of I would be grateful.

No not today’s “Sub of the Day” but the difference in experience between the last 2 SQMDP audits. If you would like a bit of a prod in the right direction join our webinar on the 24th February or ring Steve – number on the sidebar.

Sir Bill Callaghan has been speaking to the Liverpool Law Society

The bullet points of “Key Issues” towards the end of the piece are interesting. If it is savings you are after, especially in unnecessary administration, then how about;

Family Tenders – complete waste of time simply renew the contracts of anyone foolish enough to still want to do LA and buy them a bunch of flowers to boot.

New Matter Starts – a relic from a bygone decade. There is no such thing as “supplier led demand” in the current environment simply let people help anyone who comes through the door – at £86 for a basic family Green Form the Gvt is getting fantastic value for money (with knock on savings in a multiplicity of other areas of public spending).

Criminal Competition – DO NOT waste further time, energy and (very expensive?) consultancy fees* on this intractable issue. Any firm which can survive in London post the loss of the weighting deserves praise not a “LA death match”.

Payment backlogs – get a bloody move on*

*The LSC can treat this advice as falling under under the JRS Free Phone advice service.