2.Main Content
ASA responds to Unified Contract Specification
As the representative body for the Not for Profit sector ASA has responded to the LSC consultation on the draft specification for the new contract.
We repeated our concerns about the consultation period. A six-week consultation period is far too short for something as important as this, particularly when it includes category specific provisions on which we need to obtain input from specialist advisers.
Our major concerns included:
The proposed provisions restricting the ability of suppliers to adjust to the introduction of fixed fees, by changing their case mix. Agencies that stand to “lose” from the introduction of fixed fees have only two options: to make "efficiencies" and to change their case mix. There is a limited extent to which "efficiencies" can be made. Many agencies will have to change their case mix, and unpick a large number of arrangements that they have built up over the years that influence the types of cases they take on. The provision suggesting that agencies cannot intentionally change their case mix, and cannot refuse to take on cases on costs grounds, are unreasonable and unacceptable.
The proposed redefinition of "separate matters". The fixed fees proposed have been based on existing practice under the existing rules. If the rules are changed then the fixed fees have to change accordingly.
The proposal to restrict the circumstances in which a new matter can be started for a previous client. The proposal to ban such a step being taken unless there has been a material change and a gap of six months since the previous claim was made is inequitable and unworkable.
In relation to the category specific proposals, we argued that:
- In debt, the meaning of "separate proceedings" needs to be clarified
- In housing, the proposals to treat all matters arising out of one homelessness application as one matter are unworkable and require detailed reconsideration involving the representative bodies and housing experts
- In welfare benefits, we disagreed with the suggestion that cases that can be "easily dealt with by the client" should be excluded, and the suggestion that advisers cannot attend interviews under caution.
We also raised a number of detailed points about matters such as:
- When the legal help form needs to be completed
- When a legal help form can be completed by post
- When telephone advice is justified
- Whether more than one legal help form can be signed on the same day
- The proposed power to the LSC to reduce standard fees in certain circumstances
ASA's full response to the Specification to the Unified Contract
End of Section Back to top
