|
|
 |
|
|
 |
Current News |
|
| Peer review consultation: LAPG's response |
Date: 23 Jun 2005
|
 LAPG today welcomed the general thrust of the LSC's proposals for peer review, but warned that the limitations of the scheme must be respected. Director Richard Miller said, "Peer review is clearly a much better system than cost compliance auditing, and we support its development. However, the use of independent solicitors does not of itself guarantee perfection, and there are a number of aspects of the proposal that we believe can be improved. "We are very concerned about the statistical validity of the sample size. We suspect that the statistical modelling on which the LSC relies makes unwarranted assumptions about the extent to which cases and fee earners are or can be standardised. We also feel very strongly that there needs to be a mechanism for dealing with disputes between the reviewer and the firm that is independent of both. "We would also like to see how various concerns that were raised in the quality and cost research have been addressed." Of the proposal to require firms assessed as Category 3 to provide a plan on how they intend to improve, Miller said, "Much as we want to see standards improving, our fear is that given a choice between increasing standards for no extra remuneration, or pulling out of the system, a significant minority of firms will choose the latter. The Lord Chancellor has recently made a public and very welcome commitment to the Community Legal Service. If its capacity is compromised even further, he will have difficulty meeting that commitment. Increased quality comes with a price tag. The emphasis at this stage must be on tackling those who are below the competence threshold." Roy Morgan, LAPG chair, said that the peer review process did represent a major step forward compared to the cost compliance audit regime. "We commend the LSC for agreeing to independent monitoring of quality of work by fellow solicitors." |
|
|
| | | |
|
