Bar Council launches panel of law firms to help barristers “delicately” recover unpaid fees


Langdon: essential service

The Bar Council has appointed Thrings and Veale Wasbrough Vizards as the first members of a new panel that will help barristers “delicately” recover unpaid fees from solicitors.

More firms are expected to join the panel, and they offer a choice of payment options, including conditional fee agreements and fixed fees.

Some will also offer discounts or additional services to those barristers who pay the Bar Council’s Bar representation fee. Other firms can still offer this work without being on the panel.

Bar chairman Andrew Langdon QC said: “The debt recovery panel will be an essential service for many barristers. As most of us are self-employed, income is essential to our livelihoods. Balanced against that is the need to maintain long-term commercial relationships with our professional clients.

“With that in mind, the law firms on the panel are adept at handling the sensitivities around debt recovery and are able to handle the recovery of fees owed to barristers delicately. We want barristers to know they can turn to this service with the confidence that their case will be handled with care.”

In 2015, the Bar Council closed its fees collection service following the introduction of the standard contractual terms in January 2013, the introduction of which was to avoid instructions being taken on non-contractual terms.

The Bar Council will have no involvement in cases and its role is limited to promoting the availability of the panel. Being on the panel is not an endorsement; “rather it affirms that [the firms] have made a commitment to understanding the needs of the practitioner and the business of chambers”.




    Readers Comments

  • Richard Gray says:

    I can never understand why not paying Counsel is not a regulatory offence. The SRA can then NOT delicately investigate the matter and order payment. Can the SRA explain why this should not be the case? I was never paid by a Solicitor for whom I personally acted and another who always refused to answer the any correspondence when I accused him of moving disbursement for me from client to office account. The SRA did nothing for me and worked harder trying to tell me why they wouldst rather than writing to the Solicitor concerned!

    The SRA needs to look at this. In some cases it is tantamount to theft pure and simple.


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

No larger firm can ignore the demands of innovation – that was the clear message from our most recent roundtable: “The law firm of the future”, sponsored by LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions. It comes in many forms, predominantly but not just technology, and is not simply a case of automating process. Expertise and process are not mutually exclusive.

Blog

12 December 2018

Open justice and technology: Friend or foe?

Why not use this new age of technology to represent your client in court by simply logging on? However, with representation conducted from the privacy of your own space, just how ‘open’ might this process be?

Read More