Open for business: More flexibility for legal aid firms
The government is relaxing rules that control the amount of remote client consultations civil legal aid providers can offer, as well as their office opening times.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) said the changes would provide “greater flexibility” to providers.
In a letter to justice select committee chair Andy Slaughter MP, legal aid minister Sarah Sackman confirmed that the MoJ would remove the current contract requirements for providers to have permanent office locations open for periods in a week, and the contract requirements limiting the number of applications for controlled work that can be conducted without the client being present.
“We intend to replace these requirements with ones which enable providers to conduct work more flexibly, based around the needs of their clients and areas they service – while ensuring that in-person advice remains available, in appropriate and accessible locations and environments, for clients who need it.”
Currently, the legal aid regulations require that someone applying for legal aid must attend the provider’s office in person, unless the provider decides that attendance is unnecessary.
The number of cases of remote attendance must not exceed 50% of all cases the provider handles (increased in 2024 for immigration work alone to 75%).
Subject to certain exceptions, civil legal aid contracts covering a geographical area require that providers have a permanent office there that it is open and physically accessible to clients and the public seven hours a day, from Monday to Friday.
The Review of Civil Legal Aid, which was published in early 2025, said the evidence indicated that these limits should be adjusted to allow for more remote work and the MoJ then consulted on the changes.
The consultation response, published in July, did not include a decision on the way forward.
It said the majority of responses supported the principle of removing or reducing limits to the number of matters where the client did not attend the provider’s office to make an application.
There was “a clear consensus” that providers should manage this on a case-by-case basis.
“Some responses described a burden they felt this rule places on providers, in creating concerns that they may breach a rule and be sanctioned in an audit – whereas allowing them to decide whether face-to-face or remote meetings are needed could allow them space to provide remote services to areas of low geographic provision and set up the infrastructure for that.”
Responses also fed back that restricting remote applications exacerbated difficulties recruiting advisors by requiring them to be physically available in locations where staffing was “already unworkable”.
Just under half responses backed removing or reducing the contractual requirement for permanent office locations and just under a third opposed it.
The MoJ – which will be adjusting the hours, rather than the need for a permanent office – said many of those answering ‘maybe/do not know’ also described how, with caveats, “changes to this requirement could bring about beneficial flexibility in advice delivery”.
Key themes included needing to ensure some face-to-face provision remained available, and how greater flexibility could encourage collaboration between providers, such as sharing joint office space, co-locating on a part-time basis or rotating clinics, rather than maintaining a single permanent office.
“This could enable face-to-face services to be maintained in areas with low legal aid provision.”
The Legal Aid Agency will soon launch a contract consultation on these changes.
Leave a Comment