Criminal Solicitor Dot Net RSS Forum Feed

Big trouble

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:19:12 GMT

Oh dear, my best mate at my firm has told the powers that be that myself and two other colleagues have applied for a legal aid contract. I know he is a Brutus, but that is a different problem altogether.

What worries me now is that we have all now been summonsed to see the Managing partner individually.

I've been told it will be a formal meeting, but have had no indication whether it will be an investigatory interview or an actuall disciplinary hearing.

I am really worried, but can't see how I can be sacked for applying with fellow colleagues for a contract. We haven't even got an answer yet and if the LSC said no I would have been happy to continue my career with my firm.

I wonder if anyone has any thoughts.

Notification of Witness

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:30:03 GMT

I’m very new to this site so please no one beat me up too much for being stupid, not yet at least. However, I would like some expert and learned guidance on this ever increasing complexity that is the criminal law. This is my query:

The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (Notification of Intention to Call Defence Witnesses) (Time Limits) Regulations 2010 (S.I. 2010 No. 214) are due to come into force this May.

However, where is the Commencement Order for section 6C of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act, 1996; you know the section that actually does (will? I’m confused) place the obligation on us hard working defence lawyers to notify the Crown of our witnesses (against our better instincts I may add)?

New DSCC Provider

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:52:48 GMT

The Legal Services Commission has issued a press release stating that Ventura are to take over the role as the Defence Solicitor Call Centre provider from 1st April 2010:

As you will know, the Defence Solicitor Call Centre (DSCC) contract is transferring to a new provider on 1 April 2010.

We have been working hard with both the existing and the new provider to make sure that the transfer takes place as smoothly as possible.

Ventura (the new provider) is on course to deliver the service by the required start date. They have set up a secure DSCC facility in the Dearne Valley and are currently training new staff and carrying out robust system testing on telephony and computers to ensure a seamless transition.

We have had a number of questions both about the new providers and about the future of the service.

These have been addressed in a short Q&A document which is now available.

The contents of the Q&A document are set out below:

Q&A

Who are Ventura? Where are they based?

Ventura is an expert outsourcing company. They are highly experienced in managing call centre services for clients such as RSPCA, DWP and Orange. They have several call centres around the country – DSCC will be based in Dearne Valley in South Yorkshire.

How will you ensure that they maintain service standards?

The service levels are included in the contract. Ventura have to meet at least the same standards as First Assist do at present – e.g. answering the phone and deploying cases as quickly as possible.

How will you ensure they have my correct contact details?

All the information currently held at First Assist will be transferred to Ventura, so they will have access to all the contact information currently available.

How will you ensure that they understand the scheme rules and deploy cases correctly?

Ventura are undergoing extensive training on all aspects covered by the DSCC. There are ongoing meetings with First Assist, LSC staff and with provider reps to discuss technical queries, telephony, the role of the call centre and its link with police and solicitors. All staff working on the phones will be fully trained before they use the live system.

Will there be any changes to the service?

Not immediately. Our priority is to get the basic service right on day one. This means answering calls and deploying them appropriately. What we would like to do is gather any feedback you have and, where possible, use this information to improve the service you receive. Any feedback can be sent to dutysolqueries@legalservices.gov.uk

Can we have caller display for the DSCC number as it is currently withheld?

Unfortunately this is not possible. The use of the 0845 number provides companies with advanced call handling features at network level, allowing calls to be distributed effectively within the call centre. Without these it would be significantly more difficult to manage the calls and wait times would be increased. In addition, the numbers provide an advantage in maintaining the stability of the service as they can be easily transferred in a disaster recovery situation.

Can the new provider use text messaging to deploy calls to solicitors?

As mentioned above, our first priority is to transfer the service as smoothly as possible. However, we are keen to explore the use of text messaging – potentially for confirming case reference numbers or leaving messages relating to court appearances etc. No decisions have been made on this and we will communicate with you prior to introducing anything new.

To see the full text of the press release follow this link.

in the well of the court

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:24:23 GMT

Three MPs found themselves yesterday in a "glass cage" despite representations that they might reasonably be allowed to remain in the well of the court.

This enquiry is not so much about the merits of the District Judge's decision in Westminster as about general practice.

Where I live, except in relation to defendants already in custody, it is only in exceptional cases that defendants are placed in the dock. Thus I was disappointed, recently, when observing the trial of a relative charged under S5 POA, in another area, that he had been placed in the dock, and not allowed to sit in the well of the court. For an offence which, if proved [which it wasn't] carries a fine as a maximum penalty, this practice appears unnecessarily oppressive.

Placing the defendant in the well, in the generality of cases, seems to me to be one little thing that we should all be doing;
its a bad enough thing [for those not habituated to it] to be hauled up before the beaks, without being stuck, unnecessarily, in a glass cage. [And it also slows down the work of the court.]

Any views, anyone?

Witness Summons Alternatives

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:58:36 GMT

I have a Client who is being prosecuted for assaulting a Prison Officer. The Client has stated that another Prison Officer was present during the alleged assault. That second Prison Officer has not provided a witness statement.

The investigation in to this offence by the Police does not listed the second Officer anywhere in the unused material. A defence case statement has been served and the CPS/Police have said that my request for the second Officer's details falls outside the scope of secondary disclosure as they do not his name or address details.

The Prison have refused to disclose the second Officer's address details citing the Date Protection Act.

I do not think that an application to summons the second Officer to the trial is possible as, firstly, I have no idea what evidence the second Officer can give, and secondly, I do not have his address other than his place of work.

Are there any other alternatives that I could consider?

Interpretation of powers

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 02:26:35 GMT

Consumer Protection Regulations 2008 give powers to enter and inspect premises under certain conditions. These powers are more or less identical to the powers under S.28 Trade Descriptions Act. I am asking for thoughts on imterpretation of the following:-

(b) if he has reasonable cause to suspect that a breach of these Regulations has been committed, he may, for the purpose of ascertaining whether it has been committed, require any trader to produce any documents relating to his business and may take copies of, or of any entry in, any such document;

(c) if he has reasonable cause to believe that a breach of these Regulations has been committed, he may seize and detain any goods for the purpose of ascertaining, by testing or otherwise, whether the breach has been committed; and

I have highlighted the issues of concern here, which is the difference, in context, if any, between the two highlighted phrases. I am inclined to believe (!) that both, while needing some justification in the mind of the officer, are subjective, and are more or less interchangeable. After all, my suspicion may be unfounded, as may my belief, although both are based upon circumstances discovered in the early stages of the investigation.

Observing interviews

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:50:29 GMT

I am just starting my accreditation and have sat in on a few interviews over last couple of weeks. Last night was my first late interview - I was at a station with a solicitor from 8.30pm to nearly 3am. I'm shattered today! Beginning to think accreditation wasn't the best idea I ever had

LF1 - trial

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:23:46 GMT

Well this really does make you want to cry!!

Had a case which was a four day trial, the Court sat on the Monday and Tuesday, did not sit on the Wednesday, sat on Thursday and Friday when the client was acquitted. I know it is hard to believe but the LSC are saying that they will only pay a 2 day trial and a re-trial fee as " if there is a gap of more than one working day then it is considered to be a "retrial"".

I have tried to argue with them, have submitted an LF2 to which they have given me a raspberry - 3 lines and attached a copy of their guidance. What they don't appear to have grasped is at para 3.18 of the September 09 guidance the sentence starts "If a trial is aborted and another jury is sworn....." obviously this did not happen in this case. The Court merely did not sit on the Wednesday.

Thus I am going to the LSC and going to apply for costs - what a shame we can't hit the LSC with wasted costs!!!!!!

Oh despair - when will this hell end???

News reporting

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:07:19 GMT

Folks I have a real issue in case that has just been charged.

Its serious in that the client has been charged with murder.

The charge and name of my client was reported on a major news website. Unfortunately there have been many posts on this article by the public all of which are hugely prejudicial.

We printed out the article and showed the judge the content, but he refused to order the deletion of such posts citing the fact that the trial was some distance away.

Can anyone please help as these posts could be read by the jury come the trial.

ID

Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:11:39 GMT

A bit of an odd one; New solicitor starts with the firm and one of her first jobs is to deal with a long standing client at the police station, cutting a long story short this results in this client going for ID image capture. The new solicitor attends at the image capture and the client selects the images, no problems so far. On returning to the office I ask how the procedure went and was told that there were no problems, but the client looked like they had not washed for weeks and was shown a print out of the stooges selected (so far so good). On looking at the stooges I immediately recognised one of the stooges as another client of the firm and one that has current proceedings in the magistrates, new solicitor could not have know this as she had only been at the firm a week and had not come across this client.

Has anyone come across this before? I don’t think it affects either client but it does not feel right? Can the police use images of people as stooges if there are current court proceedings against them?

Any input much appreciated, Thanks

Business Plan re franchise app?

Thu, 09 Mar 2010 14:22:11 GMT

I am getting mixed messages, do I need to submit a business plan

for my application?

Are Cash Flow projections part of either the Bid process or the SQM/Franchise application?

I am told by some that they must be attached with the office manual and others that these are no required at all?

I would be grateful for some clarification

Thank you in advance

TheBrief40246.5995833333

North East Unite for OUT OF HOURS FEES!!

Thu, 09 Mar 2010 12:19:38 GMT

There is a culture among law firms in the North East to not pay staff for attending police stations out of hours.

THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN IN OTHER AREAS OF THE COUNTRY. It is quite simply unfair to do this considering the firm is earning at least £200.00 per call out and you are probably already on a poor wage anyway. I have worked in the Midlands and South West before re-settling back to this area (whre I am originally from) where I currently work as a criminal solicitor.

THE PROPOSAL; Well I havnt got a definite one as yet!! However I am seeking to drum up support from North East solicitors who will refuse to work unless we get a call out fee. If there are enough people interested I will set up a facebook page (or perhaps a similar page on this site) with the aim of getting messages of support from Law Society members who want change. We can then take this to the law society and hopefully it can make some persuasive comments.

ANYONE WHO WANTS CHANGE AND WANTS FAIRNESS PLEASE REPLY. This will give me an idea of the support we may have from other criminal lawyers in the North East.

THIS ATTITUDE OF BEING FORCED TO WORK FOR FREE BY OUR EMPLOYERS WOULD NOT BE TOLERATED IN ANY OTHER SECTOR WHERE SALARIES ARE SIMILAR TO OURS (imagine the reaction if public sector workers earning £25k were told they have to work weekends and evenings for free).

THIS IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN CHANGE THE CULTURE. EMPLOYERS WILL STILL MAKE MONEY ITS JUST TIME TO BE FAIR.

YOUR SUPPORT IS NEEDED! anyone who is in please reply below.

Tagging expert

Thu, 09 Mar 2010 12:09:27 GMT

Looking for an expert (other than Keith Borer) on electronically monitored curfew equipment. Anyone know of any expert?

What's the ASBO case?

Thu, 09 Mar 2010 12:08:18 GMT

I think I recently read a case on Crimeline dealing with ASBOs made in the absence of the Respondent.

I have either imagined it or deleted it from my in box.

The crux is that the young person should be present at the final hearing unless they have chosen to absent themselves as the court is obliged to ensure the Respondent understands the prohibitions imposed. If the young person has been made subject to a custodial sentence he can not be said to have absented himself and he should be produced.

Could any one be kind enough to point me in the right direction (or put me out of my missery if, in fact I made the whole thing up)?

Andrew, Ron, Anyone.....

Thanks in anticipation.

Simon

Tender ITT Version 3

Thu, 09 Mar 2010 09:24:11 GMT

LSC have issued a new version 3 of the ITT but we have
already submitted a version 2. Do we need to resubmit the
whole application?