Testimonials
Re E (Bankruptcy)
'Having never previously instructed a barrister, I found your site via Google, and having zipped around the straightforward navigation I quickly found myself a firm of Chambers I felt I could trust. It was then a simple matter of providing the Chambers with my instructions, and within 24 hours they put me on to one of their Barristers - who provided me with great help and advice, together with representation, in order to obtain what we required in Court. The whole experience from finding your site to obtaining Justice took less than 10 days! Amazing! Strongly recommend' - ABE of London (full name available upon request) - October 2009
Hill v Butler
Mr Hill said 'I needed some legal advice about how exactly my property was owned. I was looking to buy out the other owner and wanted to know if an offer put forward by her was reasonable. The problem was the figure offered was excessive because it was based on a misunderstanding of how we had structured our ownership. I was able to email my barrister the figures and information he needed, and he was able to advise me quickly. As I said at the time, it was "Possibly the best £240 I ever spent"' – Richard Hill October 2007
Tao v Marah
Ms Tao said 'I instructed a barrister on a public access basis to represent me in a dispute between me and my tenant. I had a conference with the barrister and he helped me draft a witness statement. As the hearing approached, we kept in contact by telephone, and he represented me in court. I found the whole experience very convenient. I was particular happy afterwards because I'd save a lot of costs doing it this way. It was all very good' -Ting Tao September 2008
GE Capital Bank v Rushton & Jenking
Rushton & Jenking were represented by a Public Access barrister; GE Capital were represented by a solicitor and barrister.
Commenting on this case, Anthony Speight QC, Chairman of the Bar Council's Access to the Bar Committee said 'The costs involved in this case have shown the clear public interest benefits of Public Access to the Bar in cases were solicitors are not required...Making every allowance for the fact that a client who acts directly will himself have to undertake some administration work which a solicitor would do for him, this case demonstrates the genuine and considerable costs savings that can be achieved through instructing a barrister without a solicitor'. Furthermore, he said 'The Bar Council has actively encouraged this development, and hopes that more clients will realise the increasing range of cost-saving options which are now available from the Bar' - Counsel Magazine 2006
Andre Agassi v S Robinson (H.M.Inspector of Taxes)
Following this case about what Public Access and Licensed Access costs can be claimed from other parties, a Bar Council spokesman said 'There are many positives for us from the judgment, which praises the Bar's direct access scheme as 'certainly both a new and better way of providing advocacy services''.
Westminster University Law School Industry Report June 2009
'Our interviews have indicated that clients who have engaged barristers directly have found the experience positive. Responses often include terms such as:
• “great value for money”
• “fast”
• “good to deal with the main person on the case”
• “respect for budgets”
• “very knowledgeable”
• “thoroughness and attention to detail”
• “good communication”
And a practice manager summarized it thus, “And we are probably, no always, cheaper than the solicitors.” Or as was articulated clearly by a senior clerk: I mean the whole thing behind the direct public access to be frank is to save money for the client. That’s why it’s going to take off because the public will look at it as a money saving. They’ll look at it and say well I can instruct one person instead of having to instruct two. That’s why I believe that it’s going to be a growing area.' - Straight There No Detours: Direct Access to Barristers - John Flood and Avis Whyte University of Westminster School of Law 17th June 2009
|
