economic cost benefit analysis of community legal centres · 2020-06-18 · economic cost benefit...
TRANSCRIPT
Economic Cost Benefit Analysis of Community Legal Centres
National Association of Community Legal Centres Inc.
by Judith Stubbs and Associates
The Old Post Office 231 Princes Hwy, Bulli NSW 251
Ph: 02 4283 7300 • Fax: 02 4283 7399 [email protected] • www.judithstubbs.com.au
This report has been prepared for
June 2012
© National Association of Community Legal Centres Inc.You may copy, distribute, display, download and otherwise freely deal with this work for any purpose, provided that you:1) attribute National Association of Community Legal Centres Inc (NACLC) as the owner of this work and
Judith Stubbs & Associates as the authors of the work and the owners of the confidential intellectual property rights of all methods, processes and commercial proposals described in the work, and
2) you do not: a) charge others for access
b) include the work or any part in advertising or in a product for sale, or c) modify the work, without the express written permission of NACLC.
Intellectual Property RightsAll Rights Reserved. All methods, processes and commercial proposals described in this document are the confidential intellectual property of Judith Stubbs & Associates and may not be used without the written permission of Judith Stubbs & Associates.
This Report has been prepared by:Mr John Storer BE (Civil) Grad. Dip. (Econ.)Dr Judith Stubbs BSW UNSW PhD RMIT
Ms Colleen Lux BA MSc (Environmental Studies)
Funding for this project was provided by the Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department and the National Association of
Community Legal Centres Inc.
National Association of Community Legal Centres Inc (NACLC) and Judith Stubbs & Associates thank the management and staff of the
community legal centres that participated in this study.
Table of Contents1. Rationale for Study ......................................................................................................................................5
2. Conceptual considerations ..........................................................................................................................6
2.1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................................6
2.2 Economicgoalsofgovernment...................................................................................................................6
2.3 Critiquesofthecost-benefitapproach......................................................................................................6
2.4 TheoriesofLaw................................................................................................................................................8
2.5 TheapproachtakenbythisStudy..............................................................................................................8
3. Framework for economic analysis ..............................................................................................................9
3.1 Whatisaneconomicanalysis?....................................................................................................................9
3.2 HowdoCLCsmeetthepublicpolicyobjectivesofgovernmentinaneconomicsense?........... 10
3.3 Applyingeconomicprinciplesandmethodologiestothelegalsystem........................................ 11
3.4 FrameworkfortheassessmentofeconomicimpactsofCLCs......................................................... 12
4. Methodology ..............................................................................................................................................14
4.1 Overview........................................................................................................................................................ 14
4.2 Selectionofcommunitylegalcentres.................................................................................................... 14
4.3 Assessmentofoperatingcosts................................................................................................................. 15
4.4 Selectionofmatters.................................................................................................................................... 15
4.5 Evaluationofmattersusingtheframework......................................................................................... 15
4.6 Discussionandreviewwithcommunitylegalcentrestaff............................................................... 16
4.7 Finalisationandquantificationofbenefits........................................................................................... 16
4.8 Calculationandreportingofcostbenefitratio.................................................................................... 16
4.9 Interviewswithkeystaffonprogramsprovidedbyeachcentre..................................................... 16
5. Summary of results ....................................................................................................................................17
5.1 Overview........................................................................................................................................................ 17
5.2 Discussion...................................................................................................................................................... 17 5.2.1 Summary........................................................................................................................................17 5.2.2 Justificationfortheprogram....................................................................................................18 5.2.3 Valueassociatedwithvarioustypesofmattersandapproaches..................................19 5.2.4 GeneralfindingsregardingeconomicefficiencyandCLCs..............................................21
5.3 Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................... 24
6. Case Study Centres .....................................................................................................................................26
6.1 LoddonCampaspeCLC................................................................................................................................ 26 6.1.1 CentreProfile.................................................................................................................................26 6.1.2 Analysisofprogramsofferedbythecentre..........................................................................32 6.1.3 AssessmentofEconomicBenefit............................................................................................38
6.2 GeraldtonResourceCentre.............................................................................................................................39 6.2.1 CentreProfile.................................................................................................................................39 6.2.2 Analysisofprogramsofferedbythecentre..........................................................................44 6.2.3 Assessmentofeconomicbenefit............................................................................................50
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
6.3 ConsumerCreditLegalCentreNSW........................................................................................................ 51 6.3.1 CentreProfile.................................................................................................................................51 6.3.2 Analysisofprogramsofferedbythecentre..........................................................................57 6.3.3 Assessmentofeconomicbenefit............................................................................................61
6.4 MarrickvilleLegalCentre............................................................................................................................ 63 6.4.1 CentreProfile.................................................................................................................................63 6.4.2 Analysisofprogramsofferedbythecentre..........................................................................69 6.4.3 Assessmentofeconomicbenefit............................................................................................74
Appendix A: economic analysis of cases and advices..................................................................................75
LoddonCampaspeCommunityLegalCentre................................................................................................... 75
GeraldtonResourceCentre................................................................................................................................... 96
ConsumerCreditLegalCentre...........................................................................................................................118
MarrickvilleLegalCentre.....................................................................................................................................132
FiguReS
Figure1: LawTypeProfileforMaleandFemaleLCCLCClients................................................................... 28
Figure2: LawTypeProfileforTotalandIndigenousLCCLCClients............................................................ 28
Figure3: LawTypeProfilebyAdvice,CaseworkandFirstActivities.......................................................... 29
Figure4: LawTypeProfileforMaleandFemaleGRCClients...................................................................... 40
Figure5: LawTypeProfileforTotalandIndigenousGRCClients............................................................... 41
Figure6: LawTypeProfilebyAdvice,CaseworkandFirstActivities.......................................................... 41
Figure7: LawTypeProfileforMaleandFemaleMLCClients...................................................................... 65
Figure8: LawTypeProfileforTotalandIndigenousMLCClients............................................................... 65
Figure9: LawTypeProfilebyAdvice,CaseworkandFirstActivities.......................................................... 66
TAbleS
Table1: Resultsofcostbenefitanalysis......................................................................................................... 17
Table2: StaffingProfile,LCCLC.......................................................................................................................... 26
Table3: VolunteerProfile,LCCLC...................................................................................................................... 27
Table4: LCCLCFirstActivityMattersbyTotalProblemTypeSortedHightoLow................................ 30
Table5: LCCLCAdvicesbyTotalProblemTypeSortedHightoLow......................................................... 31
Table6: LCCLCCaseworkActivitiesbyTotalProblemTypeSortedHightoLow................................... 32
Table7: LoddonCampaspeCommunityLegalCentreProgramMatrix................................................. 33
Table8: Economicbenefitsofselectedcases................................................................................................ 38
Table9: StaffingProfile,GRC............................................................................................................................. 39
Table10: VolunteerProfile,GRC.......................................................................................................................... 39
Table11: GRCFirstActivityMattersbyTotalProblemTypeSortedHightoLow................................... 42
Table12: GRCAdvicesbyTotalProblemTypeSortedHightoLow............................................................ 43
Table13: GRCCaseworkActivitiesbyTotalProblemTypeSortedHightoLow...................................... 44
Table14: GRCProgramMatrix............................................................................................................................ 45
Table15: Economicbenefitsofselectedcases................................................................................................ 50
Table16: StaffingProfile,CCLC............................................................................................................................ 51
Table17: VolunteerProfile,CCLC........................................................................................................................ 51
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
Table 18: CCLC First Activity Matters by Total Problem Type Sorted High to Low .................................. 53
Table 19: CCLC Advices by Total Problem Type Sorted High to Low ........................................................... 55
Table 20: CCLC Casework Activities by Total Problem Type Sorted High to Low..................................... 56
Table 21: CCLC Program Matrix ........................................................................................................................... 58
Table 22: Economic benefits of selected cases ................................................................................................ 61
Table 23: Staffing Profile Summary, MLC .......................................................................................................... 63
Table 24: Detailed Staffing Profile, MLC ............................................................................................................ 63
Table 25: MLC Activities by Funded Service Type ............................................................................................ 66
Table 26: MLC First Activity Matters by Total Problem Type Sorted High to Low ................................... 67
Table 27: MLC Advices by Total Problem Type Sorted High to Low ............................................................ 68
Table 28: MLC Casework Activities by Total Problem Type Sorted High to Low ...................................... 69
Table 29: MLC Program Matrix ............................................................................................................................ 70
Table 30: Economic benefits of selected cases ............................................................................................... 74
Table 31: Economic benefits of selected cases (LCCLC) ................................................................................. 75
Table 32: Economic benefits of selected cases (GRC) .................................................................................... 96
Table 33: Economic benefits of selected cases (CCLC) .................................................................................118
Table 34: Economic benefits of selected cases (MLC) ..................................................................................132
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
1. Rationale for StudyTherearearound200CommunityLegalCentres(CLCs)inmetropolitan,regional,ruralandremotecommunitiesacrossallstatesandterritoriesinAustralia.CLCsarenot-for-profitorganisationsthatprovidelegalinformation,advice,casework,educationandlawreformservices,particularlytargetedatthosewhoaredisadvantagedorwithspecialneeds.TherearearangeofgeneralistCLCsthatprovideservicesacrossarangeoflawtypesforaparticulargeographiccatchment,andmanyspecialistCLCsthatfocusonparticulargroupsorissues,suchaspeoplewithdisabilitiesfacedwithdiscrimination,refugeesseekingasyluminAustralia,orthatassistindividualsandcommunitygroupsonenvironmentalmatters. 1
In2009/10,CLCsthatwerefundedundertheCommonwealthandStateCommunityLegalServicesProgram(CLSP)provided168,000informationandreferrals,247,000advices,68,000cases,andconcluded2,869CLEprojectsand1,051lawreformandpolicyprojects,2withtotalannualCLSPfundingof$47,254,132.
TheprimaryroleofCLCsinprovidingforequityofaccesstolegalservicesforthosewhooftenfacesignificantbarriersisnotinquestion,andisakeyobjectiveofgovernment.3However,asacompetitorforpublicfunds,thecommunitylegalsectorinAustraliaislikelytofaceincreasingimperativestojustifyeconomicallythevalueofservicesprovided.Thisisimportantinanenvironmentwherepublicpolicyislargelyconcernedwiththeallocationofscarcecommunityresources,andwhereneedstypicallyoutweighavailableresources.Understandingtheeconomicvalueofcommunitylegalcentresthusrequiresanappropriateframeworkthroughwhichtoanalysetheircontributiontomeetingobjectivesofgovernmentrelatedtoeconomicefficiency.
Theaimsofthisstudy,commissionedbytheNationalAssociationofCommunityLegalCentres(NACLC),arethusto:
• DevelopandapplyanappropriateeconomicframeworkforunderstandingtheeconomicvalueofCLCsinAustralia;and
• ProvideaqualitativeunderstandingofthetypeandrangeofclientsservicedbyCLCsandthetypesandrangeofworkundertaken,includingcases,advicesandprograms.
1 NACLC(2010)AnnualReport2009/10,pg17.2 NACLC(2010)AnnualReport2009/10,pg17.3 TheoutcomestatementfortheCommonwealthCommunityLegalServicesProgramsetoutintheProgramGuidelinesandapprovedbythethenAttorney-GeneralinOctober2005is‘equitableaccesstolegalassistanceservicesfordisadvantagedmembersoftheAustraliancommunityandthosewithspecialneeds’(CommunityLegalServicesProgramGuidelines,p6).
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
2. Conceptual considerations2.1 introductionThisstudyadoptstheeconomicframeworkofcost-benefitanalysistounderstandtheeconomicvalueofCLCsinAustralia.Cost-benefitanalysisisapowerfultoolfortheanalysisofpolicybutisnottheonlybasisforsuchanalysis,withotherconsiderationssuchasequityanddistributionofimpactsequallyimportant.HoweveritsuseisbestpracticeandisinlinewiththestatedvaluesofgovernmentinAustralia.4Atthesametime,threepointsmustbeacknowledged.Firstly,economicefficiencyisnotthesoleeconomicgoalofgovernment.Secondly,therecontinuetobedocumentedcritiquesofthecost-benefitapproach.Thirdly,applicationofeconomicstothelawisoneamongmanytheoriesoflaw.
2.2 economic goals of governmentTherearetwoimportanteconomicgoalsofgovernmenttobeconsideredwhenallocatingresourcestocompetingneeds.Thefirstisefficiency,5andthesecondisequity.6Whilethefirstisquantifiableindollarsusingcost-benefitanalysis,thesecondisamatterofvalues.Inwesternparliamentarydemocracies,suchasAustralia,decisionsabout‘values’aremadebyelectedrepresentatives.7Theexistenceofawelfaresystemincludingservicesforpeopledisadvantagedbyincome,culture,geographyordisability,whichtransferswealthfromonepartofsocietytoanother,showstheimportanceplacedbygovernmentonmattersofequityanddemonstratesthatthisacentralpolicyconcernofgovernment.WhilenotingthatCLCsperformanimportantequityfunction,providingaccesstolegalservicesforthosewhooftenfacesignificantbarriers,assessmentofthecontributionofCLCstoequityisoutsidethescopeofthisstudy.
2.3 Critiques of the cost-benefit approachThecost-benefitapproachhasalonghistory.ItwasfirstrequiredbygovernmentintheUnitedStatesofAmericaFlood Control Actof1936,8andsuchassessmentsareroutinelycarriedoutforproposalssuchaspublicengineeringworks.9Nonetheless,therecontinueto
4 ThepositionoftheAustralianGovernmentwithrespecttobestpracticeinevaluationofpolicyissetoutinAustralianGovernment(2010),Best Practice Regulation Handbook.“The Australian Government is committed to the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) to assess regulatory proposals to encourage better decision making. A CBA involves a systematic evaluation of the impacts of a regulatory proposal, accounting for all the effects on the community and economy; not just the immediate or direct effects, financial effects or effects on one group. It emphasises, to the extent possible, valuing the gains and losses from a regulatory proposal in monetary terms. The goal of CBA is to provide the final decision maker with as much information about a regulatory proposal as is relevant in informing the decision. It provides an objective framework for weighing up different impacts and impacts which occur in different time periods. This objectivity is supported by converting all impacts into present value dollar terms. However, even when full quantification of impacts is not possible, CBA can still be useful in providing a clear decision making framework.In principle, CBA measures the efficiency or resource allocation effects of a regulatory change. It calculates the dollar value of the gains and losses for all people affected. If the sum is positive, the benefits exceed the costs and the regulatory proposal would increase efficiency. CBA is useful because it: provides decision makers with quantitative and qualitative information about the likely effects of a regulatory proposal; encourages decision makers to take account of all the positive and negative effects of a regulatory proposal, and discourages them from making decisions based only on the impacts of a single group within the community; assesses the impact of regulatory proposals in a standard manner, which promotes comparability, assists in the assessment of relative priorities and encourages consistent decision making; captures the various linkages between the regulatory proposal and other sectors of the economy (for example, increased safety may reduce health care costs), helping decision makers maximise net benefits to society, and helps identify cost-effective solutions to problems by identifying and measuring all costs.Even when it is difficult to estimate some costs or benefits with precision, CBA makes clear and transparent the assumptions and judgements made. Further, attempting to quantify costs and benefits encourages analysts to more closely examine these factors.”5 Thisconceptisatechnicaltermwherebythemaximumutilityisobtainedfromtheavailableresources.Itisdiscussedmorebroadlybelow.Relativeefficiencycanbeempiricallyobservedthroughtheoperationofmarketsandhenceismeasurable.6 Definedasfairnessordistributionofresources.Themeaningofthenotionitselfiscontested,forexampledoesequitymeanequalityofopportunityorequalityofoutcome?Thetwoapproacheshavequitedifferentpolicyimplications.SeeforexampleFriedmanL,(2002),The Microeconomics of Public Policy Analysis,Princeton,PrincetonUniversityPress,page58.7 Ibid,page66.8 Ibid,page169.9 SeeforexampleNSWTreasuryNSW Government Guidelines for Economic Appraisal TPP07-5.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
bepublishedcritiquesofthecost-benefitapproach.Intheareaofeconomicsandthelaw,theserangefromthepost-Freudian10andcriticalorpost-Marxistcritiques,11tomainstreamtechnicalcritiques.12Otherpapersdiscuss‘values’,13eitherplacingparticularvaluesaboveeconomicvaluesofefficiency,14orarguingthatvalueshavenoplaceinanyassessment.15
Publicpolicydecision-makingbasedoncost-benefitanalysistypicallyhasarangeofchecksandbalancestoaddresssuchcriticisms.Thecritiquestendtofallbroadlyintothreeschools.Thesearesetout,andbrieflyaddressed.
• Firstlythecost-benefitanalysisdoesnotassignsomethingthesamevaluethatthecriticthinksitholds,orthatthethingisofinfiniteorintrinsicvalue.16
Itmaybethattheanalysisdoesnotrankoptionsinthesamewayasthecritic’spersonalvaluesystemwouldrankthem,notingthattherearelikelytobearangeofoftencompetingvaluesandprioritieswithinthecommunity.Ineconomicterms,thesecompetingvaluescanbereflectedintheconceptof‘willingnesstopay’.17Inoursocialsystem,suchconsiderationsareeitherinformedbymarketconsiderations,basedonsurveyworktoestablishtheaverageacrosssocietyoraretheprovinceofelectedrepresentativeswhoconsiderawiderangeofmatters,includingeconomicefficiencyandthecostsofaproposal,whenmakingdecisionsregardingtheallocationofresourcesorotherpolicydecisions.
• Secondlycost-benefitanalysisisnotaccurateorexhaustiveenough. Whilealegitimatecriticism,itisbynomeansahopelessendeavour,withtheapproachcontainingchecksandbalancesdevelopedovertimetoaddresstheseissues.Acost-benefitanalysisaimstobetransparent,settingoutassumptionsandinputs,sothatifacriticofaparticularanalysisbelievesitisflawed,theycansaywhere,howandwhytheybelievetheoriginalanalysistobeincorrect.Sensitivityanalysisisusedtoensurethattheanalysisisnotparticularlysensitivetoreasonablechangesinassumptions.Finallythereisthematterofutility.Itcanbearguedthatpolicydecisionsbasedonimperfectinformationshouldcarrymoreweightthanthosebasedonnoinformationoronthepersonalvaluesofonedecisionmaker,forexample.
• Thefinalcommoncriticismisthateconomicanalysisdoesnotgiveregardtoequity;thatis,thedistributionofresourcesinsociety.
Thisisentirelycorrect.However,societyhasotherprocessesinplacetoaddressequityconcerns.Theseincludevarioussystemsoftransfers,includingmonetarytransferssuchaspensionsandindirecttransferssuchassubsidisedservicestoselectedgroupswithinthecommunity.Decisionsregardingappropriateformsandlevelsoftransfersaremadebyelectedrepresentatives,andsoareassumedtoreflecttheaveragevalues
10 SeeforexampleSchroeder,J.(1998),The end of the Market: A psychoanalysis of law and economics:HarvardLawReviewVol.112:483;discussingthemarketintermssuchasdesire,Thanatos(deathwish)andcastration,fromapost-Freudianperspectives.11 SeeforexampleHanson,J.,andYosifon,D.,(2003)The Situation: An introduction to the situational character, critical realism, power economics, and deep capture, UniversityofPennsylvaniaLawReview,Vol.152,p.129;discussingthesocialfunctionofeconomicsfromarangeoftheoreticalperspectives.12 SeeforexampleColeman,J.,(1982)The Normative Basis of Economic Analysis: A Critical Review of Richard Posner’s “The Economics of Justice”StanfordLawReview,Vol.34,NO.5,pp.1105-1131; Dworkin,R.,(1980)Is Wealth a Value?,TheJournalofLegalStudies,Vol.9,No2,pp.1991-226;Pildes,R.,(1991)The unintended cultural consequences of public policy: a comment on the symposium, MichiganLawReview,Vol.89,No.4;13 Itisnotclearwhetherthevaluesareuniversal(andifsohowdetermined)orwhethertheyarethevaluesoftheauthor.14 SeeforexampleSinger,J.,(2002),Something Important in Humanity,HarvardCivilRights-CivilLibertiesLawReview,Vol.37;andKennedy,D.(1998),law-and-economics from the perspective of critical legal studies, TheNewPalgraveDictionaryofEconomicsandtheLaw,ed.Newman,P.,MacmillanReferenceLimited.15 SeeforexampleKaplow,L.andShavell,S.(2001),Any non-welfarist Method of Policy Assessment Violates the Pareto Principle,JournalofPoliticalEconomy,Vol109,No.2,pp.281-286.16 Forexampleapersonmaysaythatthelegalsystemisaboutjusticeandapricecan’tbeplacedonjustice.17 Onemeasureofeconomicefficiencyiswhethersomethingisprovidedatapricesocietyiswillingtopay.Thisincludestheeconomicjustificationofpublicgoodssuchasexpressways.Inthecaseofexpressways,theassessingauthorityconsidersthetimesavingsforthetravellingpublicandthevalueplacedbypeopleonaverageontheirtimeagainstthecostofprovidingtheexpressway.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
ofoursociety.Asnoted,theCLCsectorisassumedtomeettheequityobjectivesofgovernment,andthisisnotchallengedbythefindingsofthisstudy.
2.4 Theories of lawThefinalareatobediscussediswhetherthelawisinformedbyeconomicsandtowhatextentorwhethereconomicsisanappropriateparadigmfortheevaluationoflegaloutcomesingeneralortheworkcarriedoutbyCLCsinparticular.Theoriesoflawareattemptstounderstandwhy,injudicialmattersorlegalprinciples,oursocietyprefersonelegalprincipletoanother.Manysuchtheoriesoflawaredocumented.Himmaproposesausefultaxonomyofthreecategoriesintowhichthetopicsoflegalphilosophyfall,eachwithanumberofschools:18
AnalyticJurisprudenceaddressestheunderlyingquestionofdeterminingthenecessaryconditionsfortheexistenceoflawthatdistinguishlawfromnon-law.SchoolsareidentifiedasNaturalLaw(morality),LegalPositivism(socialconvention,socialfacts,separability[frommoralconsiderations])andDworkin’sThirdTheory.
NormativeJurisprudenceconsidersprescriptivequestionsaboutthelaw.SomeofthesequestionsincludeFreedomandthelimitsofLegitimateLaw,ObligationtoobeyLawandJustificationofPunishment.
ThefinalcategoryisCriticalTheoriesofLawwherebylawisconsideredwithinthecontextofsociety.SchoolsincludeLegalRealism(understandingthevaluesofjudges),CriticalLegalStudies(understandingtheimportanceofideology),LawandEconomics(understandingwaysinwhichthelawmaximisesthewealthofsociety)andOutsiderJurisprudence(understandingwaysinwhichlawpromotestheinterestsofelitesattheexpenseofothergroupssuchaswomenorracialandethnicminorities).
Otherauthorsuseothertaxonomies.19
2.5 The approach taken by this StudyThecurrentstudyissituatedwithinamainstreameconomicparadigm,utilisingthetoolsofmicro-economicpolicyanalysis,whilstcognisantofthecritiquesofthisapproach.Consistentwiththis,itisinformedbyeconomictheoriesoflaw,acceptingthataneconomicapproachtolaw(andbyextensiontheworkofCLCs)isalegitimateperspective,amongothers,forunderstandingthevaluetosocietyofworkcarriedoutbyCLCs.
18 InternetEncyclopediaofPhilosophy–ThePhilosophyofLawathttp://www.iep.utm.edu/law-phil/19 Seeforexample:Harris,J.(2004),Legal Philosophies,OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford,doesnotattempttocreateasystematicplanbutinsteadidentifiessome19headingsunderwhichareasoflegalphilosophicaldebatecanbegrouped.Theseincludenaturallawandmoraltruth;thecommandtheoryoflaw;utilitarianismandtheeconomicanalysisoflaw;punishment;Kelsen’spuretheoryoflaw(lawshouldbevaluefree);legalconcepts,legalrealismandcriticallegalstudies;Hart’sconceptoflaw(legalrulesassocialrules);freedomandtheenforcementofmorals;themoralityoflawandtheruleoflaw;statutoryinterpretation;precedent;Dworkin’srightsthesis;legalreasoning;thedutytoobeythelaw;thehistoricalschoolandnon-statelaw;sociologicaljurisprudence;law,societyandMarxistjurisprudence;andjustice:liberal,communitarianandfeminist;andLeiboff,M.andThomas,M.(2004),Legal Theories in Principle,LawbookCo.,Pyrmont,whoidentifyanddiscussnaturallawtheories;modernismandliberalism;legalpositivism;Marxisttheories;sociologicallegaltheories;feministlegaltheory;criticallegalstudies;post-modernism;criticalracetheoryandpostcolonialtheory;andemergingtheories.Theymention,butdonotdiscuss,economicanalysisofthelaw;commonlawtheory;historicalandanthropologicaljurisprudence;andarangeofphilosophicalandsociologicaltheorists.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�-
3. Framework for economic analysis3.1 What is an economic analysis?Publicpolicyislargelyconcernedwiththeallocationofscarcecommunityresources,whereneedstypicallyoutweighavailableresources.20Economicanalysisisoneacceptedwayofassessingandcomparingsuchallocativedecisionstoprovideinformationtodecisionmakers.Thebreadthoftheanalysisisimportantand,inthisregard,economicanalysisshouldnotbeconfusedwithafinancialanalysis.Thelatterisconcernedwithanorganisation’sbottomline,whereasaneconomicanalysisisconcernedwithcostsandbenefitsacrossthewholeofsociety.Thislatterperspectivemaybechallengingtolegalpractitionersandotherserviceproviders,astheirprimaryconcernisunderstandablylargelyconcernedwithobtainingthebestoutcomefortheirclient,ratherthanthebestoutcomeforsociety.Aswewillseefromthecurrentstudy,thetwoarenotnecessarilythesame,thoughtheymayoftenintersect.
Aneconomic(or,moreprecisely,amicroeconomic)analysisofpublicpolicyisbasedonthepremisethatsomeallocationsofresourcesaremoreefficientthanothers,andthattoprovidemoreefficientallocationsisanimportantsocialobjective.Theterm‘efficiency’isusedinapreciseandtechnicalwaybyeconomists,andisbasedonthetheoreticalconceptofutilityandthesocialgoalofthemaximisationofutility.21SupposethatAhastenapplesandBhastenoranges.Theytradeapplesandorangeswitheachotherandendupwithfiveapplesandfiveorangeseach.Thetotalamountofresourceshasnotchanged,howeverthechangingallocationofthoseresourcesthroughtradehasincreasedthetotalutilityofAandB.Sincetheywerebothpreparedtotrade,theyboththinktheyarebetteroffcomparedwiththeiroriginalposition.An‘efficientoutcome’isoneinwhichtherearenomoretradesavailable,thatisnobodythinkstheycanimprovetheirpositionbymarketexchanges.22
Whileitcouldbearguedthatthisnotionofefficiencyisvalueladenandsubjective,itisalsoempirical,inthatitisgenerallydescriptiveofwhatpeopleactuallydowhentheytradethingsinamarketandthosemarketscanbeexaminedquantitatively.
Thereisanotherimportantpointtobeconsidered.Theefficientoutcomefrommarketexchangeswillalwaysdependontheinitialallocationofresources.Sointheexampleabove,ifAhadsixapplesandBhadtenoranges,theefficientallocationmayendupasAhavingthreeapplesandthreeorangeswhileBhasthreeapplesandsevenoranges.WhileAandBareboth betteroff,Bisbetter offthanA.
Thatinitialallocationofresourcesisentirelyarbitraryandreflectschanceandcircumstance.ForexamplesomeoneborninAustraliawillhaveaccesstomanymoreeconomicresourcesthanapersonborninCambodia,andso,iftheytraded,whilebothwouldbebetteroffaftertrading,theAustralianislikelytobemuchbetteroffthantheCambodian.WithinAustralia,anindigenouspersonlivinginaremoteareawillhavefarlessaccesstoemployment,healthandlegalservicesthanapersonborntoamiddleclassfamilyininnerSydneyorMelbourne.Thisraisesanotherimportantsocialconcern(andsecondeconomicobjectiveinoursystemofgovernment),thatof‘equity’orfairness.
Whiledifferentruleshavebeenproposedtoguideequity,thereisnoconsensusamongeconomistsregardinganappropriate‘socialwelfare’function.23InAustralia,equityisaddressedbyasystemoftransfers,wherebywealthistransferredfromonepartofsocietytoanother,eitherthroughcash,differentialtaxation,orthroughsubsidisedorfreeservicesandothermeasures.Theoretically,thosetransfersrepresentthesumofthevaluesofsocietywithregardtoequity,asexpressedbyourelectedrepresentatives.
20 SeeforexampleFriedmanop cit.,p.3.21 SeeforexampleNicholson,W.,(2005)Microeconomic Theory: Basic principles and extensions,9thed.,ThompsonSouthWestern,page338.22 TechnicallythisistermedtheParetoPrinciple.23 Thesetofrulesencapsulatingnormativestandardsthatshouldgovernredistributionofresources(seeforexampleFriedmanop cit, page58).
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
ThethirdeconomicobjectiveofgovernmentinAustralia,andinsimilarcountries,istoprovidecertaingoodsandservices,characterisedinthisreportas‘publicgoods’.24Inthisregard,differentcountrieshavedifferentviewsastowhichservicesthemarketshouldprovideandwhichshouldbeprovidedbythestate,andwhatpriceshouldbepaidforthoseservices.
TheresultisthatinAustralia,andinothercountrieswithsimilarsystems,governmenthasthreebroadeconomicfunctions.Thefirstistomaximiseindividualutilityacrosssocietybymaximisingtheefficientallocationofgoodsandservices.Thesecondistoaddressmattersofequitybyfulfillingaredistributivefunction.Thethirdistoprovidepublicgoodsandservices.
Therearearangeofwell-understoodeconomictechniquesandprinciplestoevaluatetheeconomicsofpublicpolicy,commonlyreferredtoascostbenefitanalysis.Asnoted,thisisthemethodusedinthecurrentstudytoassesseconomicimpactsoftheoperationofCLCs.
3.2 How do ClCs meet the public policy objectives of government in an economic sense?
Fundamentally,CLCsareanequitymeasurefundedbygovernmenttoincreaseaccesstothelegalsystembythosewhomayotherwisebeexcluded,orbyimprovingandfacilitatingaccesse.g.byprovidinginformationtopeopleinthelegalsystemthatenablesthemtooperatemoreeffectivelyandefficientlywithinit.FundingprovidedtoCLCsrepresentsthevalueplacedonsuchoutcomesbyourelectedrepresentatives,givingregardtocompetingdemandsforresourcesfromothersectors.
AneconomicanalysisoftheCLCsectorthereforestartsfromthispositionbutalsoseekstounderstandthedegreetowhichthat‘equity’functionmayalsoachieve‘efficiency’functions.IftheCLCsectorcanachieveefficiencygoalsofgovernmentaswellasachievingequityfunctions,thentheAustraliancommunityhasdonewelloutoftheinitialallocationoffundingtothesector.
Therearethree broad areasinwhichCLCsmaycontributetoefficienteconomicoutcomes.
• Intermsoftheefficientoperationofthemarket,CLCscanassistinthe proper operation of the legal systemfromwhichweallbenefit,byprovidingaccesstothelegalsystemforthosewhomayotherwisebeexcluded.CLCsthusprovideanopportunityforthelawtobeengagedincircumstanceswhereitmaynototherwisebeengaged.Thisoutcomeispredicatedoneconomictheoriesofthelaw,wherebythelawischaracterisedasperformingasocialfunction(amongotherfunctions)offacilitatingtheefficientoperationofthemarket.
Proponentsoftheeconomictheoryofthelaw,suchasRichardPosner,25contendthatproperoperationofthelegalsystemprovidesaneconomicbenefittosocietybecauseitfacilitateseconomicallyefficientoutcomes.Posnerdrawsonawiderangeofeconomictheorytoillustratehowvariousareasofthelawachieveanefficientoutcome,oroptimisethebenefitsacrosssociety.Someareasoflaw,likenegligence,contractandfamilylaw,mayberegardedasofgreaterorlessereconomicbenefit,26whilstotherslikeemploymentlawandhumanrightsmaybestbeconsideredtransfersorequitymeasuresunderPosner’sframework.Forexample,contractlawensuresthatnon-simultaneoustransactionscanoccurwithconsiderablebenefitinmanyspheresofactivity.Such
24 Thesearegoodsandservicesthatareofvaluetothecommunity,howeverthemarketisunlikelytoprovidethemasoncebuiltorprovided,anyonecanusethemorhavethebenefitofthem,withoutpaying.Examplesincludepublicroads,defenceforcesand,intheclassicexample,lighthouses.Othergoodscouldbeprovidedbythemarketplace,suchaselectricitysupplies,waterandtrainservicesbutarecommonlyprovidedbygovernmentinAustraliaforotherreasons.Electricityforexampleisanaturalmonopoly,henceforthegovernmenttoprovideitistoensurethatitisprovidedatthelowestprice(notinghoweverthattherearearangeofinefficienciesassociatedwithgovernmentdeliveryofservices).25 Posner,R.,(2007)Economic Analysis of Law,7thed.,Aspen,NewYork.26 Negligence,forexample,promotesamarketbyplacingacostonnegligentactsthatwouldotherwisebebornebyothers,thusinternalisinganexternality.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
theoristsprovideusefulinsightsintothelikelybenefitsofdifferentaspectsofthelaw,whichthecurrentstudydrawson,bothinaqualitativeandquantitativeway.
• CLCscanalsofunctiontoensurethe most efficient delivery of the equity goalsofgovernmentandthisisanimportanteconomicbenefit.Forexample,ifthecostofapersonobtainingappropriateaccesstojusticecanbehalved,thentwiceasmanyclientscanbeprovidedwithaservice.
• Finally,CLCscanassistinaddressing potentiallyadverse economic outcomes orexternalitiesrelatedtoperverseoutcomes.On average,theproperoperationofthelegalsystemshouldprovideeconomicallyefficientoutcomesforsociety.However,theoperationofthelegalsystemcanhaveunintendedconsequencesthatresultincoststhatarebornebythewholeofsociety,resultingin‘externalities’.27Forexample,thecostofinstitutionalisation,homelessnessorrelationshipbreakdownthatmayresultfromsomelegalprocessescanresultinsignificantdirectandhiddencoststhatmaybeavoidedthroughtimely,holisticorpreventativeaction,keystrategiesofCLCs.
3.3 Applying economic principles and methodologies to the legal system
Economicprinciplesofpublicpolicyanalysisprovideausefulwayofthinkingaboutthevalueoftheoperationandfunctioningofthelawinsociety,includingofCLCs,forthecurrentstudy,andprovidethebasisofaframeworkforevaluatingtheeconomicimpactofsuchservices.
OnlyafewstudiesinAustraliahavesoughttoanalysetheeconomicvalueoreconomicimpactofcommunityorpublicsectorlegalactivitiesinanappliedway.TheworkofPriceWaterhouseCoopersinevaluatingtheeconomicvalueoflegalaidfoundabenefit-costratioof1.60and2.25(usingarangeofdifferentcaseassumptions).28However,theanalysisisfinancialratherthaneconomicinthatitonlyconsiderscostsandbenefitsattheorganisationallevel,ratherthanatthewholeofcommunitylevelandisnarrowinscope.Thecalculationofthebenefit-costratiowasbasedonaveragecostsandtheoreticalscenarios.Threecasestudieswerealsoassessedinthestudy;however,theauthorofthisreporthasconcernswithsomeoftheassumptionsmadeinassessingthosecasestudies,forexample,theuseofwillingnesstopaymeasuresbasedonstatedratherthanrevealedpreferencesandtheascribingofaneconomicbenefittotheavoidanceoftransfers.29
TwootherAustralianstudieshavealsoaimedtoevaluatetheeconomicimpactsofthelegalsystem.30Thefirstoftheseisactuallyafinancialappraisal(concernedwithanorganisation’sbottomline)ratherthananeconomicanalysisandisrecognisedbyitsauthorsassuch.Thesecondstudyisnarrowinscope,consideringthreecasestudies,and,againintheopinionofthewriterofthisreport,containserrorssuchasconfusingthebenefittotheindividualwiththebenefittosociety.
Thereisvalueinthesestudies.Ingeneral,however,suchstudiesdonottakeacomprehensiveapproachtoeconomicevaluationofcommunityorpublicsectorlegalservices,andnoneofthestudiesbringtogethertherangeofconsiderationsoutlinedabove,assesscostsandbenefitsacrossthewholeofcommunityorbasetheiranalysisonastatisticallydefensiblesamplingapproach.ThecurrentstudyseekstoaddressthisgapbyconceptualisingthevalueofCLCserviceswithinaneconomicframework,byapplyingtheframeworktoquantifytheeconomicbenefitsassociatedwithCLCsusinganappropriatemethodology(cost-benefit
27 Suchmechanismsarecollectivelyreferredtoas“MarketFailure”.ForadiscussionseeSwann,M.andMcEachern,W.,(2003),Microeconomics, A contemporary introduction,2nded.,Thompson,pages105ff.28 PriceWaterhouseCoopers(2009)Economic value of legal aid, NationalLegalAid.29 Apension,forexample,isnotanetcostwhensummedacrosssociety,asoneperson’slossisanotherperson’sgain.Thereishoweveracosttosocietyfromtheadministrativesystemsrequiredtosupportbothsystemsoftaxationandpaymentsofpensions.30 KPMG(2008)Family dispute resolution services in legal aid commissions – Evaluation Report, Attorney-General’sDepartment;andInstituteforSustainableFutures(2006)The Economic Value of Community Legal Centres, NACLC.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
analysisatthewholeofcommunitylevel)andbyusingasoundempiricalapproachbycalculatingaveragesbasedonasampleof160casestudies.
3.4 Framework for the assessment of economic impacts of ClCs
Aframeworkforthestudywasdevelopedprimarilyusingtheeconomicprinciplesofpublicpolicyanalysis,informedbyreferencetotheeconomictheoryoflaw,wherebylawisunderstoodbyitsabilitytoreturneconomicallyefficientoutcomes.Theseconceptswerebroughttogetherwithinanoverarchingassessmentofnetbenefitatthe‘wholeofcommunity’level(commonlyreferredtoas‘costbenefitanalysis’)inordertoevaluatetheeconomicimpactofCLCs.
Acost-benefitanalysisprovidesforthetransparentcomparisonofcostsandbenefitsacrossvarioustypesofprojects,policiesorprograms,usingacommoncurrency(dollars)andisthepreferredmethodofgovernmentfortheassessmentofeconomicbenefitsinNSWandnationally.31Ittakesa‘wholeofcommunity’approachtotheassessmentofcostandbenefits,includingthedirectorfinancialcostsofaprogramorprojectaswellasitsindirectorhiddencosts(‘externalities’)thatarenonethelessrealcoststothecommunity.Evenwhereallimpactscannotbequantifiedorvalued,itallowsforacleardecisionmakingframework,andincludesquantitativeandqualitativeinformationaboutthelikelyeffectsofaprogramorproposal.
ThecostsofCLCsarelargelyevident,generallythedirectcostsofprovidingCLCs,includingwages,administrationcostsandthelikefromgovernmentfundingandanyotherincome.
Threelevelsofbenefitareconsideredinaccordancewiththeconceptualconsiderationsoutlinedpreviously.
• Firstlythestudytakestheviewthatoneoftheoutcomesoftheproperoperationofthelegalsystemistoprovideeconomicallyefficientoutcomesacrossthewholeofthecommunity,withthoseefficientoutcomesintheinterestsofthewholeofsociety.Hence,functionsofCLCsthatleadtotheproperoperationofthelegalsystemarelikelytoprovideabenefittothecommunityasawhole.Typicallythesebenefitsareassessedqualitativelyinthisstudyasinpracticeitwouldbeexpectedthat,whiletheoverallbenefitofoursystemoflawislarge,foraparticularmatteronaveragemarginalcostswouldbeexpectedtoequalmarginalbenefits.32
• Secondly,consideringthelegalsystemasapublicgood(orservice)orasanequitymeasure,itisalsointheinterestsofthecommunitytohavethatpublicgoodorequitymeasuredeliveredinanefficientway,meaning,inthiscase,thatitisdeliveredatthelowestcost,henceanyfunctionsoftheCLCsectorthatreducethecostofoperatingthelegalsystem(e.g.earlyinterventionstrategiesthatkeeppeopleoutofthesystem,orgarneringvolunteerlawyers)willalsobeabenefit.ThereisalsoafurtherbenefitherewherebytheactionsofCLCsmayreducetransactioncostsmoregenerallyinsociety,forexampleprivatelegalcostsincurredbyparties.
• Finally,itisnotintheinterestsofthecommunityifthe‘blind’operationofthelegalsystemincurscostselsewhereinthecommunity,andthosecostsoutweighthe
31 SeeforexampleAustralianGovernment(2010),Best Practice Regulation Handbook.32 Thisisbecausetheexistenceorotherwiseofaneconomicallybeneficiallegalprincipleisunlikelytohingeonaparticularcaseormatteranditistheprinciplewhichprovidesthebenefittosociety.Asanexample,ifcontractlawwastodisappeartomorrow,therewouldbeanimmensefinancialcosttosocietyastransactionswouldbelimitedtothosewhichcanbemadesimultaneously.Howevercontractsareenteredintoeverydayacrosssocietyandveryfewofthoseendupindisputeorrequirecourtenforcementforperformanceastheprinciplesarewellestablishedandwellknown.Inacompletelyrationalsystem,onewouldexpectthatinanyinstancewherealegalprincipleisdefended,thecosttosocietyofconfirmingtheprinciplewillbeequaltothecosttosocietyofhavingtheprincipleignored.Inthisview,amaturesystemofjusticeisanalogoustoamarket,whereinsomepeoplesellgoodsformorethantheirminimumprice,andsomepeoplebuygoodsmorecheaplythantheyarepreparedtopay,butthelastsellersellsatexactlyhisminimumprice,andthelastbuyerpaysexactlyhismaximumprice.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
benefitsfromtheoperationofthelegalsystemresultinginaperverseoutcome.Accordingly,theproperoperationoftheCLCsectorshouldseektoavoidtheseexternalcostsasthiswillgenerateapublicbenefit.Thesebenefitsarecharacterisedinthisreportas‘externalities’.33
33 Anexamplemaybeayoungoffenderwhoisunlikelytoreoffend,butwhoifsentencedtoacustodialsentencewillincuracosttosocietythroughincarceration.Itcouldalsobethattheirabilitytocontributetosocietywillbesignificantlyreducedastheymayhavedifficultyfindingworkinthefutureduetoacriminalrecord.Theselattertwocostscouldbeconsideredasexternalities.Fromaneconomicallyrigorousperspective,inthecasewheretheywerelikelytoreoffend,thecosttosocietyofongoingcrimewouldneedtobesetagainstthecosttosocietyofincarcerationandofreducedemploymentfromacriminalrecord.Theeconomicallyefficientpointwouldbewhereenoughpeoplewerebeingsentencedsothatthetwocostswereequal.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
4. Methodology4.1 Overview Theapproachwasbasedonareviewandanalysisofrandomlyselectedmattersacrossfourcommunitylegalcentresinamixofmetropolitanandregionalandremotelocations.Therewereeightkeycomponentstotheapproach:
• Selectionofcommunitylegalcentres• Assessmentofoperatingcosts• Selectionofmattersfromthecategoriesofinformation,adviceandcasework• Evaluationofmattersusingtheframework• Discussionandreviewwithcommunitylegalcentrestaff• Finalisationandquantificationofbenefits• Calculationandreportingofcost-benefitratio• Interviewswithkeystaffonprogramsprovidedbyeachcentre
Eachoftheseisdiscussedbrieflyinturn.
4.2 Selection of community legal centresFourcommunitylegalcentreswereselectedascasestudycentrestorepresentdifferenttypes,locationsandsizesofcentres.Thesewere:
• AgeneralistlegalcentreinaVictorianinnerregionalarea34(LoddonCampaspeCommunityLegalCentre)
• AgeneralistlegalcentreinaWesternAustralianouterregionalareaandservicingremoteareas35(GeraldtonLegalCentre)
• AspecialistlegalcentreinSydney(ConsumerCreditLegalCentre)• AgeneralistlegalcentreinSydney(MarrickvilleLegalCentre)
Centresincludedthreegeneralistcentresandonespecialistcentre.Twowereinmetropolitanlocations,onewasinaninnerregionallocationandonewasinanouterregionallocation.
OfthefourcasestudyCLCs,LoddonCampaspeCommunityLegalCentreisageneralistlegalcentrelocatedinaninnerregionalarea,GeraldtonResourceCentreisageneralistlegalcentrelocatedinanouterregionalarea,ConsumerCreditLegalCentreisastatewidespecialistserviceandMarrickvilleLegalCentreisageneralistinnercitylegalcentreservicingaspecificgeographiccatchmentarea.
Theloddon Campaspe Community legal CentrehelpsdisadvantagedCentralVictorianswithlegalproblems.ItiscommittedtohumanrightsandsocialjusticeandworkswithotherlocalagenciesandnetworkstoaddresscommonissuesofdisadvantageandneedintheLoddonCampasperegionofCentralVictoria.TheCentreprovidesfreelegaladvice,referralandongoingassistancetolocalresidentsinarangeofareasincludingfamily,consumer,debt,discrimination,family/domesticviolence,crime,motorvehicleaccidents,welfarerights,employment,guardianshipandvictimsofcrime.
Primarily,thelegalcentreprogramatgeraldton Resource Centreoperatestoprovideassistancetopeoplewhowouldnototherwisehaveaccesstolegaladvice.Italsoassistspeopletoaccessthelegalandothersystemswheretheiraccessislimited,forexampledue
34 AustralianStandardGeographicClassificationRemotenessStructure.35 Ibid.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
topoorliteracy.TheCLCseekstonegotiateoutcomesbetweenpartiesandworkswithotherprogramswithinGeraldtonResourceCentretoassistclients.
Apartfromageneralistlegalprogram,anIndigenousWomen’sprogramandtenancyadvocacy,GeraldtonResourceCentreoperatesarangeofprogramstargetingtherootcauseofproblemsthatwouldotherwisemanifestaslegalmatters.Programsincludefinancialcounselling,supportprogramsforreleasedprisonersandahomelessnessservice.TypicallytheprogramsreflecttheworkloadoftheCLC.
TheConsumer Credit legal Centrefunctionstoprovideanexpertknowledgebaseintheareaofconsumercreditactinginthepublicinterestandprovidingvaluableinputtopolicymakers.Thecentrealsoservesacompliancefunction,byassessingtheperformanceoflendersandinsurancecompaniesagainstcodesofpracticeandstatutoryregulationandensuring,asfarastheyareable,thatthosecodesofpracticeandregulationsarecompliedwith.Atamorepracticallevel,benefitsareachievedbytheCLCfacilitatingnegotiationbetweenparties,withthesebenefitsaccruingtocreditors,debtorsandtothebroadercommunity.Importantly,andsimilartoothercentres,thecentreseekstoaddresstherootcauseofmattersthatwouldotherwisepresentaslegalproblemsbyprovidingcounsellingandsupporttoclients.
Marrickville legal Centreoperatestoprovideassistancetopeoplewhowouldnototherwisehaveaccesstolegaladvice.Italsoassistspeopletoaccessthelegalandothersystemswheretheiraccessislimitedduetolackofskillsorsophistication.TheCLCrunsspecialistprogramsintheareasofyoungpeople,tenancyanddomesticviolence.
4.3 Assessment of operating costsOperatingcostsweredeterminedfromtheaccountsofthevariouscentres.Whereacommunitylegalcentrewaspartofalargerorganisation,relevantofficersfromeachorganisationidentifiedthecomponentofcostattributabletothecommunitylegalcentre.
4.4 Selection of mattersAsamplingapproachwasusedtoestimatetheaveragebenefitassociatedwithamatterforaparticularcommunitylegalcentre.Over160matterswereassessedacrossthefourlegalcentres.36Theapproachusedatthefirstcentrewastoselecttwentyrandommatters(includingcasesandadvices)andtohavelegalstaffidentifyanothertwentycasesthattheyperceivedashavinghighvalue.
Followinganalysis,itwasfoundthattheeconomicbenefitassociatedwiththerandommatterswassimilartotheeconomicbenefitassociatedwiththemattersperceivedbylegalstaffashavinghighvalue.Forthisreason,intheotherthreecentrestwentyrandomcasesandtwentyrandomadviceswereselectedandevaluated.
4.5 evaluation of matters using the frameworkEachfilewasassessedastowhetherabenefitwasevidentinthethreeareasofthelaw,theprocessandexternalities.Thebenefitwasthenquantifiedusingarangeofmethodssuchasavoidedcostorwillingnesstopaywithrecoursetootherstudiesortoreportedcosts.Thiswasthemajorpartofthestudy,andmanydifferentapproacheswereused,butarenotrepeatedhere.Detailscanbefoundintheindividualcasestudieswiththestudy’sreport.
36 Whilealargersamplewillalwaysreduceoverorunderestimatesarisingfromsamplingerror,thereisatrade-offbetweenthecostofassessinglargerandlargersamplesandthereductioninsamplingerror.Forarandomlydistributedcontinuousvariable,suchasthebenefitassociatedwithamatter,asamplesizeof30isconsideredsufficienttoreturngoodresultshencethesampleof160matterscanbeexpectedtoprovidedefensibleresults.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
4.6 discussion and review with ClC staffFollowinganinitialreviewandassessmentbytheresearcher,thematterswerethendiscussedwithcommunitylegalcentrestafftoseeif,first,thematterwasproperlyunderstood,andsecondly,whethertherewereothercircumstancesassociatedwiththematterthatmayhavecontributedadditionalbenefitthathadnotbeenidentified.
4.7 Finalisation and quantification of benefitsTheidentifiedandquantifiedeconomicbenefitswerethenfinalised.
4.8 Calculation and reporting of cost benefit ratioAnaveragebenefitpercaseandperadvicewascalculated.Thisaveragebenefitwasthenmultipliedbythenumberofcasesandadvicesrecordedbythecentreinatwelvemonthperiod,andthebenefitwasdividedbytheoperatingcostofthecommunitylegalcentretoreturnacostbenefitratio.Afurthercomparisonwasmadeofhighbenefitcaseswithoperatingcoststodeterminehowmanyhighbenefitcaseswouldberequiredtooffsettheoperatingcostofthecentre.
4.9 interviews with key staff on programs provided by each centre
Interviewswerealsoconductedwithkeystaffonprogramsprovidedbyeachcentretoprovideamorecomprehensiveunderstandingofthecentres’functions,andprovideamorequalitativeperspectiveonthevalueoftheCLCs.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
5. Summary of results5.1 OverviewThestudyfindsthat,onaverage,CLCshaveacostbenefitratioof1:18;thatis,foreverydollarspentbygovernmenttheyreturnabenefittosocietythatis18timesthecost.Toexpressthisindollarterms,iftheaverageheldconstantforCLCsacrossAustralia,the$47.0millionspentontheprogramnationallyin2009/10wouldyieldaround$846.0millionofbenefittoAustralia.
TheassessmentofneteconomicbenefitsprovidesaverystrongrationaleforthecontinuedfundingoftheCLCprogram,andaclearjustificationofCLCsineconomicterms.Asnoted,noteverythingthatisdonebyCLCscan(orindeedshould)bequantified.Theassessmentisalsolimitedtodirectservice(advicesandcasework)andsodoesnotincludesomeofthecommunitylegaleducationandpolicyandlawreformactivitiesthatarecommonlyundertakenbycentres.Nonetheless,thoseactivitiesthathavebeenquantifiedindicateaveryhighrateofreturncompared,forexample,tothecostbenefitratiothatmayberequiredtojustifyaphysicalinfrastructureprogram(typicallyaround1:2or1:3).
Resultsofthecostbenefitanalysisaresummarisedinthetablebelow.Notethatcostsincludeallprogramcostsincludingcommunitylegaleducationandotheractivitiesaswellasinformation,adviceandcasework;hencetheresultsmaybeconservative.
Table 1: Results of cost benefit analysis
CentreAverAge
benefit of AdviCes
AverAge benefit of
CAses
Cost benefit rAtio notes
Loddon-CampaspeCLC
$3,999($95,537)
$6,634(77,010)
1:30(400)
Figureinbracketsincludesoneveryhighvaluematterwhichmayskewresults.
GeraldtonResourceCentre $173 $4,241
($12,241)1:6(17)
Figureinbracketsincludesatrainingcoursewhereascribingthebenefitsoftheprogramtothecentreis
debatable.ConsumerCreditLC $3,595 $2,379 1:33
MarrickvilleLC $567 $365 1:4average across cenTres $2,084 $3,405 1:18
Source:JSAdataandanalysis
5.2 discussion
5.2.1 SummaryInallcasestheestimatedcostbenefitratiowashighenoughtojustifythecentreeconomicallyevengiventheuncertaintiesinestimatingandassigningbenefitstothevariouscentres.Asnoted,onaverageacrossthefourcentres,andbyextrapolationforthesectorasawhole,benefitsexceededcostsbyafactorof18(acostbenefitrationof1:18).However,aswouldbeexpected,therewasfoundtobeawiderangeofbenefitsassociatedwithmatters,witheconomicbenefitstothecommunityrangingfromzeroinsomecasestomillionsofdollarsinothermatterswheretheactionsoftheCLCavoidedtheverylargecostsassociatedwithinstitutionalcare.Theaveragebenefitofinformationandadviceswasfoundtobesimilartotheaveragebenefitofcases;however,thenumberofinformationandadvices
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
considerablyexceedsthenumberofcases,sothatthetotalbenefitofinformationandadvicesexceededthetotalbenefitofcasesacrossthefourcentres.
Thedifferencebetweencentresconsideredinthisreviewisstriking,withtwocentresassessedashavingcostbenefitratiosfivetimeshigherthantheothertwo.
ThereareavarietyofreasonswhyeconomiccostbenefitratiosmayvaryforCLCs.Theseinclude:• Inthisreview,benefitwasassessedfrommattersperformedinandbythelegalpractice,whereascostwasassessedbylookingatthewholecostofthecommunitylegalcentre.Somecentreshaveotherprogramsandworkersthatprovideotherservices,forexample,familyviolencecounsellingorcommunityeducationactivitiesandotherpreventativeandcapacitybuildingstrategies,thathavenotbeen'counted'inthebenefitanalysisbuttheircostmayfigureinthecostofthecentre.Dependingonthenumberandprofileoftheseotherservices,thiscostcouldbeverysignificantinsomecentres,butonlyacomparativelysmallcostatothers.
• Centresmayhavedifferentintakepolicies,withsomecentresassistinganyonefromtheircommunitywhopresents,atleastinitially,whileothersmayhavemorestrictguidelines,effectively'filtering'thepeopletheyassistbeforetheyseethem.Applicationorimplementationofintakepoliciescanalsovarybetweencentres.
• Centresmayhavemore,orless,effectivetriageassessment.Withmoreresourcesallocatedtothisstage,morepeoplemaybereferredtootherprovidersimmediately,meaningthatthosewhoareseenbyalawyermaybemorelikelytohavesignificantproblemsthatcanbeaddressedbythecentre.Thismayincreasethebenefitsideoftheequation.
• Therearedifferencesintheprofileofthecentres'underlyingclientbaseand/orthecatchment(geographicorcommunityofinterest)uponwhichtheydraw.Forexample,servicestargetedatIndigenousorparticularimmigrantorseniorsgroupsmayrequireserviceproviderstogooutintothecommunitiestoengagewithpotentialclientsbeforelegalneedscanbeexpressedoridentified,orservicesprovided.Theseclientsalsorequiremoretime.Thetimeandcostofprovidingservicesinthisway,includingtheuseofinterpretersortakingintoaccountculturalsensitivities,maysignificantlyaffectaneconomicassessment.
• Therearedifferencesinprogramfocus,forexamplesomecentresmaychoosetoprovidemainlylegaladviceandlegalcaseworkservices,whileothersmayincludeagreaterproportionofearlyinterventionorpreventativework,suchascommunitylegaleducationorlawreformactivities.Again,thiswillaffecttheassessmentofrelativecostsandbenefits.
• Differenttypesoflawareassociatedwithgreaterandlessereconomicbenefits,consequentlycentresfocussingonareasoflawunderpinnedbyequityconsiderationswillbeassessedashavinglowereconomicbenefitscomparedtocentresfocussingonareasoflawunderpinnedbyefficiencyconsiderations.
5.2.2 Justification for the programTheestimatedcostbenefitratiowasquitehigh,andmorethansufficienttojustifytheongoingfundingoftheprogramfromaneconomicperspective.Whilethecostbenefitratiowasquitehigh,therewillalwaysbeuncertaintiesastothedegreeofprecisioninthequantificationofbenefits,uncertaintyastowhetherallbenefitsandcostshavebeenidentifiedandfinallyuncertaintyastothedegreetowhichbenefitscanbefullyascribedtotheoperationofCLCs.Giventhehighcostbenefitratio,evenintheunlikelyeventthatbenefitsweresignificantlyoverestimated,theeconomicbenefitsofthesectorarestilllikelytosignificantlyexceedcosts.Forexample,evenifbenefitswereoverstatedbyafactoroftwo,thecost-benefitratiowouldstillbe1:9.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Asnoted,governmenttypicallyregardsacost-benefitratioof1:2or1:3assufficientjustificationtoproceedwithamajorinfrastructureprojectinvolving,insomecasesbillionsofdollarsinpublicexpenditure.37Bythisbenchmark,acostbenefitratioof1:18wouldberegardedasprovidingcleareconomicjustificationfortheCLCprogramusingthegovernment’spreferredeconomicevaluationmethodology.
5.2.3 Value associated with various types of matters and approaches
Thefollowingprovidesexamplesoftypicalmatterswhereabenefitwasachieved.Thesemattersillustratesomeofthewiderangeofeconomicbenefitsassociatedwithmattershandledbycommunitylegalcentres,andshowthequantumofbenefitthatcanbeachieved.Followingtheseexamples,somegeneralprinciplesareextractedregardingthetypesofmattersandapproacheslikelytoyieldhigheconomicbenefits.
benefits arising from the proper operation of the lawThereareanumberofareasofthelawwheretheoperationofcommunitylegalcentrescanresultinasignificantandquantifiedbenefit.Thisisparticularlyevidentfromcasestudiesassociatedwiththeavoidanceofdomesticviolenceandchildabuse,whereestimatesofthelifetimecostofabusedchildrenarearound$38,000perchildandestimatesofthelifetimecostofdomesticviolencearearound$37,000pervictim.38Theresponseavailablethroughthelegalsystemtothesecostsappearstobethroughcriminalaction,violenceorders(withdifferentnamesindifferentstates)andthroughcustodyinterventions.
Case study 1the client’s previous partner was subject to an intervention order and was in jail for breaches of that order and was to be released shortly. the client feared for her safety and that of her child. she was advised to report a previous breach of the intervention order and was referred to a range of support services. if the intervention order was not further enforced, it would become meaningless and would not serve its function of preventing violence.
Case study 2the client’s granddaughter lived with them but the mother had custody. the child was at risk of harm from her mother arising from violence and exposure to drug taking. the community legal centre facilitated the paternal grandparent’s successful application for custody.
Oneoftheimportantfunctionsofthelawwithregardtoeconomicefficiencyisthroughinternalisingexternalitiesthroughthenotionofnegligence,thatis,inaneconomicsenseapartyisrequiredtopaythefullpriceoftheiractions.Thebenefitofanyindividualcaseacrosssocietyislikelytobesmall,asataneconomicallyefficientpoint,thecostofadditionalenforcementwouldbeexpectedtobeequaltothecostofadditionalnegligenceacrosssociety.Howeverlevelsofenforcementbelowthisoptimumlevelwouldbeinefficientasthereducedcostfromlowerlevelsofnegligencewouldexceedtheadditionalcostoffurtherenforcement.
37 Whileacostbenefitratioof1:1.08wouldbesufficienttojustifyaproject,thehighervalueof1:2or1:3quotedreflectsthevariousuncertaintiesincalculatingbothcostsandbenefits.38 Taylor,P.,Moore,P.,Pezzullo,L.,Tucci,J.,Goddard,C.andDeBortoli,L.(2008),The Cost of Child Abuse in Australia, AustralianChildhoodFoundationandChildAbusePreventionResearchAustralia:Melbourne;AccessEconomics(2004),The Cost of Domestic Violence to the Australian Economy.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
Case study 3the client suffered a serious workplace injury while working as an apprentice. the injury was poorly managed with the employer originally claiming that the client was a subcontractor rather than an employee. A settlement was offered but appeared low in view of the client’s uncertain future earning capacity. the client suffered depression as a result of his injury. the community legal centre arranged for the client to be represented by a commercial firm.
Usingasimilarargument,itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeenforced,otherwisethepricespaidbythepartiesdonotreflectthedistributionofrisk.Againthebenefitofanyindividualcasetosocietyislikelytobesmall,asataneconomicallyefficientlevelofenforcement,thecostofadditionalenforcementwouldbeexpectedtobeequaltothecostofadditionaldefault.
Case study 4the client was a department of Housing tenant. due to a leak, his flat had been damp or wet for a four year period and the problem was ongoing. the community legal centre assisted him in his successful application to the tenancy tribunal for repair works. in addition he received an ex gratia payment of $4,000 in respect to a damages claim.
benefits arising from a more efficient operation of the legal systemThereisarangeofareaswheresomeclassesofpeopleareexcluded,eitherpartiallyorfully,fromtheeconomicallyefficientoperationofthelaw.OneofthepurposesofCLCsistoprovideaservicetothesepeople,effectivelyasaresultofequityconsiderationsonthepartofgovernment.Inthesecases,itisimportanttominimisecoststoallparties.
Case study 5the client was an 18 year old on Centrelink payments and had entered into an agreement with a mobile phone provider. she exceeded the cap on her initial plan and so entered into a more expensive plan which she was unable to afford and she accrued a debt of $1,800. there were some irregularities in her initial application, as she would not have been eligible under the provider’s guidelines due to her low income. the community legal centre negotiated to have the debt waived as the client was effectively judgement free due to her inability to repay the debt. the benefit was around $540, including the average cost of a magistrates’ court hearing of $330 and $213 for the average cost of enforcement by the sheriff. in addition, it is likely that the provider has avoided other internal administrative and legal costs.
Therearecostsassociatedwithalitigantinperson,orthroughengagingaformalsystemwhenmatterscanberesolvedmoresimply,suchasbynegotiation.Theseapproachesleadtoacostsavingacrosssociety.
Case study 6the client was a disability pensioner. He was one week behind in his rent and had arrears with regard to other debts, owing a total of $515 including his back rent. the community legal centre negotiated with the real estate Agent for the client to pay an extra $60 per fortnight to reduce the debt and arranged with Centrelink to take an additional amount from his payments until his debts were paid off. the average cost of a rental tribunal hearing, around $430, was saved, as were any administrative costs that would be incurred by the real estate Agent in pursuing the matter.
Oftentimelyadvicecanresultinamatternotbeingpursuedincomparativelyexpensivecourtortribunalproceedings,withresultantsavingstoboththeclientandtheotherpartyinadministrativecostsandtime,andtothepubliclyfundedjusticesystem.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Case study 7the client had been employed as a kitchen hand at a mine site. she cut her hand, and the injury was quite severe, requiring plastic surgery. she was concerned that she had been underpaid while working as a kitchen hand and that her workers’ compensation payments ceased when she resigned and took up another job. she was advised that her compensation payments appeared to be appropriate, and that, on review of her employment contract, she had been correctly paid. the benefit is difficult to assess as it is not clear that she would have pursued the matter using a more formal process. At a minimum, she will not spend any more time pursuing the matter, a saving to herself and to publicly funded tribunals and hence the community.
benefits arising from avoidance of externalitiesInsomecases,theoperationofthelaw,whileaddressingoneproblem,cangiverisetoothercostswithinsociety.Avoidanceofthesecoststhroughapreventativeorholisticapproachcanleadtosubstantialbenefits.
Case study 8the client had a daughter who was developmentally delayed and had behavioural problems, causing her to act violently at times. the response of the client or her neighbours was to contact the police. due to the number of call outs, and because of concerns for the safety of a younger brother, police sought a violence order. this would most likely have resulted in a breach, meaning that the daughter could no longer live at home. the community legal centre facilitated a range of negotiations resulting in the daughter providing a limited undertaking and a number of supports being put in place. While it is important to avoid the costs of assault, estimated at around $5,750 for a significant assault, the cost of providing residential accommodation support is a much greater cost to the community at around $112,000 per annum per client, or a one off cost over twenty years of $1.2 million. this cost was avoided.
Case study 9the client was on workers’ compensation and had received a default notice from his home loan lender. He had been advised by the bank to convert his loan to fixed interest, but was not able to pay the higher payments and so was issued with a default notice. He changed back to a variable loan but was required to pay a cancellation fee. the bank had not advised him of the option of a hardship variation. the community legal centre negotiated with the bank and was successful in having the cancellation fee waived. if the matter had gone further, it is likely that costs of around $6,850 in court and enforcement costs and $11,000 in estate agent fees would have been incurred across society. the bank would also incur costs, both legal and internal. these costs were avoided by the negotiated settlement.
5.2.4 general findings regarding economic efficiency and ClCs
Overarching principlesTheoverarchingprinciplewhenassessingeconomicbenefitsistodothisfromtheperspectiveofthewholeofthecommunity.Thisperspectivecanbechallenginginthecontextofassessinglegalservices,asbytheverynatureofthelegalsystem,legalpractitionersareconcernedwiththeoutcomefortheirclient,butagoodoutcomeforaclientmaynotleadtoaneconomicbenefitforallofsociety.Forexample,alegalpractitionermaybesuccessfulinhavingaclient’sdebtwaived,butthecostofthatdefaultisbornebytherestofsociety,throughforexample,higherinterestratesorprices.Inadditiontransactioncostshavebeenincurred.Consequently,whatisaneconomicbenefitforaclientisnotnecessarilythesamethingasaneconomicbenefitforsociety.
Theperspectiveofthewholeofthecommunityalsogoesmuchfurtherthanwhatisoftentheconcernofgovernmentagencies,thatis,thefinancialimpactontheirbudget.Thetwo
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
arenotthesamething,forexample,thefinancialimpactonanorganisation’sbudgetcanbeminimisedbyreducingtheservicesdelivered,butthecostofnotdeliveringtheservicemightwelloutweighthemoneysaved,forexample,notspendingmoneyonlegalaidmayresultinawholeclassofpeopleexcludedfromtheproperoperationofthelawandconsequentlytheirexclusionfromanyeconomicbenefitsassociatedwiththatproperoperation.
Further,whenassessingeconomicbenefitforthecommunity,indirectcoststothecommunityshouldbetakenintoaccount.Thecosttosocietyofinstitutionalcareofapersonisverygreat,typicallyatleast$100,000peryear.Ifsuchcostscanbeavoided,benefitsaresignificant.
benefits arising from the operation of the lawTherearesomeareasofthelawwherethelaw’soperationresultsinaneconomicbenefit;however,inotherareasthepurposeofthelawisbestconsideredasameasuretoaddressequityconcerns,thatis,notionsoffairness.Itotherwords,itisatransfer.
Withregardtothoseareaswherethelawcanbeseentodeliveraneconomicbenefit,therearefoursetsofcircumstances,listedinorderofdecreasingeconomicbenefitacrossthewholeofthecommunity.
• Wherethelawfunctionstoavoidcosts,thatis,functionsbeforetheeventinapreventativeway,thentheeconomicbenefitsmaybequitehigh.Inthesecasesthelawappearstofunctionsoastoavoidexternalities.Someexamplesofthisincludeviolenceorderswherequitesmalladministrativecostsmaybeincurredtopreventorreduceviolence,andcustodyorders,wherethepurposemaybetoavoidcostsrelatedtochildabuse.Otherareasincludecustodyfollowingrelationshipbreakdown,withevidencethatchildreninjointcustody(followingrelationshipbreakdown)arebetteradjustedbycomparisonwithchildreninsolecustodyarrangements.39Considerablecostscanbesavedifpeoplemanagetheirownaffairsratherthanrelyingonthepublictrusteeandsoifarrangementscanbefacilitatedforthemtomanagetheirownaffairsortoavoidtheinterventionofthepublictrustee,thereareassociatedeconomicbenefits.CLCscanreturnahigheconomicbenefitinthesetypesofmatters,effectivelythroughtheavoidanceofrelativelyeasilyquantifiedexternalities.
• Wheretheeconomicbenefitoftheproperoperationofthelawservesadeterrentfunctionbypunishment40orassignspropertyrights,itislikelythatanybenefitasaresultoftheoperationofthelawwouldbemarginal.Usinganeconomicapproachtothelaw,itwouldbeexpectedthatanoptimumpositionwouldbeachievedwherebytheexpectedcostofbreakingthelawisgreaterthantheexpectedbenefitofbreakingthelaw,butthatdoesnotmeanthatthelawwouldalwaysbeenforcedineverycase.Lookedatanotherway,aneconomicallyefficientpointmightbewherethecosttosocietyofincorrectlyfindingsomeoneguiltyisequaltotheadditionaladministrativecostofmeetingahigherlevelofproof.Conversely,ahighstandardofproofmightincorrectlyfindsomeonenotguilty,andhenceincurcostselsewhereinsocietythroughfailuretodetercrime.Thismeansthatwhiletheeconomiccosttosocietyof,say,abreakdownofcontractlawmightbeverylarge,onaveragethecostsofanyparticularbreachmightbeexpectedtobeoffsetbythecostofpursuingthatbreach.
Someexamplesofthesetypesofbenefitswheremarginalbenefitswouldbeexpectedtoequalmarginalcostsincludecorrectallocationofriskininsuranceclaimssuchasworkers’compensation,theenforcementofdebts,nuisance,contractualmattersincludingtenancymattersandpunishmentforcriminalmatters.TheeconomicbenefitreturnedbyCLCs
39 Bauserman,R.(2002)ChildAdjustmentinJoint-CustodyVersusSole-Custody:AMeta-AnalyticReview,Journal of Family Psychology,AmericanPsychologicalAssociationAPA,Inc.2002,Vol.16,No.1,91-102.Theauthorconductedameta-analysisof33studies,findingthatchildreninjointcustodyarrangementswerebetteradjustedacrossarangeofmeasurescomparedtochildreninsolecustodyarrangements,andwithresultssimilartochildreninintactfamiliesandthattheconclusionwasrobustacrossstudies.40 Inaneconomicanalysisofthelaw,acriminalsentenceorafineputsapriceonacriminalorproscribedactivityandthereforepromotesamarket.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
inthesemattersisthereforedifficulttoquantifybecauseofthemarginalnatureofthebenefit,butisnonethelessvaluable,asforexampleintheabsenceofCLCstheremaybeaclassofpeoplewhoareexcludedfromthebenefitsofaneconomicallyefficientoutcomeduetotheirinabilitytounderstandortoaccessthelegalsystem,orinotherwaysredressawrongorsolvetheirproblem.
• Inothercasestheoperationofthelawseemstobelargelyamatterofsettlingdisputes,althoughthiscanbejustifiedeconomicallyastheminimisationoftransactioncosts,whichareessentiallyresourcesexpendedfornoreturn(i.e.benefitequalscost)whenlookingacrossallthepartiesoracrossthewholeofsociety.Someexamplesincludelawsaroundwillsandprobate,disputesbetweenneighbours,childsupportmatters,propertysettlementafterdivorceandbankruptcy.Ofcourse,disputescan,andsomenotinfrequentlydo,escalate,andhence‘cost’more,soearlyresolutionofdisputesmaystillbeasavingtosociety(andtoindividuals’qualityoflifeandwell-being),althoughnotalwaysprovableorquantifiable.
• Finally,inmanyareasoflaw,theunderlyingrationaleisoneofequity,thatis,fairnessorredistribution.TheseareoftenimportantareasforCLCs,reflectingtheircommitmenttotheseprinciples.Someexamplesincludelawsrelatingtorefugees,discriminationofvariouskinds,labourlaws,victims’compensationschemesandaspectsofconsumerprotectionlegislation.Howeverintheseareasthelawdoesnotoperateinawaythatcanbeconceptualisedaspromotingeconomicefficiency,andconsequentlythereisnoassociatedeconomicbenefit.
The processTherearethreeimportantareaswhereCLCsreducecostswithinthelegalsystemacrossthewholeofsociety.Thesavingscomefromareductionintransactioncostsandadministrativeaction,firstlybytheclientthemselves,secondlybytheotherpartyandthirdlywithinthelegalsystem.Theareasarelistedinorderoftheirabilitytoreducetransactioncosts.Itshouldalsobenotedthatinmanycases,theearlierthecommunitylegalcentrebecomesinvolved,thegreatertheopportunityforsavings.
• ThefirstandperhapsthesimplestiswhentheCLCformsanindependentviewofaperson’scaseormatterand,whereappropriate,advisesthemthatthecasehaslittleornoprospectsofsuccess,orthatwhatmaybe‘won’wouldbefaroutweighedbythecostorpotentialrisk(e.g.fromanadversecostsorder)totheclient.Ifthisisthecase,thenconsiderableadministrativeeffort(andcost)canbesaved,bothonthepartoftheclientandinthelegalsystemand/orotherpartsoftheeconomy.
• Negotiatinganoutcomeisanotherimportantapproach.Sometimesintroductionofathirdpartytoadisputeleadstoarapidconclusion.Sometimesthematterindisputeisasignofanunderlyingproblem,andwhenthisproblemisidentifiedandaddressed,aconclusioncanbereachedrapidly.Inanycase,comparedtotheconsiderableadministrative(andpersonal)expenseingoingtocourt,negotiatedsolutionsinvariablyhaveabenefit.
Empoweringpeopletomanagetheirownaffairsthroughcommunitylegaleducationisanotherimportantarea.Thisisalong-standingandcommittedstrategyofCLCs.Oftenpeopleneedguidanceonhowtonegotiatetheadministrativeorlegalsystemaboutaparticularissueormatter,orwhattheirlegalrightsoroptionsare,orhowtoprotectorassertthem.Oncetheylearnthesethings,orhavesomesupport,theycanoftenprogressandresolvethematterthemselves.
• Finally,communitylegalcentrescanrepresentclients.Intermsoftheprocess,thereisonlyasmallsavingincourtcosts(reportedas20%onaverage)betweenalitigantinpersonandsomeonewhohaslegalrepresentation.41Itisnotclearthatthisisahigh
41 Malcolm,D.(2004)2004 Annual Review of Western Australian Courts,page50(thesourceofthedataisnotclear).
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
benefitareaforcommunitylegalcentres,asinthreeofthelegalcentresconsidered,theaveragebenefitofinformationandadvicesexceededtheaveragebenefitofcases(although,averagedacrossthefourcentres,thevaluewassimilar).Themajorbenefitofcaseworkappearstolieinfourareas:
- Strategiccaseworkcantestandcreatelaw,orconfirmorclarifytheinterpretationorapplicationofthelawwhich,inthetypesofmattershandledbyCLCs,suchaswelfarerights,migration,tenancy,canoftenoperatetothebenefitofmorepeoplethanthepartyinvolved,andisthereforealsotothebenefitofjudicialandadministrativedecision-makers.Onemattermaybeaserviceandgivebenefittoanindividualbutoperatetopreventorresolvelegalproblemsformany.
- ‘Test’casescanresolvetherightsoftheparties,butalsoworkaseducativeorawarenessraisingmechanismsforthecommunitytoo,informingthemofpotential‘dangers’e.g.paydaylendingschemes,workingwithasbestosandusingtheDalkonShield.Thiscanalsoeducatepeopleabouttheirrightsandpossibilitiesforrecourse,andcanhaveadeterrenteffectonwrongdoerswhohavebeenoperatingtothedetrimentofthedisadvantaged.
- Conductingcasescanbeimportantprofessionaldevelopmentforlawyers,maintainingandimprovingtheirprofessionalknowledgeandskills,especiallyinkeyareas.
- Theavailabilityoflitigationandlegalcaseworkopportunitiescanbeasignificant‘drawcard’inrecruitmentandretentionoflawyers,particularlyimportantinrural,regionalandremoteareas,whererecruitmentandretentionareoftenhardest.
externalitiesTheoperationofthelegalsystemcanresultinunintendedcostselsewhereintheeconomy.Whereveryhighbenefitsareassociatedwithamatter,theyareusuallytheresultofavoidanceofthesetypesofexternalities.Wherethesebenefitsareidentifiedinthecasestudies,theyareoftenbecausecommunitylegalcentrestakeaholisticorcasemanagementapproach,thatis,theylookbeyondthelegalproblemandseektoidentifyitscausesand/orotherunderlyingproblems.Simpleapproaches,suchasassistingsomeoneinarrangingtheirfinancialaffairs,orinco-ordinatingwithsupportservicestoenablepeopletoremainintheirdomesticarrangements(avoidinginstitutionalcare)canhaveveryhighbenefitsfortheindividual,andbyextension,tosociety.
5.3 Conclusion ThestudydemonstratesthatthecalculatedbenefitsoftheCLCsectorsignificantlyoutweighthecosttothecommunityofprovidingcommunitylegalservices.Anaveragecalculatedcostbenefitratioof1:18issuchthat,evenaccountingfortheopportunitiesforimprecisionintheanalysis,theconclusionwillberobust,thatisitwouldrequireverysignificanterrorsinthevaluesusedandintheassumptionsforbenefitsnottoexceedcostsbyanacceptablemargin.
Thoughthestudy’sscopewasfocusedonthequantificationofadvicesandcasesindollarterms,amorequalitativereviewofprogramslikecommunitylegaleducationandlawreformisalsolikelytoyieldaneteconomicbenefittotheextenttowhichtheyperforminformation,empowermentandpreventativefunctions,andleadtotheavoidanceofexternalitiesandtransactioncosts.Intheseways,CLCsperformanimportantroleinfulfillingtheobjectivesofgovernmentrelatedtoeconomicefficiency,inparticularrelatedtotheprovisionoflegalservices.
OtherfunctionsofCLCswhereabenefitisnotevidentarebestthoughtofasequitymeasuresandaremoredifficulttovalueineconomicterms.Theyaregenerallyacosttosociety,butone
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
thatwearepreparedtopay,andfulfilalegitimatemarketfunctioninaddressinginequalitiesintheinitialallocationofresourceslikeincome,education,ability,location,culturalandotheraspectsofsocialandeconomicdisadvantage,thatprovideabarriertoaccessoflegalservices.Inthisregard,CLCsperformanimportantfunctioninmeetingtheequityobjectivesofgovernment,suchasthecurrentAustralianGovernment’spolicyagendasofsocialinclusionandequitableaccesstojustice,andcanalsoprovideaneconomicbenefitwheresuchfunctionsareperformedinacosteffectivewaycomparedtodeliveringservicesthoughhighercostdeliverymechanisms.
ThefunctionsperformedbyCLCsarethusofgreaterorlessereconomicvalue,dependingonthenatureoftheworkundertaken,thetypesofmattersdealtwithandtheprioritiesgiventocertainapproachestoworking.
Theaveragebenefitassociatedwithinformationandadviceswasfoundtobesimilartothatarisingfromcasework,stronglysupportinggreaterallocationofresourcestothisactivity,soastomaximisenumbersofpeoplehelpedwiththelimitedresources.Atthesametime,casesareimportantintestingthelaw,sometimesasacosteffectivepreventativestrategy,andformaintainingthecurrencyoflegalstaff’sknowledgeandexpertiseandotherbenefitsnotedabove.
Someareasofthelaw(orlegalprinciples)areassociatedwithhighereconomicbenefitstosocietythanotherareasandhencemaximisingeconomicbenefitmightmeanafocusontheseareas,thoughthiswillneedtobebalancedwithconsiderationsofequity.Thatis,involvementinotherareasofthelawmaynothavethesameeconomicbenefitsasinotherareas,butatthesametimesuchinvolvementachievesanequitygoalofgovernmentbyprovidingaccesstothelegalsystemtopeoplewhomaybeotherwiseexcluded.
Intermsofreducingtransactioncosts,anearlyprofessionalassessmentofthemeritsofamatter,andwhereamatterprogresses,seekingtosettlevianegotiationwhereverpossibleandappropriate,canprovidesignificanteconomicbenefits.Processesofcommunityeducationandlawreformarealsosupportedbyeconomicanalysisduetothelowunitcostofsuchmeasuresandtheopportunityforreducingtransactioncosts.Finally,theeconomicbenefitsofarepresentedlitigantcomparedtoalitigantinpersonareacostsaving,thoughnotparticularlyhighonaverage.42
Fromaneconomicperspective,someofthelargesteconomicbenefitsareachievedbyaholisticapproachtocasemanagement,wherebyanuancedunderstandingandmanagementofaperson’scircumstancescanleadtotheavoidanceofoftensignificantcostsbothwithinandexternaltothelegalsystem,andtoworkinginapreventivewaytoavoidormitigatecosts.ThisisanareawhichCLC’sareuniquelyplacedtoprovidevalueforthefundingprovidedbygovernment.
42 Thereislimiteddataofunknownprovenancearoundthismatter,suggestingitcouldbeanareawarrantingadditionalresearch.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6. Case Study Centres6.1 loddon Campaspe ClCTheLoddonCampaspeCommunityLegalCentre(LCCLC)islocatedinBendigo,Victoria.LCCLC’sprimarygeographiccatchmentincludesthe6LGAsofMacedonRanges,CentralGoldfields,Loddon,Campaspe,MountAlexanderandtheCityofGreaterBendigo.ThecentreisalsorunningapilotservicethatoperatesintheGoulburnValley,incorporatingthe5LGAsofCityofGreaterShepparton,Campaspe,Strathbogie,MoiraandMitchell.
6.1.1 Centre profile
Current Staffing profileBasedoninformationreceivedfromthecentre,thecurrentstaffingprofileasatMarch2011forLCCLCstaffisasfollows.
Table 2: Staffing profile, lCClC
role fte
Principal/Coordinator 0.8
CommunityEducator 0.6
Solicitor(General) 2
Solicitor(FamilyRelationshipCentre/General) 1
Solicitor(GoulburnValleyPilotService) 1
Solicitor(Senior’sRightsVictoria) 1
Solicitor(Familyviolenceandclinicaleducation) 0.45
CLCAdministrator 1
Finance/Administration 0.9
Executivemanagementcontribution 0.5
TOTAl 9.25
Source:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
TheCentrealsoreceivessupportfromarangeofvolunteers.ClaytonUtzandotherlocallawyersprovideprobonolegalassistanceonacasebycasebasis.Ingeneral,theCentre’svolunteerprofileisasfollows:
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 3: Volunteer profile, lCClC
role Hours per Week fte
Legalvolunteers 13 0.37
Studentvolunteers 8 0.23
Administrativevolunteers 4 0.11
ToTal 25 0.71
Source:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
Current Service provisionLCCLCisageneralistcentreprovidinglegalassistance(information,adviceandcasework),communitydevelopmentandlegaleducation,lawreformandspecialprojects.
• Generalistservicesareprovidedthroughtelephoneandface-to-faceappointments(dayandevening)inBendigo.
• OutreachservicesareprovidedbyappointmentatEchuca,MaryboroughandKyneton.• FamilyViolencePreventionLegalServicesattendsBendigocourtseveryWednesdayandMaryboroughandEchucacourtsonalternateTuesdays.
• SeniorsRightsVictoria• ImmigrationAdviceServicesisprovidedbyappointmentinBendigoandShepparton.• HomelessPersons’LegalClinicisprovidedeveryFridayinBendigo,withamonthlyprofessionaldevelopmentseminarseriesalsoconducted.
• GoulburnValleyCLCPilot(October2009-June2011)hasprovidedlegalservicesthroughtelephoneandface-to-faceappointmentsdayandeveningoncertaindaysoftheweekatShepparton.
Client profileDuringthe2009/10financialyear,theLCCLCprovidedserviceto2,275clients.43
• 57.4%civillawclients,43.8%familylawclientsand5.8%criminallawclients(notethataclientcanhavemultiplelawtypes)
• 60%femaleclients,39.2%maleclients,0.8%clientsex/genderunknown
• 3%Indigenousclients
• 1.7%wereunder18years,25.6%wereaged18-34years,32%wereaged35-49years,20.3%wereaged50-64years,16.8%wereaged65orolderand3.6%agewasnotstated
• 79%werenewclientsduringtheperiod,11%wererepeatclientsand10%wereexistingclients.44
Femaleandmaleclientshadslightlydifferentlawtypeprofiles,withfemaleclientsmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforfamilylawtypeproblems(50.5%femaleclients/33%maleclients)andmalesmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforcivil(53.9%femaleclients/63.1%maleclients)andcriminallawtypeproblems(3.9%femaleclients/9%maleclients).
43 AsperCLSISCC6.ClientbyLawTypereports.44 AsperCLSISCA1.1ActivitySummarycountof2107totalclientsfor2009/10FY.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Figure 1: law Type profile for Male and Female lCClC ClientsSource:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
IndigenousclientswerelesslikelythanTotalClientstoreceiveservicesforcivilandcriminallawproblemsandmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforfamilylawproblems.Notethatfor2009/10,Indigenousclientscomprised3%oftotalclients(n=69).
Figure 2: law Type profile for Total and indigenous lCClC ClientsSource:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
Activity profileLCCLCconducted46informationand2059advicesactivitiesin2009/10.Thecentreopened998newcasesduringtheyearandclosed966cases,including864minorcases,91mediumand11majorcases.LCCLCalsocompleted4non-caseworkprojectsduringtheyearincluding1CLEprojectand2LawReformandPolicyprojects.Therewerealso16non-caseworkprojectsopenandstillgoingthroughouttheperiod.45
45 AsperCSLISCA1.1ActivitySummary
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-29-
Problem Type ProfileLCCLC works across all areas of law, but a large proportion of its activities (advices, casework and first activity matters) are focused on family and civil law problem types, with a large proportion dedicated to family/domestic violence and other civil violence/retraining order problems.
Figure 3: Law Type Profile by Advice, Casework and First ActivitiesSource: LCCLC 2011, JSA 2011
First Activity MattersFirst Activity Matters are a count of the first interaction or ‘activity’ a client has with the service within the period of time specified. First Activities would most likely be advices and are thought to represent the most common problem types generated by clients of the service. For LCCLC in the 2009/10 FY, there were 2143 first activity matters. The most common problem types were Family/Domestic Violence, Other Civil Law, Wills/Probate, Contact and Residency and Property. Around one quarter of all first activities are related to Family/Domestic Violence problem types, plus around 7% of all first activities are Other Civil Violence/Restraining Order problems.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
Table 4: lCClC First Activity Matters by Total problem Type Sorted High to low
problem type # first ACtivities % first ACtivities TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 533 24.87%TotalOtherCivilLaw 329 15.35%TotalWills/Probate 208 9.71%TotalContactandResidency 169 7.89%TotalProperty 137 6.39%TotalCreditandDebt 95 4.43%TotalImmigration 91 4.25%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 90 4.20%TotalMotorVehicle 68 3.17%TotalDivorceandSeparation 67 3.13%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 56 2.61%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 55 2.57%TotalEmployment 49 2.29%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 35 1.63%TotalInjuries 35 1.63%TotalConsumerComplaints 34 1.59%TotalTenancy 22 1.03%TotalChildProtection 17 0.79%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowances 17 0.79%TotalChildSupport 11 0.51%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 11 0.51%TotalDiscrimination 9 0.42%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 4 0.19%TotalEnvironment 1 0.05%ToTal FirsT acTiviTy MaTTers 2143 100.00%
Source:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
AdvicesTheproblemtypeprofileofadviceactivitiesin2009/10issimilartofirstactivities,withastrongemphasisonFamily/DomesticViolence,OtherCivilLaw,Wills/ProbateandContactandResidency.Adviceserviceswerealsodiverseacrossarangeofproblemtypes.Withintheseareasoflaw,keyproblemtypesincluded:
• Familyordomesticviolenceorder,18.71%• Othercivilviolence/restrainingorders,6.38%• Childcontactsorcontactorders,5.24%• Wills/probatepowerofattorney,3.87%• Elderabuse(physical,sexual,psychological,social,neglect,agedcare),3.13%
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 5: lCClC Advices by Total problem Type Sorted High to low
problem type # AdviCes % AdviCes TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 519 22.84%TotalOtherCivilLaw 350 15.40%TotalWills/Probate 225 9.90%TotalContactandResidency 196 8.63%TotalProperty 143 6.29%TotalCreditandDebt 105 4.62%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 96 4.23%TotalImmigrationLaw 93 4.09%TotalMotorVehicle 80 3.52%TotalDivorceandSeparation 68 2.99%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 60 2.64%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 57 2.51%TotalEmployment 53 2.33%TotalInjuries 43 1.89%TotalConsumerComplaints 41 1.80%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 39 1.72%TotalTenancy 22 0.97%TotalChildProtection 21 0.92%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowance 21 0.92%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 15 0.66%TotalChildSupport 11 0.48%TotalDiscrimination 8 0.35%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 5 0.22%TotalEnvironment 1 0.04%ToTal aDvices 2272 100.00%
Source:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
Casework ActivitiesLCCLCcaseworkactivitiesfor2009/10FYwereagainspreadacrossarangeofproblemtypes.WhilstFamily/DomesticViolencematterswereakeyareaofactivity,thesetypesofmatterscomprised40%ofcaseworkactivities.OtherCivilLaw,Wills/Probate,ContactandResidencyandCreditandDebtwerealsoprimaryareasofcaseworkactivities.Withintheseareasoflaw,keyproblemtypesincluded:
• Familyordomesticviolenceorder,37.87%• OtherCivilViolence/RestrainingOrders,14.4%• Wills/probatepowerofattorney,5.27%• Wills/probateguardianship/trusteeship,4.03%• Creditanddebtowedbyclient,2.11%• Elderabuse(physical,sexual,psychological,social,neglect,agedcare),1.63%
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 6: lCClC Casework Activities by Total problem Type Sorted High to low
problem type # CAseWork ACtivities
% CAseWork ACtivities
TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 418 40.08%TotalOtherCivilLaw 208 19.94%TotalWills/Probate 117 11.22%TotalContactandResidency 41 3.93%TotalCreditandDebt 38 3.64%TotalMotorVehicle 27 2.59%TotalProperty 26 2.49%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 21 2.01%TotalImmigrationLaw 19 1.82%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 17 1.63%TotalDivorceandSeparation 16 1.53%TotalInjuries 15 1.44%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 14 1.34%TotalConsumerComplaints 12 1.15%TotalEmployment 12 1.15%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 11 1.05%TotalChildProtection 8 0.77%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowance 8 0.77%TotalTenancy 4 0.38%TotalDiscrimination 4 0.38%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 4 0.38%TotalChildSupport 1 0.10%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 1 0.10%TotalEnvironment 1 0.10%ToTal casework acTiviTies 1043 100.00%
Source:LCCLC2011,JSA2011
6.1.2 Analysis of programs offered by the centreAbriefanalysisofthelikelyeconomicoutcomesofselectedprogramsprovidedbytheLoddon-CampaspeCLCinBendigoareprovidedinthetablebelow,togetherwithabriefdescriptionoftheprograms,theiraimsandkeyoutcomes.ThisinformationisbasedonaseriesofinterviewscarriedoutwithkeycentrestaffduringthevisittothecentreinMarch2011.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Tabl
e 7:
lodd
on C
ampa
spe
Com
mun
ity le
gal C
entr
e pr
ogra
m M
atrix
lCCl
C pR
OgR
AMpR
OgR
AM A
iMS,
SeR
ViCe
S, e
TCOV
eRVi
eW O
F deS
iRed
OuT
COM
eSeC
On
OM
iC C
On
Side
RATi
On
S
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
GeneralistLegal
Service
AiM
S:Toprovidefreelegalinformation,adviceand
caseworktodisadvantagedgroupswithlimited
accesstojustice–allwithinacommunity
developmentframework.
SeRV
iCeS
:•TelephoneadviceMonday1-4pmandThursday
9.30am-12.30pm
•EveningAdviceService
•Wednesday 6-8pm.
•DayappointmentsThursday1-4pm
•Outreachappointmentsavailable
inShepparton,Echuca,Kynetonand
Maryborough.
•CLE
Resolutionofissues,includingproviding
importantinformationwherepeopledo
nothaveacase.
Facilitatesaccessto
thelegalsystem,and
inmanysituations
resolutiontoaproblem,
formanypeoplewho
wouldnothaveanyother
meansofaccessingthe
system.
Holdgovernment
agenciesandinstitutions
toaccountwherethey
arenotenactingtheir
ownpolicies.
Reducestheneedfor
litigationthrough
appropriatetriaging
ofmatters,assistingin
negotiationoradvising
wheretheremaybe
limitedmerittoamatter,
andwheretheclient
wouldnothavetheskills
orknowledgetodosoon
theirown.
Preventsissuesfrom
developingfurtheror
worseningbymaking
referralsbothinternal,and
workinginanholisticway
withclientstoaddressa
rangeoflegalandnon-legal
issues.
CLE–Youth
CreditandDebt
Project
AiM
S:Toprovideinformation,adviceandraiseawareness
amongyoungpeopleaboutcredit/debt.
SeRV
iCeS
:•Presentationsandinformationsessions.
•Creativeworkwithyoungpeople–making
videos,audiorecordingsetc.
•Preparationofinformationmaterials,fliers,
resourcesheets.
•Targetedvisitstoalternativeschools,TAFE,
drug/alcoholservices
Assistyoungpeopletoresolveexisting
debtissues,notenterintodangerous
creditarrangementsinthefirstplace,
changetheirattitude,reducestresslevels
andpreventproblemsfromescalatingto
largerlegalissuesandfamilyissues.
Reducingrecklesslending
practicestoyoungpeople
mayreducecoststowider
community.
Dealingwithmany
individualmatterstime
consumingandinefficient.
Creditorreceivessomeorall
ofwhatisowed.
Establishbetterhabits
toavoid/preventfuture
credit/debtissues
and/orescalationof
existingproblemsto
largerlegalissueswith
greaterramifications(eg
incarceration)
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
lCCl
C pR
OgR
AMpR
OgR
AM A
iMS,
SeR
ViCe
S, e
TCOV
eRVi
eW O
F deS
iRed
OuT
COM
eSeC
On
OM
iC C
On
Side
RATi
On
S
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
FamilyViolence
CourtProgram
AiM
S:Toprovideinformationandadvicetopeople
experiencingfamilyviolenceandseekinglegal
action,facilitateimprovedlevelofsafetyforvictim
andanychildren.
SeRV
iCeS
:•OutreachtoBendigoCourt 1day/wk
•OutreachtoMaryboroughandEchucaCourts
everysecondTuesday.
•ClinicallegaleducationpartnershipwithLa
TrobeUniversity( 4-6studentspersemester)
•Providesdutysolicitortoassistnon-
representedparties,principallyapplicants,in
familyviolencematters
•Providesfollowupadviceandcaseworkas
relevant
•Engagesinarangeofawarenessraisingand
networkingactivitiesaspartofapreventative
focus
•Themostappropriateoutcomein
familyviolencemattersthatcome
beforethecourt(principallyrelatedto
applicationsforInterventionOrders)
•Safetyofvictimsoffamilyviolence,
imbalanceinrepresentationbetween
applicantandrespondentsis
addressed(e.g.thelatteraremore
likelytoberepresentedbyLegalAid
duetoprioritisationofmatterslikely
tohaveseriousconsequences)
•Greaterawarenessoffamilyviolence
issuesandserviceco-ordinationin
thisareaaspartofapreventative
approach.
Greatlyreducesthe
numberofunrepresented
matters.
Elevatestheseriousness
offamilyviolence
intheeyesofpolice,
governmentagencies,
potentialperpetrators
andthecommunity.
Greaterunderstanding
ofthelegalremedies
andprocess,makemore
efficientprocess.
Representationstreamlines
thecourtprocess.
Reduceexperiencesof
violence.
Higherpublicprofileof
issueleadtoitbeing
takenmoreseriouslyby
offenders,greaterpolice
accountability.
LegalVolunteer
Program
AiM
S:•Toaugment/increaseCLCserviceswith
additionalexpertiseandstaffingprovidedby
legalvolunteers.
SeRV
iCeS
:•Volunteersolicitors,mainlyfromlocalprivate
practices,providefreeadvicenightsinBendigo
(2hrs/wkw/3volsols)andShepparton(2hrs/
wkw/2volsols)
•Studentvolsalsosupportcentreoperations.
•Increasedaccessibilityoffreelegal
adviceforthecommunity.
•IncreasedawarenessofCLCand
itsworkamongstcommunityand
privatelegalprofession.
Ensurestimely,accessible
advicelikelytoresolve
issues.
Providesaccessto
appropriatefollowup
legaladviceorcasework
whererequiredthrough
theprivate,publicor
communitylegalsector.
Providesatleast 10hrsper
weekofvoluntarylegal
advice.
Providesadditional
voluntaryhourstosupport
centreactivities.
Timelyresolutionof
matters,including
regardingwhetherornot
thereisacase,increased
abilitytoself-representor
gainearlyresolution.
Promptandappropriate
resolutionofmattersis
likelytoreduceflow-on
effectstootheraspectsofa
person’slife.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
lCCl
C pR
OgR
AMpR
OgR
AM A
iMS,
SeR
ViCe
S, e
TCOV
eRVi
eW O
F deS
iRed
OuT
COM
eSeC
On
OM
iC C
On
Side
RATi
On
S
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
Secondmentto
Seniors’Rights
Victoria
AiM
S:Assistpeopleexperiencingelderabuse(financial,
psychological,socialorphysical).
SeRV
iCeS
:SolicitorandcaseworkersecondedtoSeniors
RightsVictoria.
Modelprovidesforinitialinterviewbyasolicitor
andacaseworker/advocatetodealwitholder
persons’issuesinaholisticway.
Helppreparesafetyplans,guardianshipmatters,
refertootherservicesforassistanceifrequired.
Worksfroma‘rights’modelthatsupports
thedignityofolderpeople,seeksto
empowertheolderperson,andtogain
whattheyconsidertobethemost
appropriateoutcome.
Ensuringthatolder
peopleareawareoftheir
rightsandpotential
remedies,andalerts
thosecaringforthem
thatolderpeoplehave
rightsandremedies,
assiststheproper
operationofthelegal
system.
Dealingwithissuesthat
havethepotentialto
involvemoreprotracted
disputesattheearlyor
interimstagehasthe
potentialforsignificant
costsavings.
Havingasolicitorand
caseworkerisacost
effectivewayofdealing
withnon-legalproblems
thatoftenaccompanylegal
issues.
Wherefamilyrelationship
breaksdownandcare
arrangementsmust
change,issueswith
recoveryofmoneyinvested
andrequireasubsidised
loworhighcareplacement,
orbecomingeffectively
homeless.
Legalremediescanbe
expensiveandinvolve
supremecourtactionto
establishwhetherthey
haveanequitableinterest
inproperty.
Preventativeaspectsof
CLEinrelationtoensuring
knowledgeofrights,
enteringintoappropriate
agreementscanavoid
externalities(e.g.abilityto
befinanciallyindependent,
remaininownhome,etc)
Maintenanceofpositive
familyrelationshipsalso
promoteshealthyagingand
supportforyoungpeople.
Avoidhomelessness,
organisedappropriate
supporttostayinthehome.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
lCCl
C pR
OgR
AMpR
OgR
AM A
iMS,
SeR
ViCe
S, e
TCOV
eRVi
eW O
F deS
iRed
OuT
COM
eSeC
On
OM
iC C
On
Side
RATi
On
S
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
Immigration
AdviceService
AiM
S:Provideadvicetomostvulnerableand
disadvantagedduetoresourceconstraintsasthere
isalackofaccesstoassistanceasfewmigration
servicesavailable.
SeRV
iCeS
:•
3x1hrappointmentsinBendigoperfortnight.
•MattersoftenrelatedtoDVwheresomeone
isinAustraliaonaspouse/partnervisaand
isbeingthreatened/abused,temporary
protectionvisaholdersapplyingfororwhere
partnerhasdiedwithinthetemporaryvisa
period.
•ServicesalsoprovidedinSheppartonthrough
GVmigrationclinic.
Provideadvicesufficienttoachieve
anoutcomefortheclient.Maybe
apermanentvisa,accesstomore
appropriatelegalservices–suchasa
LegalAidlawyer,andincasesofDVthat
personandchildrenareinsafersituation.
Greatdemandfor
migrationservices
forvulnerableand
disadvantagedpeoplein
regionalVictoria.CLCslike
LCCLCbecomingregistered
inmigrationlawand
usingprobonosolicitors
tomeetsomeoftheneed,
butgovernmentsrelying
ontheseserviceswithout
providingmuchadditional
fundingandclientshave
littletonocapacitytopay.
Preventingpeople
remaininginunsafe
relationships/situationsdue
tovisastatus.
Avoidpeoplereturningto
unsafesituations/country.
Reuniteand/orkeep
familiestogetherwhere
maybeseparated.
GoulburnValley
CLCPilot
AiM
S:PromoteCLCservicesandtheirvalueintheGV.
EncouragegovernmenttofundapermanentCLC
intheregion.
SeRV
iCeS
:•TelephoneadviceMonday 2-4pm.
•EveningadvicebyappointmentTuesdays 6-
8pm(2volsols)
•10locallawyersonadviceroster
•CobramFamilyViolenceService
•GVHospiceOutreach
•MigrationClinic
•CLEandcommunityconsultation
Mattersoftenrelatedtofamily(contactand
residency),creditanddebt,familyviolence
•Hasprovidedaccesstoservicesfor
disadvantagedgroupswhopreviously
hadnoaccess,particularlyfaceto
face.
•Hasdocumentedanddemonstrated
theneedthatexistsforservicesinthe
region.
•RaisedawarenessaboutroleofCLCs.
Documentingand
demonstratingneedfor
increasedservicing.
ReducingpressureonLAC
officeinSheppartonby
increasedaccesstoservices
andeducation.
Providingservicewhere
peopleneedit,avoiding
costlytripstoothercentres/
Melbournetoaccess
services.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
lCCl
C pR
OgR
AMpR
OgR
AM A
iMS,
SeR
ViCe
S, e
TCOV
eRVi
eW O
F deS
iRed
OuT
COM
eSeC
On
OM
iC C
On
Side
RATi
On
S
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
Family
Relationship
CentreSolicitor
AiM
S:Assistpeopletocometoanegotiatedagreement
thatisinthebestinterestsofthechild/ren.
SeRV
iCeS
:BendigoandSheppartonbasedgiveinformation
sessions( 2-3sessions/wk),advice,assistance
tomediators(eg.reconsentorders)toachieve
informalagreement,throughatherapeutic
approach.
Negotiatedoutcomesbetweenparents
thatisinthebestinterestsofthechild/
ren.
Reservescourtprocess
forthoseissuesthattruly
requirelitigationwhere
mediationhasfailed.
Avoidcourtproceedings.
Lessconflictandbetter
outcomesforchildren.
Preventcontinuedstress,
strainamongfamiliesand
childrenduetoon-going
conflict.
Homeless
Persons’Service
AiM
S:Toprovidelegalassistancetopeopleexperiencing
oratriskofhomelessness
SeRV
iCeS
:Freelegaladviceforissuesrelatedtohousing
andtenancy,finesandinfringements,Centrelink,
creditanddebt,familyandcriminalmatters,
victimsofcrime,guardianshipandadministration,
discriminationandhumanrights.
Latemorningsessions( 1
0am-12pm)onFridaysat
StLuke’sAnglicareortheLegalCentre.
Tomovebeyondtheimmediate
presentingcrisistotheunderlying
issueswhicharekeepingsomeonein
homelessness(oratrisk)andprevent/
mitigatethoseissues.
Preventorreduce
homelessnessand
institutionalisationof
vulnerablepeople.
BulkDebt
Scheme
AiM
S:
Bulkdebtnegotiationschemetohelplow-income
debtorsinfinancialhardship.
SeRV
iCeS
:Identifiespeoplewhoneedimmediatefinancial
reliefthroughdebtwaiverandfasttracksa
resolution,helpingthecreditortowipeabaddebt
andmoveon.
Moreefficientlyassistagreaternumber
ofpeoplewithdebtissuesbybundling
andnegotiatingissuestogether.
Insteadofnegotiating
hardshipcasesor
repaymentplansonacase-
by-casebasismatterswith
acommoncreditorare
bundledandnegotiated
together.
Relievinghardshipfor
peoplestrugglingwith
debt.
Source:JSAinterviewswithLCCLCstaff,March201
1
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6.1.3 Assessment of economic benefitArandomsampleoftwentycasesandadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedtwentycasesevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue,andtheeconomicbenefitsofthesecaseswerealsoestimated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 8: economic benefits of selected cases
group Number The Law The Process exTerNaLiTies AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices
13 $12,120 $950 $1,228,915 $95,537($3,999excludingonebenefitestimatedat
$1.19million).
RandomCases
7 $38,770 $540 $7,130 $6,634
SelectedCases
20 $118,750 $73,455 $1,348,000 $77,010($17,510excludingonebenefitestimatedat$1.19
million).
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10theAdvocacyandRightsCentrehadatotalbudgetofaround$1.2million.TheCommunityLegalCentreprogramhadexpenditureof$531,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad1,043casesand2,272advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$224million,acostbenefitratioofover400,howeverthisisinflatedbytheinclusionofoneveryhighvalueadviceinthedataset.Excludingtheveryhighvalueadvice,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$16million,acostbenefitratioofover30.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.Theuseofaveragecostsforserviceswillalsounderandoverestimatethebenefitassociatedwithaparticularoutcome.Thereisconsiderablecomfortinthehighcostbenefitratio,suggestingthatifonlyoneinthirtyoutcomeswasattributabletotheCommunityLegalCentre,costswouldstillexceedbenefits.
Arangeofhighvaluecaseswereidentified,includingintherandomselection.Themaximumbenefitwas$1.19million,representingthebenefitofavoidinginstitutionalaccommodationandsupportforadisabledpersonoveratwentyyearperiod.IftheCommunityLegalCentrewasinstrumentalinonesuchoutcomeeverytwoyears,thiswouldjustifythecostofthecentre.
Theothermajorbenefitisintheareaofchildabuse.Theavoidanceofinstitutionalandothercostsinmattersofchildabusehasbeenassessedat$38,000.14suchcaseseachyearwouldjustifythecentreeconomically.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6.2 geraldton Resource Centre
6.2.1 Centre profileTheGeraldtonResourceCentre(GRC)islocatedinGeraldton,WesternAustralia(intheMidWestRegionofWAaround400kmnorthofPerth).GRC’sgeographiccatchmentincludestheLGAsofGeraldton,GreenoughandtheMidWestregionofWA.
Current Staffing profileBasedoninformationreceivedfromthecentre,thecurrentstaffingprofileforGRCisasfollows.
Table 9: Staffing profile, gRC
role fte
Managers(CorporateServices,Operations,Assistant) 3.0
Administration(Non-LegalSecretary,Accounts,Etc) 1.9
LegalTeam:PrincipalSolicitor 0.9
LegalTeam:Paralegals 2.8
LegalTeam:LawGraduate 1
LegalTeam:TenantAdvocate 1.8
LegalTeam:FinancialCounsellor 2
LegalTeam:CommunityLegalEducation 0.8
LegalTeam:LegalSecretary 1
OtherPrograms:MoneyBusiness(Leader&FamilyHelpers/Outreach) 4.8
OtherPrograms:PrivateRentalProgram(Caseworker) 0.8
OtherPrograms:Re-entryProgram(Leader,Caseworkers,Transport) 5
OtherPrograms:HomelessnessSupport(Caseworkers) 2
OtherPrograms:SupportedHousing(Caseworkers) 2
OtherPrograms:HomeVisiting 0.5
OtherPrograms:EmergencyRelief 0.3
ToTal
Source:GRC2011,JSA2011
Thecentrealsoreceivessupportfromarangeofvolunteers.ClaytonUtzandotherlawyersprovideprobonolegalassistanceonacasebycasebasis.Ingeneral,thecentre’svolunteerprofileisasfollows:
Table 10: Volunteer profile, gRC
role Hours per Week fte
Legalvolunteers:probonosupervisingsolicitor 3 0.1
Legalvolunteers:lawgraduates 12 0.3Studentvolunteers(TAFECertificateIII/IVandDiplomaofCommunityServiceplacements) 6 0.2
Administrativevolunteers 3 0.1ToTal 24 0.7
Source:GRC2011,JSA2011
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-40-
Current Service provisionTheGRCiscomprisedofmanycomplementaryservicesincluding:GeraldtonCommunityLegalCentre,RuralWomen’sLegalOutreachService,GascoyneCommunityLegalService,FinancialCounsellingService,TenantAdvocacyService,CommunityandHomeVisitingScheme,SupportedHousingAssistanceProgram,Re-EntryService,TransportofPrisonersProgram,PrivateRentalAccommodationCaseworkandMoneyBusiness.
Client profileDuringthe2009/10FY,theGRCprovidedserviceto1702clients.46
• 85%civillawclients,27%familylawclientsand3%criminallawclients(notethataclientcanhavemultiplelawtypes)
• 51%femaleclients,47%maleclients,1%clientsex/genderunknown
• 49%Indigenousclients
• 1%wereunder18years,41%wereaged18-34years,35%wereaged35-49years,14%wereaged50-64years,5%wereaged65orolderand3%agewasnotstated
• 53%werenewclientsduringtheperiod,34%wererepeatclientsand13%wereexistingclients.47
Femaleandmaleclientshadbasicallyequivalentlawtypeprofiles.
Figure 4: law Type profile for Male and Female gRC ClientsSource:GRC2011,JSA2011
IndigenousclientswerelesslikelythanTotalClientstoreceiveservicesforfamilyandcriminallawproblemsandmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforcivillawproblems.Notethatfor2009/10,Indigenousclientscomprised49%oftotalclients(n=835).
46 AsperCLSISCC6.ClientbyLawTypereports.47 AsperCLSISCA1.1ActivitySummarycountof1616totalclientsfor2009/10FY.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
Figure 5: law Type profile for Total and indigenous gRC ClientsSource:GRC2011,JSA2011
Activity profile• GRCconducted1320informationand1967advicesactivitiesin2009/10.• Thecentreopened575newcasesduringtheyearandclosed511cases,including
230minorcases,227mediumand54majorcases.
• GRCalsocompleted112non-caseworkprojectsduringtheyearincluding69CLEprojectsand5LawReformandPolicyprojects.
• Therewerealso146non-caseworkprojectsopenandstillgoingandthroughouttheperiod.48
problem Type profileGRCworksacrossallareasoflaw,butalargeproportionofitsactivities(advices,caseworkandfirstactivitymatters)arefocusedoncivilandfamilylawproblemtypes,withalargeproportiondedicatedtotenancy,creditanddebtandothercivillawproblems.Thereisadefinitedifferencebetweentheprofileofadviceandcaseworkactivities,withafarsmallerproportionofcaseworkactivitiesrelatedtofamilylawproblemtypescomparedtoadvices.
Figure 6: law Type profile by Advice, Casework and First ActivitiesSource:GRC2011,JSA2011
48 AsperCSLISCA1.1ActivitySummary
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
First Activity MattersFirstActivityMattersareacountofthefirstinteractionor‘activity’aclienthaswiththeservicewithintheperiodoftimespecified.FirstActivitieswouldmostlikelybeadvicesandarethoughttorepresentthemostcommonproblemtypesgeneratedbyclientsoftheservice.ForGRCinthe2009/10FY,therewere1779firstactivitymatters.Themostcommonproblemtypeswererelatedtotenancy,creditanddebt,othercivillaw,governmentpensionsandbenefits,andcontactandresidency.Keyproblemtypesincluded:
• Creditanddebtother(9.95%)• Tenancyaccess(9.27%)• Othercivil(7.25%)• Governmentpensions/benefitsallowancesOther(6.58%)• Changeofnameorbirthrecords(6.46%)
Table 11: gRC First Activity Matters by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowproblem type # first ACtivities % first ACtivities TotalTenancy 389 21.87%TotalCreditandDebt 328 18.44%TotalOtherCivilLaw 176 9.89%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowances 137 7.70%TotalContactandResidency 133 7.48%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 126 7.08%TotalProperty 90 5.06%TotalDivorceandSeparation 62 3.49%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 60 3.37%TotalInjuries 54 3.04%TotalWills/Probate 50 2.81%TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 36 2.02%TotalEmployment 32 1.80%TotalChildSupport 23 1.29%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 23 1.29%TotalChildProtection 14 0.79%TotalConsumerComplaints 14 0.79%TotalDiscrimination 10 0.56%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 7 0.39%TotalMotorVehicle 6 0.34%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 3 0.17%TotalImmigration 3 0.17%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 2 0.11%TotalEnvironment 1 0.06%ToTal FirsT acTiviTies 1779 100.00%
Source:GRC2011,JSA2011
AdvicesTheproblemtypeprofileofadviceactivitiesin2009/10issimilartofirstactivities,withastrongemphasisontenancy,creditanddebt,contactandresidency,othercivillaw,otherfamilylawandgovernmentpensionsandbenefits.Adviceserviceswerealsodiverseacrossarangeofproblemtypes.Withintheseareasoflaw,keyproblemtypesincluded:
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
• CreditandDebtOther(10.93%)• Tenancyaccess(8.39%)• Othercivil(6.09%)• Changenameorbirthrecords(5.94%)• Governmentpensions/benefitsallowancesOther(5.56%)• TenancyOther(4.01%)• Childresidency(3.82%)• Childcontactandcontactorders(3.59%)
Table 12: gRC Advices by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowproblem type # AdviCes % AdviCes TotalTenancy 514 19.43%TotalCreditandDebt 477 18.03%TotalContactandResidency 287 10.85%TotalOtherCivilLaw 228 8.62%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 175 6.62%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowance 173 6.54%TotalProperty 144 5.44%TotalDivorceandSeparation 118 4.46%TotalWills/Probate 87 3.29%TotalInjuries 85 3.21%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 73 2.76%TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 59 2.23%TotalChildSupport 39 1.47%TotalEmployment 36 1.36%TotalChildProtection 34 1.29%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 33 1.25%TotalConsumerComplaints 22 0.83%TotalMotorVehicle 17 0.64%TotalDiscrimination 17 0.64%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 12 0.45%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 7 0.26%TotalImmigrationLaw 4 0.15%TotalEnvironment 2 0.08%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 2 0.08%ToTal aDvices 2645 100.00%
Source:GRC2011,JSA2011
Casework ActivitiesGRCcaseworkactivitiesfor2009/10FYwerealsospreadacrossarangeofproblemtypes.However,thevastmajorityofcaseworkactivitieswereassociatedwithcivillawproblemtypes.Tenancy,creditanddebt,injuries,othercivillawandgovernment/administrativelawwereprimaryareasofcaseworkactivities.Withintheseareasoflaw,keyproblemtypesincluded:
• Tenancyaccess(18.13%)• Creditanddebt-Other(13.6%)
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-44-
• Tenancyrent(7.16%)• Injuriescompensation(5.85%)
Table 13: gRC Casework Activities by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowproblem type # CAseWork
ACtivities % CAseWork
ACtivities TotalTenancy 327 47.81%TotalCreditandDebt 176 25.73%TotalInjuries 44 6.43%TotalOtherCivilLaw 23 3.36%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 16 2.34%TotalProperty 15 2.19%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowance 14 2.05%TotalMotorVehicle 13 1.90%TotalContactandResidency 12 1.75%TotalDiscrimination 9 1.32%TotalDivorceandSeparation 7 1.02%TotalChildProtection 5 0.73%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 5 0.73%TotalChildSupport 4 0.58%TotalConsumerComplaints 4 0.58%TotalMotorVehicle 4 0.58%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 4 0.58%TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 2 0.29%ToTal casework acTiviTies 684 100.00%
Source:GRC2011,JSA2011
6.2.2 Analysis of programs offered by the centreAnanalysisofthelikelysocialandeconomicbenefitsofselectedprogramsprovidedbytheGeraldtonResourceCentreisprovidedinthetablebelow,togetherwithadescriptionoftheprograms,theiraimsandkeyoutcomes.
Primarily,theCLCoperatestoprovideassistancetopeoplewhowouldnototherwisehaveaccesstoexpertlegaladvice.Italsoassistspeopletoaccessthelegalandothersystemswheretheiraccessislimited,forexampleduetolimitedliteracy.TheCLCseekstonegotiateoutcomesbetweenpartiesandworkswithotherprogramswithinGeraldtonResourceCentretoassistclients.
WhiletherangeofprogramswithinGeraldtonResourceCentreismuchwiderthanthoseofferedbytheCLCcomponent,thecentreoperatesinasynergisticway,andinthiswayprovidesasocialbenefitmuchgreaterthanthatprovideddirectlybytheCLCcomponent.Theprogramsareintendedtoaddresstherootcauseofmattersthatotherwisepresentaslegalissuesandprovidesocialandeconomicbenefitsacrossarangeofareas.Primaryareasincludefinancialcounselling,assistancewithtenancymattersandprogramsaimedataddressingrecidivism.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
grC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
prop
er o
pera
tion
of
the
lega
l sys
tem
effic
ienc
y of
serv
ice
prov
ision
/out
com
esAv
oidi
ng e
xter
nalit
ies
GeneralistLegal
Providelegalservicestothecommunitywithan
emphasisonselfempowerment,usingparalegals
andonesolicitorwithapracticingcertificate.This
limitstheabilitytodocourtwork,withparalegals
limitedtosupportroleincourt.
Telephoneandfacetofaceadviceandcasework
providedfromGeraldtonandCarnarvonoffices
Outreachtoclientsbasedonneedand
appointments.Paralegalshavespecificgeographic
areastheyservicebasedonfundingrequirements.
CLEandinfosessions,regularRadioMama
interviews(AboriginalradiostationfortheMid
Westregion)&ABC
PrincipalSolicitordoeslawreformworkandjoint
submissionswithotherorganisations.
Providepeoplewithenoughinformation
tosolvetheirissue.Ifadditionalassistance
isrequiredthecentrewillprovideitin
ordertoachieveabeneficialoutcomefor
theclient.
Holdgovernment
agenciesand
institutionstoaccount
wheretheyarenot
enactingtheirown
policies.
Servicefillsgaps
fromLegalAid,ALS
(primarilycriminal
withsomecivil)and
FVPLS(advice&case
workforAboriginal
womenonly).
Facilitatesaccessto
thelegalsystem,and
inmanysituations
resolutiontoa
problem,formany
peoplewhowould
nothaveanyother
meansofaccessing
thesystem.
GRCreducescourtaction
byassistingaclientto
negotiateanagreement,
wheretheywould
nothavetheskillsor
informationtodosoon
theirown.
GRCstopsissuesfrom
developingfurtheror
worseningbymaking
referralsbothinternal
&externalofGRCfor
increasedandspecialised
supportfortheclient.
Tabl
e 14
: gRC
pro
gram
Mat
rix
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
grC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
prop
er o
pera
tion
of
the
lega
l sys
tem
effic
ienc
y of
serv
ice
prov
ision
/out
com
esAv
oidi
ng e
xter
nalit
ies
Indigenous
Women’sparalegal
Providelegalinformation,adviceandcasework
forAboriginalwomenoncriminalinjuries
compensation,motorvehicleinjuriesandchild
protection.
WeeklyappointmentsatGRCoffice
MonthlyoutreachtoMeekatharra,Mullewa,Cue,
MtMagnetforclientappointments,liaisonwith
services,informationsessions
WeeklyoutreachtoGeraldtonwomen’srefuge
RegularinterviewswithRadioMama
Togetclientscompensationforinjuriesor
togettheirchildrenbackintheircare.
Injuriescompensation
(CIC)claimsrequireclient
tosupplymanyexternal
documentsthatcost
moneywhichmayprevent
aclientfromlodginga
claim.GRCnetworksand
assistancecanfacilitate
reducedcostorfree
accesstodocuments
(e.g.Psychiatristsreport).
Clientsareunlikelyto
accessthesystemforCIC
withoutGRCassistance.
LegalAidonlyprovides
initialadviceandprivate
solicitorfeeshighandany
compensationreceived
wouldpaylawyerandnot
client.
GRCispreventingwomen
doingnothingabout
theviolencetheyhave
experiencedandinjuries
sustained.
Tenantadvocates
(Aboriginalspecific
andgeneral)
Advocacyforclientsintenancymatterswithprivate
andsocialrentalorganizationsthrough:
Telephoneandfacetofaceadviceandcasework
AssistclientsatResidentialTenancyMagistrates
Court
CLEandinformationsessions(1permonthto4
outreachlocations,weeklyatGeraldtonAboriginal
MedicalService,irregularlyatprison)
RadioMamainterviews
Keeppeoplehousedandintenancy
agreement.
Toassistpeopletomaintaintheir
home,payrent,knowtheirrights,take
responsibilityandfunctionsuccessfullyon
theirown.
Clientsareunlikelyto
accesslegalsystem
tohaveproblem
addressedwithout
assistanceofGRC.
Otheroptionsare
TAShotlineinPerth,
consumerprotection
office,ALS,butall
havelimitationsand
willnotdofaceto
faceoutreachorcourt
assistance.
GRCispreventing:
Increasingdebt
Breakdownofthe
relationshipbetween
tenantandlandlord
(privateorpublic)
Morepeopleontenancy
‘blacklist’
Lossoftenancy
Homelessness
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
grC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
prop
er o
pera
tion
of
the
lega
l sys
tem
effic
ienc
y of
serv
ice
prov
ision
/out
com
esAv
oidi
ng e
xter
nalit
ies
Financial
counselling
Toresolveissueswithoutstandingcredit/debtfor
thebenefitofclientandcreditor–withtheclient
comingfirst;andimprovemoneymanagement
skillsthrough:
Telephoneandfacetofaceadviceandcasework,
Negotiationwithcreditorsincludingutilities
CLEandinformationsessions
RegularmonthlyoutreachtoMidWest
communitiesforworkshopsandclient
appointments
ApproveHardshipUtilitiesGrantScheme(HUGS)
applications
Negotiatedoutcomeswhereclientcan
paywhattheycanaffordandcreditorgets
something.
Empowermentbygivingclientsskills
theyneedtomanagetheirownsituation,
providingthemwithoptions,andmaking
suretheyareawareoftheirrightsand
responsibilities.
Informingclients
oftheirrightswith
collectionagencies,
andactingontheir
behalfregarding
aggressivecollection
methods,intimidation,
misleadingclients,
coercionandother
deceptivepractices.
Informingcreditors
wheretheyarenot
followingcodesof
conduct,theirown
policiesandthelike.
Otheroptionsfor
assistanceincludeDeptof
Commerce,StateFinancial
Counsellinghotline,Legal
Aidoraprivatelawyer.
Mostwouldbeunable
tocopewithincreased
demandoraretoocostly
forclients.
Professionallegaladvice
wouldcostaclientatleast
$280perhour
DeptofCommercerefers
toGRCregularly.
Hotlineregularlycloses
downduetotoomany
clients.Itservesallof
WAwith4or5financial
counsellors.
GRCispreventing:
Bankruptcywhereclient
hasassets
Lossoftenancy
Foreclosureson
properties
Peoplelivingwithout
basicutilitiesand
necessities
Additionalstress,
depression,illness,and
suicide
Familyviolence
Re-entrysupport
Provideone-on-onesupportforprisonersat
GreenoughRegionalPrisonfor6monthspre-
releaseand12monthspost-releasebyassisting
with:
Sourcingidentificationdocuments(birthcertificate,
medicarecard,bankaccount)
Outstandingissuesincludingdebts,cars,pets,child
support
Contactingfamilymembers
Food,clothing,lifts,helpseekingemploymentetc
Makereferralstoservicesw/inandoutsideGRC
Keepprisonersfromre-offendingforas
longaspossible.
Reducerecidivism
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
grC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
prop
er o
pera
tion
of
the
lega
l sys
tem
effic
ienc
y of
serv
ice
prov
ision
/out
com
esAv
oidi
ng e
xter
nalit
ies
TOP(Transport
OptionsProgram)
Transportprisonersviacar,busorplanebackto
theirhomecommunityuponrelease.
RidesareprovidedasfarnorthasExmouthandeast
toMeekatharra,withothersusingpublictransport.
Returnprisonerstotheirhomecommunity
&connectionsimmediatelytoprevent
themfromre-offendingduetoinabilityto
gethomeandlackofaccommodationand
support.
Reducerecidivism
Transitional
Accommodation
SupportService
(TASS)
PartnershipwithHomesWest(threeproperties)
providessix-monthleasesandsupportupon
releasefromprisonforsinglesorfamiliesreuniting.
Assistwithwhitegoods,furniture,amenities,food
etctomakeita‘home’uponrelease.
Providesupportedaccommodationfor
prisonersuponreleasetokeepthemfrom
reoffendingandre-integrateintothe
community.
Reducerecidivism
Outreach
Provide12monthsofsupporttoprisonerswho
havereturnedtoremotecommunities.
Keepprisonersfromre-offendingforas
longaspossible.
Reducerecidivism
MoneyBusiness
MoneymanagementservicefundedbyFaHCSIA
thatprovides:
Financialliteracyworkshopsusinginformation
fromvariousgovernmentdepartments(eg.Deptof
Commerce,WACommunityServicesetc)delivered
inpartnershipwithotherorganizations.
WorkshopsareheldweeklyinGeraldtonand
regularlyacrossmanyoutreachlocationsintheMid
Westbasedonarosterandexpresseddemand.
Adviceandcaseworktoidentifyissuesandprepare
budgetswithindividualclientsthatarisesfrom
workshops,walk-insandreferralsfromwalkinand
outsideGRC.
WeeklyvisittoGeraldtonAboriginalHealthService
MonthlyadinlocalAboriginalpaper.
Freetaxreturns(eg.FY09/10completed150)
PrepareHUGSapplicationsforFinancialCounsellor
toreviewandapprove.
CompleteandprocessNoInterestLoanScheme
(NILS)applications.
Toimproveoutcomesinafinancialwayfor
individualsandthecommunity.
Withmanyserviceswithin
GRC,referralsandproblem
solvingforclientsismore
efficient.
GRCispreventingor
reducing:
Incorrectpaymentstoand
fromCentrelinkandthe
Numberofpeople
experiencingfinancial
hardshipand
accumulatingdebt
Receivereferralsfrom
MentalHealth,Dept
ofJustice,judges,Drug
andAlcoholservicesetc
whereclientisadvised
theyrequirefinancial
counsellingassistance.
GRCbenefitsthose
servicesbysupporting
clientsatapersonal,case
managedlevel.
Reducedcostsforlow-
incomehouseholds
byprovidingFacilitate
accesstoprograms(eg.
NILS,HUGS,freepatches
toquitsmokingetc)
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-4�-
grC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
prop
er o
pera
tion
of
the
lega
l sys
tem
effic
ienc
y of
serv
ice
prov
ision
/out
com
esAv
oidi
ng e
xter
nalit
ies
PrivateRental
Accommodation
Casework(PRAC)
Provideassistancetothoseseekingorinprivate
rentaltenancyincluding:
Forexistingtenants-negotiationwithrealestate
agentsandpropertyownersre:arrears,property
maintenance,anti-socialbehaviour
Fornewtenants–reviewtenancyhistory,work
inpartnershipwithotherGRCservicestorelieve
outstandingdebts,liaisewithreferences,bond
assistanceforms,gatherprivaterentallistand
discussneeds,arrange/accompanytoviewing,
assistwithpropertyapplication,refertoother
servicesforfurnitureetc
RegularinterviewsonRadioMama
Topreventhomelessnessbyassisting
clienttokeeptenancyorattainstable
accommodationwhilstwaitingforsocial
housing(Deptofhousingwaitlist 6years,
prioritylist1
2-18months)
GRCispreventingissues
withlandlordsescalating
tocourtifpossible.
GRCispreventing:
Homelessness
Familiesfrombeing
separateddueto
homelessness.
Ifabletoassistpeopleto
keepsuccessfulprivate
tenancies,GRCreduces
demandonpublic
housingsystemand
waitinglist.
Homelessness
–Prisoners
Locateaccommodationandprovidesupport
forprisonersreferredfromCorrectiveServices,
CommunityJusticeandYouthJustice.
Fundedtohouseupto 16clientsper12month
period.
Sourcehousesthroughprivatemarket,public,
familymember,etc–solelyGeraldtonbased
Weeklyhomevisitsfortenants
Backgroundchecksonallpropertiestoassess
suitabilityofplacement
Toseeclientshousedfor1
2months.
GRCispreventing:
Homelessness
Recidivismorlength
oftimebetweenre-
offending
Homelessness
–General
Locateaccommodation(publicorprivate)and
providesupportforthosewhoarehomelessorat
riskofimminenthomelessness.
Fundedtohouseupto 10clientseverysixmonths.
Weeklyorsemi-regularhomevisitsforclients
Assistancewithanythingtomaintaintenancy
–assistancewithjobsearch,independentliving
skillsetc.
Toseeclientshousedfor1
2months.
GRCispreventing:
Homelessness
Livinginunsafeand
violentsituationswithor
withoutchildren
Depression,suicide
Source:Staffinterviewsduringweekof11-15April20
11andcentrepublications
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
6.2.3 Assessment of economic benefitArandomsampleoftwentycasesandtwentyadviceswasselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedonecaseevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue,andtheeconomicbenefitsofthiscasewasestimated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 15: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 20 $0 $2,860 $600 $173
RandomCases 20 $168,000 $8,820 $68,000
$12,241($4,241ifatrainingcoursewithanassessedbenefitof$160,000is
excluded)
SelectedCases 1 $224,000 $0 $0 $224,000
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10theGeraldtonLegalCentrehadtotalexpensesofaround$520,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad684casesand2,645advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$8.8million,acostbenefitratioofabout17.
AlargebenefithasbeenassociatedwithatrainingsessioncarriedoutbytheCLCforanotherorganisation.Itisdebatableastowhetherthisbenefitshouldbeascribedtothelegalcentreratherthantotheotheragency.Excludingthistrainingsession,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$3.4million,acostbenefitrationofoversix.
Theaveragecostovercasesandbenefitsis$137,suggestingthecostbenefitratioonadvicesis1.3.Ascasesarelikelytotakemoreresourcesthanadvices,theeconomicreturnonadvicesislikelytobemarginal.
ThemajoruncertaintyintheestimateisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldhavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.Howeverintheworstcase,theCLCwouldneedtobeinstrumentalinoneinsixcasestobreakeven,henceitislikelythatapositivecostbenefitratioisachieved.
Onehighvaluecasewasidentified.IftheCommunityLegalCentrewasinstrumentalinfivesuchoutcomesintwoyears,thiswouldjustifythecostofthecentre.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6.3 Consumer Credit legal Centre nSWTheConsumerCreditLegalCentreNSWislocatedinSurryHills,NewSouthWales(aninnercitysuburbofSydney).CCLCNSWprovidesastatewideserviceacrossNSWandanationalserviceforitsinsurancelawprogram.
6.3.1 Centre profile
Current Staffing profileBasedoninformationreceivedfromthecentre,thecurrentstaffingprofileforCCLCisasfollows.
Table 16: Staffing profile, CClC
role fte
Administration(3staff,1alsodoessomeSolicitorwork) 2.3
Solicitors(10staff) 9
FinancialCounsellors(7staff) 5
ToTal
Source:CCLC2011,JSA2011
Thecentrealsoreceivessupportfromarangeofvolunteers.Ingeneral,thecentre’svolunteerprofileisasfollows:
Table 17: Volunteer profile, CClC
role Hours per Week fte
Legalvolunteers 0 0
Studentvolunteers 1-3PLTstudentscompleted15weekplacements 2
Administrativevolunteers 0 0
ToTal
Source:CCLC2011,JSA2011
Current Service provisionClient profileDuringthe2010calendaryear,theCCLCprovidedserviceto6925clients.49
• 49.5%femaleclients,49.9%maleclients,0.6%clientsex/genderunknown
• 1.0%Indigenousclients
• 0.2%wereunder18years,22.9%wereaged18-34years,36.4%wereaged35-49years,21.4%wereaged50-64years,5.3%wereaged65orolderand13.8%agewasnotstated
• 94.5%werenewclientsduringtheperiod,4.1%wererepeat50clientsand1.4%wereexisting51clients.52
49 AsperCLSISCC6.ClientbyLawTypereports.50 Previousfileclosed.51 Filestillopen.52 AsperCLSISCMR1.1ActivitySummarycountof6901totalclientsfor2010.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Activity profile• CCLCconducted6832informationand9896adviceactivitiesin2010.• Thecentreopened487newcasesduringtheyearandclosed455cases,including144minorcases,178mediumand133majorcases.
• CCLCcompleted4non-caseworkprojectsduringtheyearincluding1CLEprojectand1LawReformandPolicyproject.
• Therewere5non-caseworkprojectsopenandstillgoingandthroughouttheperiod.53
problem Type profileCCLCprovidesadviceandcaseworkacrossparticularcivillawproblemtypesrelatedtocreditanddebt,consumercomplaintsandinsuranceclaims.
First Activity MattersFirstActivityMattersareacountofthefirstinteractionor‘activity’aclienthaswiththeservicewithintheperiodoftimespecified.FirstActivitieswouldmostlikelybeadvicesandarethoughttorepresentthemostcommonproblemtypesgeneratedbyclientsoftheservice.ForCCLCinthe2010FY,therewere8311firstactivitymatters.78.1%ofmatterswereassociatedwithcreditanddebtproblemtypes,9.9%wererelatedtoconsumercomplaints,generallyconcerninginsurance,and12%wererelatedtomotorvehiclecrashes.Thefollowingtablebelowshowsthefirstactivitymattersbyproblemtypesortedhightolow.
53 AsperCSLISCMR1.1ActivitySummary
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 18: CClC First Activity Matters by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowCode problem type # first
ACtivities % first
ACtivities 3420 Creditanddebtconsumercredit 1602 19.28%3440 Creditanddebtowedbyclient 1186 14.27%3425 Creditanddebtmortgagehardship 1047 12.60%5320 Consumercomplaintsfinancial/insurance/superetc 658 7.92%3410 Creditanddebtbankruptcy 477 5.74%5510 Motorvehicleaccident 420 5.05%3471 Statementofclaim 416 5.01%3460 Creditanddebtcollection 291 3.50%3472 Judgmentdebt 262 3.15%5520 Motorvehiclepropertydamage 257 3.09%5521 Motorvehicle3rdpartyrecoverybyinsurer 253 3.04%3490 CreditanddebtOther 211 2.54%3461 Repossessioncar 159 1.91%3476 Garnishee(wages/salary/account) 137 1.65%3430 Creditanddebtowedtoclient 102 1.23%3470 Creditanddebtrecovery(court) 76 0.91%3482 Creditreportingdispute 75 0.90%3412 BankruptcyNotice 70 0.84%3473 Writforlevyofproperty 70 0.84%5590 MotorvehicleOther 70 0.84%3481 Creditreportenquiry 68 0.82%3475 Noticetovacate 52 0.63%3414 PartIXAgreement 42 0.51%5322 Insurance-storm/flood 42 0.51%5380 Consumercomplaintsfairtrade/trade/sellpractice 39 0.47%5390 ConsumercomplaintsOther 39 0.47%3480 Creditanddebtinformation/privacy 32 0.39%3413 Creditor’sPetition 31 0.37%3477 Examinationnotice/order 30 0.36%3474 Writofpossession 20 0.24%3462 Repossessionothergoods 16 0.19%5370 Consumercomplaintsservices 16 0.19%3411 Debtor’sPetition 10 0.12%5360 Consumercomplaintsproducts 10 0.12%5361 Mathematicstutoringsoftware 8 0.10%3441 Debttoinsurancecompany(notMVA) 6 0.07%5340 Consumercomplaintslegal/solicitors 5 0.06%5321 Insurance-bushfire 4 0.05%5310 Consumercomplaintsbuilding 2 0.02%ToTal FirsT acTiviTies 8311 100.00%
Source:CCLC2011,JSA2011
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
AdvicesTheproblemtypeprofileofadviceactivitiesin2010issimilartofirstactivities,with81%ofadvicesrelatedtocreditanddebt,9.2%relatedtoconsumercomplaints,largelyinsurancematters,and9.9%dealingwithmotorvehiclecrashes.Thefollowingtablebelowshowsadvicesbyproblemtypesortedhightolow.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 19: CClC Advices by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowCode problem type # AdviCes % AdviCes 3420 Creditanddebtconsumercredit 2114 17.03%
3425 Creditanddebtmortgagehardship 1959 15.79%3440 Creditanddebtowedbyclient 1538 12.39%5320 Consumercomplaintsfinancial/insurance/superetc 908 7.32%3471 Statementofclaim 799 6.44%3410 Creditanddebtbankruptcy 625 5.04%5510 Motorvehicleaccident 520 4.19%3472 Judgmentdebt 516 4.16%3460 Creditanddebtcollection 450 3.63%5521 Motorvehicle3rdpartyrecoverybyinsurer 311 2.51%5520 Motorvehiclepropertydamage 305 2.46%3490 CreditanddebtOther 297 2.39%3461 Repossessioncar 268 2.16%3476 Garnishee(wages/salary/account) 251 2.02%3470 Creditanddebtrecovery(court) 183 1.47%3412 BankruptcyNotice 175 1.41%3475 Noticetovacate 143 1.15%3473 Writforlevyofproperty 127 1.02%3430 Creditanddebtowedtoclient 126 1.02%3482 Creditreportingdispute 97 0.78%5590 MotorvehicleOther 90 0.73%3481 Creditreportenquiry 75 0.60%3477 Examinationnotice/order 64 0.52%3413 Creditor’sPetition 59 0.48%5380 Consumercomplaintsfairtrade/trade/sellpractice 59 0.48%5390 ConsumercomplaintsOther 56 0.45%3474 Writofpossession 54 0.44%5322 Insurance-storm/flood 49 0.39%3414 PartIXAgreement 43 0.35%3480 Creditanddebtinformation/privacy 34 0.27%3462 Repossessionothergoods 28 0.23%5370 Consumercomplaintsservices 25 0.20%5361 Mathematicstutoringsoftware 16 0.13%3411 Debtor’sPetition 11 0.09%5360 Consumercomplaintsproducts 11 0.09%5340 Consumercomplaintslegal/solicitors 9 0.07%3441 Debttoinsurancecompany(notMVA) 7 0.06%5321 Insurance-bushfire 5 0.04%5310 Consumercomplaintsbuilding 3 0.02%ToTal aDvices 12410 100.00%
Source:CCLC2011,JSA2011
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Casework ActivitiesTheproblemtypeprofileofCCLCcaseworkactivitiesfor2010calendaryearwassimilartofirstactivitiesandadvices,withaslightlygreateremphasisonconsumercomplaints.79%ofcaseworkactivitieswereassociatedwithcreditanddebt,12.6%wererelatedtoconsumercomplaints,largelyinvolvinginsurancematters,and8.1%relatedtomotorvehicles.Thefollowingtablebelowshowscaseworkactivitiesbyproblemtypesortedhightolow.
Table 20: CClC Casework Activities by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowCode problem type # CAseWork
ACtivities % CAseWork
ACtivities 3420 Creditanddebtconsumercredit 166 26.82%3425 Creditanddebtmortgagehardship 117 18.90%5320 Consumercomplaintsfinancial/insurance/superetc 69 11.15%3440 Creditanddebtowedbyclient 44 7.11%3471 Statementofclaim 32 5.17%3472 Judgmentdebt 24 3.88%3475 Noticetovacate 23 3.72%5521 Motorvehicle3rdpartyrecoverybyinsurer 19 3.07%3461 Repossessioncar 16 2.58%5510 Motorvehicleaccident 15 2.42%5520 Motorvehiclepropertydamage 14 2.26%3460 Creditanddebtcollection 13 2.10%3410 Creditanddebtbankruptcy 11 1.78%3476 Garnishee(wages/salary/account) 11 1.78%3473 Writforlevyofproperty 8 1.29%3413 Creditor’sPetition 5 0.81%3470 Creditanddebtrecovery(court) 5 0.81%3412 BankruptcyNotice 4 0.65%5322 Insurance-storm/flood 4 0.65%3482 Creditreportingdispute 3 0.48%3430 Creditanddebtowedtoclient 2 0.32%3474 Writofpossession 2 0.32%3477 Examinationnotice/order 2 0.32%3490 CreditanddebtOther 2 0.32%5361 Mathematicstutoringsoftware 2 0.32%5380 Consumercomplaintsfairtrade/trade/sellpractice 2 0.32%5590 MotorvehicleOther 2 0.32%3481 Creditreportenquiry 1 0.16%5390 ConsumercomplaintsOther 1 0.16%ToTal casework acTiviTies 619 100.00%
Source:CCLC2011,JSA2011
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6.3.2 Analysis of programs offered by the centreAnanalysisofthelikelysocialandeconomicbenefitsofselectedprogramsprovidedbytheConsumerCreditCLCareprovidedinthetablebelow,togetherwithadescriptionoftheprograms,theiraimsandkeyoutcomes.
Atthehighestlevel,theCLCfunctionstoprovideanexpertknowledgebaseintheareaofconsumercreditactinginthepublicinterestandprovidingvaluableinputtopolicymakers.Thecentrealsoservesacompliancefunction,byassessingtheperformanceoflendersandinsurancecompaniesagainstcodesofpracticeandstatutoryregulationandensuring,asfarastheyareable,thatthosecodesofpracticeandregulationsarecompliedwith.Atamorepracticallevel,benefitsareachievedbytheCLCfacilitatingnegotiationbetweenparties,withthesebenefitsaccruingtocreditors,debtorsandtothebroadercommunity.Importantly,andsimilartoothercentres,thecentreseekstoaddresstherootcauseofmattersthatwouldotherwisepresentaslegalproblemsbyprovidingcounsellingandsupporttoclients.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
CClC
pRO
gRAM
pRO
gRAM
AiM
S, S
eRVi
CeS,
eTC
deSi
Red
OuT
COM
eSid
enTi
Fied
SO
CiAl
An
d eC
On
OM
iC b
eneF
iTS
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/ o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
CreditandDebt
Hotline&Casework
Service
AiM
S:Toprovidelegaladviceandcasework,financial
counsellinginformationandreferralstoNSWresidentsin
relationtocredit,debtandfinancialhardship.
SeRV
iCeS
/ACT
iViT
ieS:
Clientsreceiveinitialinformationandadvice(including
legaladvice)requiredtoresolvetheirproblemontheir
ownifpossible.Ifthematterismorecomplexand/orthe
clientisunabletoself-advocate,facetofacefinancial
counsellingorlegalassistancewillbeoffered.Legal
assistancemayincludemakingsubmissionsonbehalfof
theclienttoanappropriatedisputeresolutionservice.
Provideprofessionaladvicetofinancialcounsellors,CLCs,
LegalAidandotherservicesasrequired.
Appearonbehalfofclientsincourtsandtribunals
includingtheNSWSupremeCourt.
Lodgecomplaintsonbehalfofclientstoregulatory
organisations(suchasAustralianSecurities&
InvestmentsCommission,LegalServicesCommissioner,
andInsolvencyTrusteeServiceofAustralia)toensure
thattheyareawareofrelevantsystemicbreachesof
legislation.
Majorityofclientsableto
resolvetheirissuesontheir
own.
Clientswithurgent,
complexmatters,strong
publicinterestcomponent,
limitedabilitytoself-
advocate,and/orisseverely
disadvantaged(including
pensioner,lowincome
family,disability,NESB)
assistedwithadditional
adviceandcaseworktohelp
solveissue.
Ensurethatlenders
andcreditorsare
operatingaccording
tolawandcodesof
practice.
EnsureExternal
DisputeResolutions
Schemesareaccessible
forconsumers,fairand
accountable.
Negotiationand
planningwith
debtorsandcreditors
cansignificantly
reduceuseofcourt
procedures.
Reduceunnecessarybankruptcies
–wherecreditorsloseoutentirely
onrecoveringtheirdebtsandthe
individualmayexperiencelimitations
inthefutureandrelyongovernment
subsidies.
Canbepositiveoutcomeforcreditors,
toreceivesomerepaymentofdebt
versusnoneatall.
InsuranceLaw
Service
AiM
S:Toprovidenationwidefreelegalinformation,adviceand
caseworkforpeoplewhohaveproblemswithinsurance
claims.
Toidentifylegitimatebarrierstomakingclaims.
Topreventunnecessarybankruptcies.
Toraisetheprofileofthedisputeresolutionprocess.
SeRV
iCeS
/ACT
iViT
ieS:
Legalinformationandadviceprovidednationallyviaa
1300numberforinsurancerelatedmatters(primarily
relatedtomotorvehicle,naturaldisasterand/ordifficulty
receivingclaims).
Clientshavingtrouble
makingclaimsareableto
resolvetheirissues.
Barrierstomakingclaims
areidentifiedandreformed
ifpossible.
Monitorandensure
insuranceindustryis
actinginaccordance
withestablishedlaws
andcodesofpractice.
Negotiation
betweenparties
cansignificantly
reduceuseofcourt
procedures.
Tabl
e 21
: CCl
C pr
ogra
m M
atrix
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
CClC
pRO
gRAM
pRO
gRAM
AiM
S, S
eRVi
CeS,
eTC
deSi
Red
OuT
COM
eSid
enTi
Fied
SO
CiAl
An
d eC
On
OM
iC b
eneF
iTS
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/ o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
MortgageHardship
Service
AiM
S:Toprovideinformation,adviceandcaseworkto
homeownersinNSWinordertohelppeoplestayinand
savetheirhomesifpossible.
Ifstayinginthehome/savingthehomeisnotfinancially
sustainablefortheclient,assisttominimisetheloss(e.g.
Saleofpropertyetc).
SeRV
iCeS
/ACT
iViT
ieS:
Telephoneinformation,adviceandreferrals.Caseworkfor
appropriateclients(seeabove).
Providefreeadviceviaadutyrosteronceperweekatthe
NSWSupremeCourtforunrepresentedlitigantsinthe
possessionslist(e.g.AssistwithurgentstaysonWritsfor
Possession).
Aclient’shomeisretained
andasustainable
repaymentprogramis
achieved.
Ifahomeisunableto
besaved,astrategyis
developedtominimisethe
lossandtoassistclientto
repaysomedebtandmove
forward.
Negotiation
betweenparties
cansignificantly
reduceuseofcourt
procedures.
Lossofahome.
Unnecessarybankruptcies.
Personalandfamilystress,health
issues,etc.
PolicyandLaw
Reform
AiM
S:Toprovidefeedbackandaccountabilitytothecredit/
lendingindustry®ulators.
ACTi
ViTi
eS/S
eRVi
CeS:
Preparepolicysubmissions
RepresentCCLConmultipleadvisorycommittees,panels,
referencegroupsetc–atahighlevel.
Serveanaccountability
functionandprovide
feedbacktotheconsumer
creditprocessataveryhigh
level(e.g.Commonwealth
–ASIC,Treasury,State,
MajorBanksandother
lenders,creditors/collection
agencies).
Assistinthereformoflaws
toimprove/safeguardthe
systemforconsumers.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
CClC
pRO
gRAM
pRO
gRAM
AiM
S, S
eRVi
CeS,
eTC
deSi
Red
OuT
COM
eSid
enTi
Fied
SO
CiAl
An
d eC
On
OM
iC b
eneF
iTS
prop
er o
pera
tion
of th
e le
gal s
yste
mef
ficie
ncy
of se
rvic
e pr
ovisi
on/ o
utco
mes
Avoi
ding
ext
erna
litie
s
Training&
Education
AiM
S:Toinformandtraincommunitysectorprofessionalsabout
keyissuesrelatedtoconsumercredit(suchaschangesto
laws,etc)inordertoimproveserviceprovisiontoclients.
Toinformthepublicregardingkeyissues,theirrightsand
responsibilitiesrelatedtoconsumercreditinorderto
reduceincidenceandseverityofproblemsexperiencedby
consumers.
ToincreaseawarenessofavailabilityofCCLCservices.
Toencourageandfacilitatedebateonlaw-reformissues.
SeRV
iCeS
/ACT
iViT
ieS:
ConductregulartrainingforFinancialCounsellorsin
urbanandruralNSW.
Respondtomediainquiriestoprovidepubliceducation
onkeyissuesthroughnewspaper,radio,magazinesand
TV.
Developanddistributeeducationmaterialsforthesector
(e.g.CreditLawToolkittoinformfinancialcounsellors,
legalaidsolicitorsandcommunitysectorlawyershowto
usenewCommonwealthlaws.11
00copiesdistributed
freetoservicesacrossAustraliaorMortgageStress
Handbook).
Informedandcompetent
serviceproviders(e.g.
Financialcounsellors,
solicitors,etc)andpublic/
consumers.
Reducedincidence/severity
ofconsumercredit
problems.
Source:BasedoninformationreceivedfromKarenCoxduring05/05/11interviewandCentre’s2
009/10AnnualReport.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6.3.3 Assessment of economic benefitArandomsampleoftwentycasesandtwentyadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedcasesevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue.Typicallytheeconomicbenefitsofthesecasesweresimilartothoseintherandomsampleofcases,consequentlythesewerenotevaluated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 22: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 20 $0 $54,047 $17,850 $3,595
RandomCases 20 $0 $11,670 $35,910 $2,379
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10theConsumerCreditLegalCentrehadtotalexpensesofaround$1,378,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad619casesand12,410advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$46.1million,acostbenefitratioofaround33.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.Howeverthereisconsiderablecomfortinthehighcostbenefitratio,suggestingthatifonlyoneinthirtyoutcomeswasattributabletotheCommunityLegalCentre,costswouldstillexceedbenefits.
Noparticularhighvaluecaseswereidentified,howeverthereisabenefitassociatedwithmostmatters,theaveragebenefitisquitehigh,andaverylargenumberofadvicesareprocessed.Ofparticularinterest,particularlywithregardtomortgagedispute,theearlierthecentrewasinvolvedparticularlypriortolegalaction,thegreaterthebenefit.Theoverallimpressionisthatthecentredealswitharangeofpeopleandmattersanddoesthisinaveryefficientway,particularlynotwastingpeople’stimeandthecentre’sresourceswherethereisnocase,andstrategicallyfollowingthroughonselectedmattersforarangeofreasons.Thisisaneffectiveuseofcommunityresourcesandisreflectedinthehighbenefitcostratio.
Theeconomicbenefitsoftheproperprocessofthelawwithrespecttocontractsaredifficulttodetermine.
Theeconomicbenefitofcontractlawlargelycomesfromallowingpeopletoconducttransactionsovertimebymakingsurethatcustomersgetwhattheypayfor,andsuppliersprovidenomorethantheyhavebeenpaidfor,thatisthatpricesreflectaccuratelyreflectservices.Theeconomiccostsifsocietydidn’thaveaproperregulatorysystemaroundcontractscouldbeenormous,butbecausesocietydoeshavesuchasystem,it(probably)functionsatalevelwherecostsjustequalbenefits.Itisexpectedthatonaverage,themarginalcostsofpursuingaclaimwouldbeequaltothemarginalbenefitshoweverthiswillnotalwaysbethecase,particularlywherethereisasymmetricinformation.TheConsumerCreditLegalCentreperformsanimportantfunctioninthisregard,byprovidingexpertadviceatlowcosttooffsetthehighcosttoindividualsinobtainingsufficientinformationtoreachaninformedview.Insurancecompaniesandfinanciersaredealingwithclaimsandthecourtsallthetime,andsowouldbemuchmorelikelytoknowthelawthananindividualwhomayhaveoneortwomattersinalifetime.Thisprovidesanopportunityformoralhazard,whereacompanymayrejectaclaimwithoutappropriatesupport,buttakingadvantageofthecustomer’slackofsophistication.Thisbenefitisbestassessedintermsofwillingnesstopay,thatiswhatpriceisthecommunitypreparedtopaytohaveaccesstogoodlegaladviceatnocost.
Bywayofexample,thecostofthecentreperadviceis$111.Thismayrepresentgoodvalueintermsofthecommunity’swillingnesstopay,asa“flagfall”withaprivatesolicitorislikely
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
tobearound$300,andthecentrehasaveryhighlevelofexpertiseastheydealwiththesemattersallthetime.OnapercapitabasisandtakingtheadultpopulationofNSWas4.9million,54thecostofthecentreperadultis$0.30peryear.Inthisregard,eventhoughtheaveragebenefitassociatedwithcasesisabouthalfthebenefitassociatedwithadvices,thecasesprobablyserveatrainingorcurrencypurpose,ensuringthatsolicitorsinthecentreareuptodatewiththelaw.Moreimportantly,thereisanadditionalbenefitarisingfromcaseworkasmatterscanoftenbesettledquicklyascreditorsandinsurersknowthattheCLCispreparedtoruncasesthroughcourtorexternaldisputeresolutionandarethereforemoreinclinedtosettlethaniftheCLCofferedadviceonlywithnoopportunitytoengagethelegalsystem.
54 ABSCensus2006
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
6.4 Marrickville legal CentreTheMarrickvilleLegalCentre(MLC)islocatedinMarrickville,NewSouthWales(aninnersuburbofSydney)andwasestablishedin1979.MLC’sprimarygeographicservicecatchmentincludesthe12LGAsofAshfield,Auburn,Bankstown,Burwood,CanadaBay,Canterbury,Hurstville,Kogarah,Marrickville,Rockdale,StrathfieldandSutherland.
6.4.1 Centre profile
Current Staffing profileMLCstaffaredividedintothreeteams:legal,tenancyandadministration.Basedoninformationreceivedfromthecentre,thecurrentstaffingprofileasatMarch2011foreachteamisasfollows.
Table 23: Staffing profile Summary, MlC
role Hours per Week fte
TotalPermanent 262.5 7.5
TotalTemporary 136.5 3.9
TotalVolunteer 256 7.3
ToTal 655 18.7
Source:MLC2011,JSA2011
Table 24: detailed Staffing profile, MlC
teAm role Hours per Week fte
Legal PrincipalSolicitor(Permanent) 35 1
Legal Solicitor(Permanent) 91 2.6
Legal Solicitor(Temporary) 28 0.8
Legal Solicitor(SecondeefromPrivateFirm) 16 0.45
Legal Solicitor(Volunteer) 5 0.14
Legal Paralegal(Temporary) 7 0.2
Legal LegalStudent(Volunteer) 70 2
Legal EveningAdviceSolicitor(Volunteer) 68 1.9
Legal EveningAdviceAssistant(Volunteer) 17 0.5
Tenancy Advocate(Permanent) 45.5 1.3
Tenancy Advocate(Temporary) 52.5 1.5
Tenancy Information/ReferralOfficer(Permanent) 17.5 0.5
Administration CentreCoordinator(Permanent) 35 1
Administration Information/ReferralOfficer(Permanent) 17.5 0.5Administration Finance(Permanent) 21 0.6Administration DVPASSCoordinator(Temporary) 35 1Administration DVPASSWorker(Temporary) 14 0.4Administration Student(Volunteer) 80 2.3
ToTal 655 18.7
Source:MLC2011,JSA2011
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
Current Service provisionMLCoffersfourprograms:
• GeneralLegalService(GLS)- ProvidesfreelegaladvicetoadultresidentsoftheMLCcatchmentviatelephoneandface-to-facethroughdayandeveningappointmentsandoutreaches.
- Providescasework,advocacyandrepresentationservicestoclientsmeetingintakecriteria.
- ProvidesCommunityLegalEducation(CLE)
- During2009/10FY,thisprogramwassupplementedbytwoone-offgrantsincludingtheFamilyRelationshipCentrePilotProject(endedDecember2010)andCALDCreditandDebt(endedJune2010).
• Children’sLegalService(CLS)- Providesastatewideadviceservicebytelephoneorface-to-facetochildrenandyoungpeopleunder18yearsoldwholiveinNSW.
- Providescasework,advocacyandrepresentationservicestoclientsmeetingintakecriteria.
- ProvidesanoutreachadviceserviceatayouthcentreinBankstown.
- ProvidesCLE
- ConvenestheYouthJusticeCoalition(YJC),anetworkofyouthworkers,children’slawyers,policyworkersandacademicswhoworktopromotetherightsofchildrenandyoungpeopleinNSWandacrossAustralia.
• InnerWestTenancyAdviceandAdvocacyService(IWTAAS)- Providesadvice,caseworkandCLEservicestotenants(includingboarderandlodgers)rentingintheinnerwestofSydney.
- Providescasework,advocacyandrepresentationservicestoclientsmeetingintakecriteria.
- ProvidesaweeklyoutreachatNewtownNeighbourhoodCentre.
- ProvidesadutyadvocacyserviceattheConsumer,TraderandTenancyTribunalintheSydneyCBD.
• InnerWestDomesticViolencePro-ActiveSupportService(IWDVPASS)- ProvidesinformationandreferralservicestopersonsinneedofprotectionnamedonApprehendedDomesticViolenceOrderapplicationsmadebyNSWPoliceinNewtownandBalmainLocalCourts.
Client profileDuringthe2009/10FY,theMLCprovidedserviceto2864clients.55
• 76%civillawclients,20%familylawclientsand10%criminallawclients(notethataclientcanhavemultiplelawtypes)
• 55%femaleclients,43%maleclients,2%clientsex/genderunknown
• 1%Indigenousclients
55 AsperCLSISCC6.ClientbyLawTypereports.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
• 48%ofclientshadastatedage.Ofthegroupofclientswithaknownage:8%wereunder18years,31%wereaged18-34years,34%wereaged35-49years,20%wereaged50-64years,and7%wereaged65orolder.
• 87%werenewclientsduringtheperiod,11%wererepeatclientsand2%wereexistingclients.56
Femaleandmaleclientshadslightlydifferentlawtypeprofiles,withfemaleclientsmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforfamilylawtypeproblemsandmalesmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforcriminallawtypeproblems.
Figure 7: law Type profile for Male and Female MlC ClientsSource:MLC2011,JSA2011
IndigenousclientswerelesslikelythanTotalClientstoreceiveservicesforcivillawproblemsandmorelikelytoreceiveservicesforfamilyandcriminallawproblems.Notethatfor2009/10,Indigenousclientscomprised1%oftotalclients(n=29).
Figure 8: law Type profile for Total and indigenous MlC ClientsSource:MLC2011,JSA2011
Activity profileMLCconducted2994informationand3582advicesactivitiesin2009/10.Thecentreopened285newcasesduringtheyearandclosed250cases,including168minorcases,61mediumand2majorcases.MLCalsocompleted102non-caseworkprojectsduringtheyearincluding59CLEprojectsand28LawReformandPolicyprojects.Thefollowingtableshowsabreakdownofactivitiesbyfundedservicetype.
56 AsperCLSISCA1.1ActivitySummarycountof2840totalclientsfor2009/10FY.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 25: MlC Activities by Funded Service Type
serviCe type/speCifiC projeCt AdviceCasesopenatstart
Casesopenedduringperiod
Casesclosedduringperiod
CLEActivitiescompletedduringperiod
LRLPActivitiescompletedduringperiod
TOTALACTIVITIES 3582 75 285 250 59 28Funded Service Type Generalist 1758 52 158 142 21 4Generalistcreditanddebt 33 6 3GeneralistDVAS 414 2Generalisttenancy 1097 8 44 29 5GeneralistYouth 236 15 75 74 29 23FRC 44 2 2 2 1
Source:MLC2011,JSA2011
problem Type profileMLCworksacrossallareasoflaw,butalargeproportionofitsactivities(advices,caseworkandfirstactivitymatters)arefocusedoncivillawproblemtypes.
Figure 9: law Type profile by Advice, Casework and First ActivitiesSource:MLC2011,JSA2011
First Activity MattersFirstActivityMattersareacountofthefirstinteractionor‘activity’aclienthaswiththeservicewithintheperiodoftimespecified.FirstActivitieswouldmostlikelybeadvicesandarethoughttorepresentthemostcommonproblemtypesgeneratedbyclientsoftheservice.ForMLCinthe2009/10FY,therewere3850firstactivitymatters.ThemostcommonproblemtypeswereTenancy,Employment,Family/DomesticViolence,Credit/DebtandOffencesAgainstPropertyorOtherOffences.OverathirdofallfirstactivitiesarerelatedtoTenancyproblemtypes;howeverthetablebelowshowsthediversityofproblemtypescapturedduringfirstactivitiesin2009/10.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 26: MlC First Activity Matters by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowproblem type # first
ACtivity mAtters
% first ACtivity mAtters
TotalTenancy 1392 36.2%TotalEmployment 431 11.2%TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 415 10.8%TotalCreditandDebt 376 9.8%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 226 5.9%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 201 5.2%TotalMotorVehicle 188 4.9%TotalContactandResidency 131 3.4%TotalConsumerComplaints 130 3.4%TotalInjuries 73 1.9%TotalDiscrimination 73 1.9%TotalOtherCivilLaw 62 1.6%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 33 0.9%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 29 0.8%TotalWills/Probate 23 0.6%TotalChildSupport 16 0.4%TotalProperty 16 0.4%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 10 0.3%TotalDivorceandSeparation 8 0.2%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowances 8 0.2%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 3 0.1%TotalChildProtection 3 0.1%TotalImmigrationLaw 3 0.1%ToTal FirsT acTiviTy MaTTers 3850 100.0%
Source:MLC2011,JSA2011
AdvicesTheproblemtypeprofileofadviceactivitiesin2009/10issimilartofirstactivities,withathirdofadvicesdealingwithTenancymattersandsmallerproportionsrelatedtoCredit/Debt,Employment,Family/DomesticViolenceandOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences.Adviceserviceswerealsodiverseacrossarangeofproblemtypes.Withintheseareasoflaw,keyproblemtypesincluded:
• Familyordomesticviolenceorder,8.1%• Credit/debtowedbyclient,7.5%• Tenancyother,7.5%• Government/Administrationissuesrelatingtofines,4.8%
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 27: MlC Advices by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowproblem type # AdviCes % AdviCes TotalTenancy 1760 33.0%TotalCreditandDebt 638 12.0%TotalEmployment 571 10.7%TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 467 8.8%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 340 6.4%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 328 6.2%TotalMotorVehicle 317 5.9%TotalConsumerComplaints 236 4.4%TotalContactandResidency 166 3.1%TotalInjuries 131 2.5%TotalDiscrimination 105 2.0%TotalOtherCivilLaw 82 1.5%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 46 0.9%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 36 0.7%TotalWills/Probate 29 0.5%TotalProperty 18 0.3%TotalChildSupport 17 0.3%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 15 0.3%TotalDivorceandSeparation 9 0.2%TotalGovtPensionsBenefitsAllowances 7 0.1%TotalChild/SpousalMaintenance 4 0.1%TotalChildProtection 3 0.1%TotalImmigrationLaw 2 0.0%TotalEnvironment 1 0.0%ToTal aDvices 5328 100.0%
Source:MLC2011,JSA2011
Casework ActivitiesMLCcaseworkactivitiesfor2009/10FYwerespreadacrossarangeofproblemtypes.WhilstTenancymatterswereagainakeyareaofactivity,thesetypesofmatterscomprised17%ofcaseworkequaltoCredit/Debtcasework.Employment,Government/Administrativelaw,OffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences,andInjurieswereprimaryareasofcaseworkactivities.Withintheseareasoflaw,keyproblemtypesincluded:
• Credit/debtowedbyclient,12.5%• Government/Administrationissuesrelatingtofines,8.2%• Injuriescompensation,4.7%• Employmentunfairdismissal,4.5%• Tenancyterminationbylessor,4.0%• Roadtrafficandmotorvehicleregulatoryoffences,3.8%
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Table 28: MlC Casework Activities by Total problem Type Sorted High to lowproblem type # CAseWork
ACtivities % CAseWork
ACtivities TotalTenancy 73 17.2%TotalCreditandDebt 73 17.2%TotalEmployment 61 14.4%TotalGovt/AdministrativeLaw 48 11.3%TotalOffencesAgainstPropertyandOtherOffences 40 9.4%TotalInjuries 31 7.3%TotalMotorVehicle 18 4.2%TotalOtherCivilLaw 18 4.2%TotalConsumerComplaints 16 3.8%TotalDiscrimination 12 2.8%TotalFamily/DomesticViolence 10 2.4%TotalContactandResidency 9 2.1%TotalOffencesAgainstPersons 7 1.6%TotalWills/Probate 3 0.7%TotalProperty 2 0.5%TotalNeighbourhoodDisputes 2 0.5%TotalChildSupport 1 0.2%TotalOtherFamilyLaw 1 0.2%ToTal casework acTiviTies 425 100.0%
Source:MLC2011,JSA2011
6.4.2 Analysis of programs offered by the centreAnanalysisofthelikelysocialandeconomicbenefitsofselectedprogramsprovidedbytheMarrickvilleLCisprovidedinthetablebelow,togetherwithadescriptionoftheprograms,theiraimsandkeyoutcomes.
Primarily,theCLCoperatestoprovideassistancetopeoplewhowouldnototherwisehaveaccesstoexpertlegaladvice.Italsoassistspeopletoaccessthelegalandothersystemswheretheiraccessislimitedduetolackofskillsorsophistication.TheCLCrunsparticularprogramsintheareasofyoungpeople,tenancyanddomesticviolence.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
mlC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
Properoperationofthe
legalsystem
Efficiencyofserviceprovision/
outcomes
Avoidingexternalities
GeneralistLegal
Services
Toprovideaccesstojusticeforpeoplewho
wouldnototherwisehaveit.
Toprovideinformationandadvicetoanyone
livinginthe12LGAsoftheMLCcatchment,
thatisnot-selectiveormeanstested,in
certainareasoflaw.
Toprovideminorcaseworkassistanceand
caseworktoclientswhoareparticularly
disadvantagedintheiraccesstojustice
includingIndigenous,NESB,women
experiencing/escapingDV,peoplewith
mentalhealthissuesand/ordisabilities,youth,
andpeoplewhoaregay/lesbian.
YouthandIndigenousclientsareabletosee
solicitorwithoutanappointment,toavoid
failuretoreturn.
OutreachonceperfortnightforNESBliving
inRockdaleandKogarahattheStGeorge
MigrantResourceCentre.
InvestigatingnewoutreachtoBurwood,
HomebushWest,andBelmore/Campsieareas
basedonlegalneedsstrategicplanning.
MentorandtrainPLTstudentplacements.
CLE,lawreformandpolicywork.
FamilyRelationshipCentrepartnership.
FacilitateaccesstoVictim’sCompensationfor
CALDandvulnerablewomen.
Peoplewhowouldn’t
normallyhaveaccess
tolegaladvicecan
determinewhattheir
problemis,whatoptions
theyhavetodealwith
it,beconnectedtothe
mostappropriatelegal
servicetodealwiththeir
problem,andeventually
obtainaresolution.
Resolutionofissues,
includingproviding
importantinformation
wherepeopledonot
haveacase.
ImpactonGovernment:
Thecentreagitatesfor
reformwheresystemic
issuesareidentified.Holds
governmentagencies
andinstitutionsto
accountwheretheyare
notenactingtheirown
policies.
Impactonprivate
enterprise:Inemployment
lawmattershaving
arepresentedclient
achievesbetterresults
inmoreefficientway
asemployerstakethe
mattermoreseriously.
Representation‘levelsthe
playingfield’.
Impacton‘legalsystem’:
Improvesandincreases
accessibilitytothesystem.
Thecentrefacilitates
probonoworkbylegal
firms,practicesand
professionals.Thereare80
volunteersolicitorsinthe
MLCadviceprogram,and
eachgives 1eveningper
fortnightoftime.
Providingclientswithinformation
abouttheirrights,responsibilities,
andproceduralissues(suchasthe
correctforum/arenaandwaytodo
things)savesconsiderabletimeand
resources.
Ifaclientdoesnotstartamatterin
thecorrectforum(CTTT,localcourt,
FairWorkAustralia,etc)theywaste
theregistrar’stime.
Ifsomeonecommencesaclaim
incorrectly,thecourtmayrequire
multipleamendmentstogetit
right.Thisisveryinefficientforthe
client,courtandallinvolved.
Withfines,oftenthepersonshould
paywhattheycan,asopposedto
progressingacasewheretheyhave
nogrounds.
Muchoftheworkofthecentreis
innegotiatedsettlementswithout
litigation,estimatedat9
0%ofthe
time.Thisisaconsiderablecost
saving,asthehighestcostsare
incurredinatrialwithajudgeor
magistrate’stime.
Theearliersomeonecomesto
thecentrethemoreefficientand
greatestcostsavingsareachieved.
Reducestheneedforlitigation
throughappropriatetriagingof
matters,assistinginnegotiationor
advisingwheretheremaybelimited
merittoamatter,andwherethe
clientwouldnothavetheskillsor
knowledgetodosoontheirown.
Byprovidingclientswith
informationaboutreasonable
expectations–suchaswithdebt
andfamilylawmatters–thiscan
streamlinetheprocess,saving
timeandmoneyforallparties
concernedandoftenachieving
amoredesirableoutcomeforall
concerned.
Inadebtmatter,negotiatinga
paymentplanandavoidingcourt
providescreditorwithsomething
ratherthancontinuedcosts
chasingsomeone.
Withfamilylawandcare
arrangements,thebestinterests
ofthechildmaynotmean50/50
timesplit.Workingthroughwith
aparentwhattheyarelikelyto
achieveasopposedtocontinued
fighting,stress,etcmaygivea
betterresult.
Preventsissuesfromdeveloping
furtherorworseningbymaking
referrals.
Tabl
e 29
: MlC
pro
gram
Mat
rix
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
mlC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
Properoperationofthe
legalsystem
Efficiencyofserviceprovision/
outcomes
Avoidingexternalities
LegalVolunteer
Program
AiM
S:Toaugment/increaseCLCserviceswith
additionalexpertiseandstaffingprovidedby
legalvolunteers.
SeRV
iCeS
:Volunteersolicitors,mainlyfromlocalprivate
practices,provideTuesandThurseveningfree
advicesessionsatMLCbyappointment.
Lawgraduatescompletingtheirpracticallegal
trainingcomponentonavoluntarybasis.
Undergraduatelawstudentsassistingwith
receptionduties.
Increasedaccessibilityof
freelegaladviceforthe
community.
Increasedawareness
ofCLCanditswork
amongstcommunityand
privatelegalprofession.
Ensurestimely,accessible
advicelikelytoresolve
issues.
Providesaccessto
appropriatefollowup
legaladviceorcasework
whererequiredthrough
theprivate,publicor
communitylegalsector.
Providesadditionalvoluntaryhours
tosupportcentreactivities.
Timelyresolutionofmatters,
includingregardingwhetheror
notthereisacase,increasedability
toself-representorgainearly
resolution.
Promptandappropriateresolution
ofmattersislikelytoreduceflow-
oneffectstootheraspectsofa
person’slife.
Children’sLegal
Service
Providestatewidelegaladviceandcasework
tochildren,youthworkersandother
communityworkerswhoworkwithchildren,
inallareasoflawbutprimarilyrelatedto
fines,criminalcharges,courtprocess,bail,
victimscompensation,AVOs,ADVOs,debt,
schoolsuspension/expulsion,bullying/
harassmentandfamilylaw.
Outreach:OneperfortnightatHomebase,
multiculturalcentreinBankstown.
ConvenorofYouthJusticeCoalition(YJC),
anetworkoflawyers,children’ssolicitors,
academicsandyouthworkerswhoadvocate
fortherightsofyoungpeopleinthejuvenile
justicesystem.
Lawreformandpolicyworkbasedonaims
andobjectivesoftheYJC.
CLEwithyouth/communityworkersand
youngpeople(e.g.Everysixweeksatyouth
refugeinLeichhardt).
SecondmentofChildren’ssolicitorto
AboriginalLegalService.
Toprovidehelpful,
practicalandconsistent
legaladviceforyoung
peopleacrossNSWin-
person(ifpossible)and
inanenvironmentthat
isaccessibleandless
intimidating.
Tosupportyouthworkers
withissuessuchasduty
ofcare,confidentiality
andvicariousliability.
Ensuringthatyoung
peopleareawareof
andunderstandtheir
rightsandhavecontact
andaccesstotheright
servicetohelpthem
exercisethoserights.
Advocateforchanges
inthejuvenilejustice
system.
Impactongovernment:
Buildabridgebetween
youngpeopleandNSW
PoliceandStateDebt
RecoveryOfficesothat
mattersmaybesettled
bynegotiation.Give
info/advice/assistance
toclientstoassistin
navigatingthesystem.
Ex:MLCwasinvolvedwith
settinguppilot‘Work
DevelopmentOrders’
programw/StateDRO
whereyoungpeople
canworkortakepartin
activitiestopayofffines.
MLCassistedYJCto
conducthumanrights
consultationwithyoung
peoplefrom 80-90schools
whereoutcomeswere
partofshadowreport
thatwenttotheUNwhen
Australiawasbefore
theUNHumanRights
Commission.Couldhave
impactonnationallevel
reforms.
Otherserviceoptionsavailablefor
youngpeopleincludeLegalAid
telephonehotline(whichdoes
notprovidefacetofaceadviceor
representation),dutysolicitoratthe
courtsorprivatesolicitor.Shopfront
LegalService(CLCforyoungpeople)
onlyprovidesadviceandcasework
foryoungpeopleinSydneymetro
areaandincriminallawmatters.
Ourlegalrepresentationtakes
pressureoffLegalAid,private
solicitors,registrarsandthecourts.
Withfines,StateDROhaslittle
enforcementofyoungpeoplenot
payingfines.Weassistyoungpeople
tomeetdebtswithgovernment
wheretheyprobablywouldn’t
otherwise.
Engagingandinformingyoung
peopleabouttheirrightsand
responsibilitiesregardingaproblem
earlywillhopefullyavoidorlimit
furtherengagementwiththe
juvenilejusticesystem.
Reducingjuvenilejusticedetention
andrecidivism.
Assisting/referringtoother
servicesforcorrespondingmental
health,housing/homelessness,
drug/alcoholproblemsthatclient
mayhave.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
mlC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
Properoperationofthe
legalsystem
Efficiencyofserviceprovision/
outcomes
Avoidingexternalities
InnerWestTenants’
Adviceand
AdvocacyService
Assisttenantsandpromotetenants’rights.
Providetenantswithinthe5LGAsofthe
IWTAAScatchmentwithinformation,
adviceandrepresentationintheCTTT(NSW
Consumer,TraderandTenancyTribunal)if
appropriate.
Adviceisprovidedoverthetelephone,with
followupadvocacysuchasliaisingwithreal
estateagents,writinglettersandtribunal
actionifappropriate.
WeeklyoutreachtoAshfield/HomebushWest
areaisproposed(notcommenced).
Lawreformandpolicysubmissions.
CLEwithcommunityworkers,particularly
aboutthepriorityhousingsystemwith
HousingNSW(process,howtoappeal,etc).
Fundedfor1
05hoursperweekornearly3FTE
throughtheOfficeofFairTradingandRental
BondBoard.(currentlyhavemorestaffdueto
one-offfundingincreaseandsurplus)
DutyadvocacyatCTTT
1 /2dayperfortnight
atSydneyregistrytoassistwithconciliation
resolution(notfundedtodothis,sharedwith
4otherservicesandsupportedbyMLC).
OutreachprogramtoNewtown
NeighbourhoodCentre.
Outreachprogramtargetedtoboardersand
lodgers.
Topromotetenants
rightsandhelppeople
attainsecureandstable
accommodation.
Addressinghousing
crisisinNSW,preventing
homelessness,
addressingsystemic
barriersthatprevent
peoplefromaccessing
theirrights.
Tenantsenforcingtheir
rights.
Protectingtenantsfrom
termination.
Makingsureproperties
arefittolivein.
Makingsurepeoplehave
accesstopublichousing
andareappropriately
housedtomeettheir
needs.
Makesureproblems
arefixedandissues
addressed.Ifatenanthas
sufferedtheyareableto
receivecompensation.
ImpactonGovernment:
EnsureHNSWare
followingtheirpolicies,
proceduresandlegislation.
Makesubmissionstothe
Ministerandothersto
havepracticeschanged
wheresystemicissues
exist.
AimtoensuretheOfficeof
FairTradingaredoingtheir
jobofenforcementwith
regardtotheResidential
TenanciesAct.
Ensureadministration
withintheCTTTis
correct(lostapplications,
applicationcheques/
payment,etc).Gather
evidencetosupport
reformofpractices(ex:
applicationsinthreatof
lock-outasopposedto
onlyafterlock-outhas
occurred).
Impactonprivate
enterprises:Ensure
bestpractice,negotiate
outcomesandconduct
tribunalactionwithReal
EstateAgents.Facilitate
‘Misleadinganddeceptive
conduct’claimsasa
consumermatterfor
BoardingHouselodgers
usingAustralianConsumer
Laws.
Impacton‘legalsystem’:
ImpactonCTTT,district
andhighcourtsthrough
interpretationofthelaws.
Resolutionofdisputesbetween
tenantsandlandlordsthrough
negotiatedoutcomesthatwould
otherwisebeheardbyamagistrate
ortribunalatahighercost.
Providingclientswithinformation
abouttheirrights,responsibilities
andprocessensuresthatpeople
arenotmakingerroneousor
unnecessaryclaimsthataretime/
resourceintensiveforcourtstowork
through.Givingclientsrealistic
expectationsabouttheirmattercan
streamlinelegalprocessesandsave
resources.
‘Governmentoftenthinksthatif
theyfundusmoretheywillhave
moreproblems,butitisreallythe
oppositeasoftenonceclientgets
informationtheyrealisetheydonot
haveacase.’
Preventinghomelessness.Evena
shortstintofhomelessnesscan
havelastingimpactonhealthand
employmentprospectsresultingin
costtorelevanthealthservices.
Tenancymatterscanexacerbate
existingmentalhealthissues,
achievingaresolutioncanlimit
thecostandflowonimpacts.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
mlC
pro
grAm
pro
grAm
Aim
s, se
rviC
es, e
tCde
sire
d o
utCo
mes
iden
tifi
ed s
oCi
Al A
nd
eCo
no
miC
ben
efit
s
Properoperationofthe
legalsystem
Efficiencyofserviceprovision/
outcomes
Avoidingexternalities
DomesticViolence
Pro-ActiveSupport
Service(DVPASS)
Makecontactandprovidesupportand
referraltopeoplewhohavehadcontactwith
policewhereDVwasidentifiedandtheclient
consentedtohavingdetailspassedonfor
furthersupportandreferralservices.
Telephoneassessmentofrisk,safetyand
needs.Provideinformationandreferraland
ensurethatclientisconnectedtoappropriate
services.
AuspicedbyMLCandbasedin3LACsinthe
InnerWestarea(Leichardt,Marrickvilleand
Newtown).
LiaisewithLACDVLOs(domesticviolence
liaisonofficers)andotherpoliceofficers.
Providebriefingsandeducationforofficersin
thestations.
CLEforcommunityworkers.
Sitoninteragencypanelsandcommittees.
ParticipateinDVCAS(domesticviolencecourt
advocacyservice)attwolocalcourtsonceper
month(BalmainLCandNewtownLC).
Tomaximizesafetyfor
women,childrenand
otherswhoarevictims
ofDV–andtohold
perpetratorsresponsible.
Toidentifyrepeatvictims
andprovidethemwith
additionalsupport.
Toengagethosewho
haveconsentedto
furthercontactand
improvetheirlevelof
safetyandputinplace
mechanismstoimprove
theirsafety.
Currently30-40%ofDV
call-outshaveconsent
grantedforfurther
contact.Typicallythe
servicecanonlymake
contactwith2/3rdsof
soofthereferralswe
receive.
Provideseamlesssupport
sopeopledonot‘fall
throughthecracks’
andrepeatthecycleof
violence.
Tofindabalance
betweentheneedsof
thevictimsandthe
needsofthecriminal
justicesystem.
ImpactonGovernment:
LocationwithinNSW
PoliceStationsisunique
andvitalforcontinued
liaison,relationship
buildingandcultural
changeamongstpolice.
ThereisnowaDV
codeofpracticeand
goodattendanceand
engagementwiththe
referencegroupforthis
program.Therehasbeen
animprovementand
changeinpoliceattitudes
andbehaviourregarding
DVwiththeprogram.
Morecommandsare
requestingthataDVPASS
belocatedwithinthem
andthatisasignthat
theserviceishavingan
impact.
Impactonthe‘legal
system’:
ParticipationintheDVCAS
secondeerostertosee
womeninthesaferoomat
localcourtsontheirAVO
mentiondate.
ThecostofDVacrossthenation
isastronomicalintermsofpolice
resources,mental/physical/
reproductivehealthimpactsand
criminaljusticeinterventions.
1inevery3policecalloutsinour
LACsinDVrelated.
Thisisaninexpensiveprogram
at$10
0kperyear,andwithoutit
womenwouldbecastadriftafter
contactwithpolice.Contactand
referralhopefullyintervenesin
thecycleofviolenceandreduces
impactsbyconnectingpeoplewith
services.Theserviceaimsfora
72hourcallback,asresearchhas
shownthatthereisawindowof
timeduringthecrisisperiodwhere
victimismorelikelytoaccept
assistance.
Interventionatcriticalpointin
violencecycletoreducerepeat
violenceandimprovesafetyof
womenandchildren.
Raisingawarenessaboutdifferent
formsofDV.Theremaynotalways
bephysicalinjuriesthatyoucan
see.
Source:BasedoninformationreceivedfrominterviewswithkeyMLCstafffromtheGeneralistLegalService,ChildrensLegalService,InnerWest
TenancyTeam,andDVPASSprogramon20/05/11andothercentredocuments.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
6.4.3 Assessment of economic benefitArandomsampleoftwentycasesandtwentyadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedcasesevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue,howevertheeconomicbenefitsofthesecasesweresimilartothoseintherandomsampleofcases,consequentlythesewerenotevaluated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 30: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 20 $0 $4,490 $6,850 $567
RandomCases 20 $0 $6,168 $1,140 $365
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10MarrickvilleLegalCentrehadtotalexpensesofaround$877,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad425casesand5,328advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$3.2million,acostbenefitratioofaround4,andsufficientlyhightojustifytheexpenditureonthecentre.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.IfoneinfouroutcomeswasattributabletotheCommunityLegalCentre,costswouldstillexceedbenefits.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
Appendix A: economic analysis of cases and advicesloddon Campaspe Community legal CentreArandomsampleoftwentycasesandadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedtwentycasesevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue,andtheeconomicbenefitsofthesecaseswerealsoestimated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 31: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 13 $12,120 $950 $1,228,915
$95,537($3,999excludingonebenefitestimatedat$1.19million).
RandomCases 7 $38,770 $540 $7,130 $6,634
SelectedCases 20 $118,750 $73,455 $1,348,000
$77,010($17,510excludingonebenefitestimatedat
$1.19million)
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10theAdvocacyandRightsCentrehadatotalbudgetofaround$1.2million.TheCommunityLegalCentreprogramhadexpenditureof$531,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad1,043casesand2,272advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$224million,acostbenefitratioofover400howeverthisisinflatedbytheinclusionofoneveryhighvalueadviceinthedataset.Excludingtheveryhighvalueadvice,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$16million,acostbenefitratioofover30.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.Theuseofaveragecostsforserviceswillalsounderandoverestimatethebenefitassociatedwithaparticularoutcome.Howeverthereisconsiderablecomfortinthehighcostbenefitratio,suggestingthatifonlyoneinthirtyoutcomeswasattributabletotheCommunityLegalCentre,costswouldstillexceedbenefits.
Arangeofhighvaluecaseswereidentified,includingintherandomselection.Themaximumbenefitwas$1.19million,representingthebenefitofavoidinginstitutionalaccommodationandsupportforadisabledperson.IftheCommunityLegalCentrewasinstrumentalinonesuchoutcomeeverytwoyears,thiswouldjustifythecostofthecentre.
Theothermajorbenefitisintheareaofchildabuse.Theavoidanceofinstitutionalandothercostsinmattersofchildabusehasbeenassessedat$38,000.14suchcaseswouldjustifythecentreeconomically.
Followingthisassessment,adifferentmethodologywasfollowedinothercentreswhereby20randomadvicesand20randomcaseswereevaluated.Thiswasbecause:
• Thebenefitsoftherandomcasesandadviceswereconsiderable;• Casesandadviceswithhighvaluewereidentifiedintherandomprocess;• Casesidentifiedbythecentrewerenotnecessarilyofhigheconomicvalue;and• Alargerrandomselectionprovidesahigherdegreeofreliability.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. C
ase
Ahadanaccessagreementinplacewiththe
motherbuthadnotaccessedthechildren
forsometime.Inaddition,therewasan
interventionorderinplacewiththechildren’s
mother.Hewishedtomakecontactwith
thechildrenandtheCLCsentalettertothe
mother.Anegativeresponsewasreceived.
TheapproachforcontactbyAappearedto
beinresponsetothemother’sapplicationto
havetheinterventionorderextendedtocover
thechildrenaswell.Asoughttohavethe
interventionorderrevokedandwasadvisedby
theCLCthatthismaybeunsuccessfulbutifhe
wishedtoproceedheshouldgotocourt.
Thereisevidencethatchildreninjointcustody
(followingrelationshipbreakdown)arebetter
adjusted(acrossarangeofpsychologicaltesting
instruments)bycomparisonwithchildren
insolecustodyarrangements.1 Suchlackof
‘adjustment’mayhaveeconomicconsequences
withrespecttoemploymentandrelianceona
rangeofsupportandwelfareservicesandthis
isreflectedins6
5DAAoftheFamilyLawAct
1975(Commonwealth)wherejointparentingis
assessedinthecontextofthebestinterestsof
thechildandinpracticality.Atthesametime,
thereareconsiderablecostsassociatedwith
familyviolenceandwithchildabuse.2 ,
3
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tForabenefitfromtheoperationofthelawinthis
case,itwouldbenecessaryforaneconomically
inefficientoutcometoariseintheabsenceof
thelegalcentre.Inthiscase,itappearedthatthe
legalcentreassessedthatthecourtwouldfind
againsttherevocationoftheinterventionorder,
andthisoutcomewouldoccurintheabsenceof
interventionbythelegalcentre.Hencethereis
nobenefit.
IftheCLChadnotadvisedthefatherthenhemay
haveprogressedthematterthroughthecourtsasa
litigantinpersonatconsiderableexpenseandwith
smallchanceofsuccess.Hencetheremayhavebeen
reductionsincourttimeandcosts,withrespectto
themagistratescourtregardingtheintervention
order.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tThetotalannualbudgetfortheMagistrates’Court
ofVictoriawas$77million.
4 Duringthesameperiod,
therewere17
6,13
2criminalcasesfinalised,44,92
6civilclaimsfinalisedand68,01
1familylaw,family
violenceandafterhoursmattersgivingatotal
numberofmattersof 2
89,069,5 oranaveragecost
of$27
0permatter.Itislikelythemediancostper
matterissomewhatlessthanthis,butthereisno
dataavailableregardingtherangeofcomplexityin
themattersconsidered.Thereisalsoanadditional
costfromlitigantsinpersonwiththe20
04 A
nnua
l Re
view
of W
este
rn A
ustr
alia
n Co
urts
reportinga20%
increaseintimeforselfrepresentedlitigants.6
Hencethebenefitisassessedat$27
0plus20%,or
$320.
Noneidentified.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tNobenefit.
Rand
om sa
mpl
e of
case
s and
adv
ices
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
2. C
ase
B’srelationshiphadrecentlybrokendown.She
hadmovedfromherhomeandwasstaying
withafriend.ShecontactedtheCLCtoobtain
aninterventionorderagainstherformer
domesticpartner.Animportantconcernwas
herabilitytorecoverherpossessionsand
furniturefromthehome.TheCLCnegotiateda
‘withoutprejudice’agreementwithrespectto
householdfurnitureandvehiclesbetweenthe
partiesandobtainedaninterventionorderforB
fromthemagistrate.
Relationshipbreakdown,separationanddivorce
areafactofoursocietywithourlegalsystem
facilitatingseparation.Henceitiseconomically
efficienttofacilitateseparationatminimumcost.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tThisbenefitisidentifiedbelowunder
externalities.
TheCLC’sinterventionmayhavereducedtimeinthe
courtswithregardtoBobtaininganintervention
orderthroughacontestedprocess,perhapsasa
litigantinpersonorfundedbylegalaid.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tTheadditionalcostofalitigantinpersonis
estimatedtobe$6
0.
Inthiscase,theCLC’sfacilitationofseparation
islikelytohaveminimisedsocialcostssuch
aspoliceinterventions(collectingproperty,
interventionorderbreaches)anddamageor
lossofhouseholdgoods.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tThereislikelytohavebeenaconsiderable
benefitarisingfromtheapparentconciliation
roletakenbytheCLChoweverthisbenefitis
difficulttoestimate.Somepossiblebenefits
include:
Costoflosthouseholdgoods.Thiswouldonly
beacostif,forexample,thepartnerdisposed
ofthegoodstothetip,asatthewholeof
communitylevel,oneperson’slosswouldbe
another’sgain.Itisdifficulttoestimatethe
valueofhouseholdgoodsonaverage,however
in200
3-04,theaveragehouseholdspent
$52perweekonhouseholdfurnishingsand
equipment.7Assumingthelifeofhousehold
goodsis1
0years,thissuggestsreplacement
valuemaybeoftheorderof$
30,000,and
splitting50:50,thereplacementvalueofgoods
foronepersoncouldbeestimatedat$
15,000.
Alternatively,policemayhavebeeninvolved
inrecoveringgoods.In201
0theoperating
budgetfortheVictorianPolicewas$1,85
9million.
8 Inthesameperiodtherewere
795,00
0responsesrecorded,
9 givingan
averagecostperresponseofabout$2,34
0.This
islikelytobeanupperendestimate,asthe
costsincludesthecostoftheHighwayPatrol
andtrafficinfringementsarenotrecordedas
crimes.Budgetbreakdownbyprogramarea
wouldenableabetterestimatebutthisis
notavailable.Inadditionthereislikelytobe
amagistrate’shearing,estimatedpreviously
at$33
0.Additionalcostscouldarisefrom
custodialsentencing.In201
0theoperating
expensefor“enforcingcorrectionalorders”
was$56
7millionandthetotalnumberof
prisonerdayswas1.656million,givingadaily
costperprisonerof$
340.
10Atwodaycustodial
sentencewouldthencost$68
0,givingatotal
costofaround$ 3,350.
Thebenefithasbeenassessedat$
3,35
0.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
3. A
dvic
e
Chadsoughttoproposeanumberofrefugees
underAustralia.soffshorehumaniatarian
program.Oneofhisapplicationshadbeen
refused.HesoughtanFOIregardingthe
reasonsforrefusal.Adraftrequestforaccessto
documentswaspreparedbutnotsent.Hewas
advisedbytheCLCthatheshouldberealistic
regardingthenumberofpeoplehecould
realisticallypropose,andfocushiseffortson
thosepeople.
TheacceptanceofrefugeesintoAustraliawould
appeartobebasedonhumanitarianratherthan
economicreasons.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tNil
Thereisasocialcostassociatedwiththepreparation
andconsiderationofsponsorshipandvisa
applicationsandFOIapplications.Itislikelythat
appropriateadvicefromtheCLCledtoareductionin
applicationswhichmayhavehadlimitedlikelihood
ofsuccess.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tIn 201
0thegovernmentsubsidyoftheDepartment
ofImmigrationandCitizenshipwas$1,18
4million.
11
Inthesameperiod,4,322,710permanentand
temporaryvisasweregranted,
12givingacostper
visagrantedofabout$27
0.Applicationswillbe
moreorlessexpensivedependingonthedegreeof
assessment,andthereareactivitiescoveredbythe
Departmentthatdonotrelatedirectlytovisassuch
asbordercontrol.Nonethelesstheestimategives
someideaoftheorderofmagnitude.Ifitisassumed
thattheadviceoftheCLCledtoMnotmakingone
application,thenthebenefitisassessedat$27
0.
Noneidentified.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tNil
4. A
dvic
e
Dhadanintellectualdisabilityandwasthe
fatherofachild.Hehadseparatedfromthe
motherandhadregularcontactwiththechild.
Henolongerwantedtocontactthechildasthe
motherwasabusivetowardshimandacted
inappropriately.Hedidnotwishtoapplyforan
interventionorderandthoughtitwasbestto
nolongerseethechildrenbutwasconcerned
thathisbreachoftheaccessorderwould
resultinproblems.Hewasadvisedthatbynot
contactingthechildrenhewouldbeinbreach
oftheaccessorderbutthatthemotherwould
beunlikelytorespondtothisbreach.
Thereisevidencethatchildreninjointcustody
(followingrelationshipbreakdown)arebetter
adjusted(acrossarangeofpsychologicaltesting
instruments)bycomparisonwithchildren
insolecustodyarrangements.13Suchlackof
‘adjustment’mayhaveeconomicconsequences
withrespecttoemploymentandrelianceona
rangeofsupportandwelfareservicesandthis
isreflectedins6
5DAAoftheFamilyLawAct
1975(Commonwealth)wherejointparentingis
assessedinthecontextofthebestinterestsof
thechildandinpracticality.Atthesametime,
thereareconsiderablecostsassociatedwith
familyviolenceandwithchildabuse.14,15
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tForabenefitfromtheoperationofthelawinthis
case,itwouldbenecessaryforaneconomically
inefficientoutcometoariseintheabsenceofthe
legalcentre.Whilethereisalikelytobeacost
associatedwiththechildonlyseeingoneparent,
thiscostisdifficulttoquantifyandisprobably
offsetbyothercostsincurredifDwastocontinue
toseethechild.
Dreceivedappropriateadvicerelativelyeasilyby
accessingtheCLC.Duetohisintellectualproblems,it
islikelythathewouldhavehaddifficultyaccessing
aprivatelawyerorobtaininginformationthrough
otheravenues.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tNil
IfDhadcontinuedtoaccessthechildren,itis
likelyaninterventionorderwouldberequired
witharangeofcostsassociated.D’sdecision
appearstohaveavoidedthesecosts.
estim
ate
of b
enefi
tThecostofobtaininganinterventionorderhas
beenassessedat$33
0.Thisexcludesanycosts
arisingfrombreachorenforcement.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
5. C
ase
Ewashomeless(livingwithafriendorrelative)
andwishedtochangeherwillasaresultof
separatingfromherhusband.Anewwillwas
draftedupchangingtheexecutorfromher
husbandtoherdaughterandnamingher
childrenasherbeneficiaries.
Thereisabenefittosocietyfrompeoplehaving
willsinplaceinthatdisputes,withresultantcost,
regardingthedisposaloftheperson’sassets
areavoided.Thehusbandbeingnamedasan
executorcouldhaveledtocostsasbeneficiaries
mayhaveobjectedandacourtprocessand
appointmentofanadministratormayhavebeen
incurred.Alsothechildrenwouldhavehadto
contestthewilliftheywishedtobetreatedas
beneficiaries.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
ProbatemattersareheardintheSupremeCourt
ofVictoria.In 200
8-09therewereabout7,300
finalisationsintheSupremeCourtofVictoria.16
Overthesameperiodexpenditurewas$50
million.
17Thisisanetcostperfinalisation
ofabout$6,85
0.Themediancostislikely
tobethebestestimatehowevernodatais
availabletoestimatethisvalue.Theaverage
costperfinalisationof$6,85
0islikelytobean
overestimate.Itisalsonotedthatinthiscasethe
benefitislikelytooccursometimeinthefuture.
Assuming20yearsat7%,thenetpresentvalueof
$6,850isaround$1,770andthisistakenasthe
benefit.
Nobenefitsidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
6. C
ase
FsoughtanInterventionOrderagainst
herlandlordaspartofanongoingdispute
regardingtherentalpropertyanddamage
toherpersonalpropertyasaresultofthe
landlord’sactions.Shewascurrentlylivingwith
afriend.Thatapplicationwenttocourtwhich
waswhentheCLCbecameinvolvedaspartof
theirinterventionorderprogram.Anagreement
wasreachedthatthelandlordwouldclean
andreturnherproperty,andthatallelectrical
itemswouldbechecked.Theapplicationforan
interventionorderwasnotprogressed.
Generallyitiseconomicallyefficientforviolence
tobeavoided,howeverinthiscaseitisdoubtful
iftheInterventionOrderwouldhaveaddressed
theproblem.Itisalsoeconomicallyefficientfor
negligencetobeattributed.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
TheengagementoftheCLCledtoanegotiated
settlementinacrimoniouscircumstancesand
withoutfurthercourtaction.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nilasthematterhadgonetocourt.
Itisunlikelythattheinterventionorderwould
havesolvedtherealproblems,thesebeing
repairandreturnofpossessionsandadispute
regardingnonpaymentofrent,andthatthe
grantingoftheinterventionorderwouldhave
incurredadditionalcostsassociatedwith
enforcement.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofenforcementofanintervention
orderhasbeenassessedaboveat$
3,35
0.In
addition,additionalcourtortribunalcosts
wouldbeincurredtoresolvetheunderlying
dispute.In200
9/10,VCATfundingwas$36.8
millionand84,806caseswerefinalised.
18This
isabout$
430perfinalisation.Hencethetotal
benefitisaround$ 3,780.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
7. A
dvic
e
GhadnotbeenissuedacertificatebyherTAFE
collegeasshehadnotcompletedaplacement
requirementofthecourseduetodifficultiesin
travel.Shebelievedshehadbeendiscriminated
against.Shewascounselledtousethecollege’s
grievanceprocedure.
Itcouldbeseenthatdiscriminationmaynotbe
economicallyefficient,insofarasdiscrimination
resultsinpeoplenotbeingallocatedtotheir
mostefficientuse.Howeverinthealternative,
legislationaimedtoavoiddiscriminationthrough
positivediscriminationmaynotbeeconomically
efficienttotheextentitprovideseconomicrent
toaparticularinterestgroup.Itcouldalsobe
consideredanequitymeasure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytohavebeenasignificantreductionin
transactioncostsandadministrationcostsincurred
bySpursuingacasewithlittlemerit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Basedoncostsofadministrativereviewcalculated
above,thebenefitislikelytobearound$ 3-400.
Thisisaroundoneday’swagesforaprofessional
personandonthisbasisseemsreasonable.The
benefitistakenas$35
0.
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
8. A
dvic
e
Hhadtakenhisyoungsonfromhisexpartner
ashethoughtthechildwasindanger.Hewas
concernedthatthisactionwouldadversely
affecthispositioninanyfuturecustody
hearing.Hewasadvisedthatastherewere
noordersinplaceitisunlikelythathisactions
wouldprejudicefutureproceedings.
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereisasignificantsocialcostassociated
withabusedchildrenandwithfostercare.If
thefatherwasunsureofhisposition,hemay
haveleftthebabywiththemother,placing
itindanger.Itisnotedthatthebenefitcould
havebeenincreasedbyrecommending
mediationbetweenthefatherandthemother
asthiswouldbelikelytosavecostsdownthe
trackwithregardtofacilitatinganearlyfamily
lawoutcomeandavoidingopportunitiesfor
enmitytodevelopbetweentheparties.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Tayloretalestimatethat 177,300children
experiencedabusein200
7atalifetimecost
of$6,71
2million.
19Thisisanaveragelifetime
costperchildofabout$38,000andthiscould
betakenasthebenefitfromtheCLCadvice.
9. A
dvic
e
Ihadcrashedhercarandhadbeencharged
withdangerousdriving.Herlicensewas
suspendedpendingapsychiatricreport.As
shewasexperiencingacutementalillnessshe
soughttoappealthesuspension.Asshewas
eligibleforlegalaid,shewasreferredtothem.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
TheCLCfacilitatedtheefficientreferralofthe
filetolegalaid.Peoplewithmentalillnessesand
similarproblemscanhavedifficultynavigating
theirwaythroughbureaucracies,withconsequent
administrativecostsandlossoftime.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Assessmentofbenefit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
10. C
ase
J’spreviouspartnerissubjecttoanintervention
orderandiscurrentlyinjailforbreachesofthat
interventionorder.Hewillbereleasedshortly.
Afearsforhersafetyandthatofherchild.She
wasadvisedtoreportapreviousbreachofthe
interventionorderthatresultedincharges
againstherpreviouspartner.Shewasalso
givenadviceregardingaBsafekit,anotification
systemforthosewithaninterventionorder,at
riskoftheinterventionorderbeingbreached
andwhohavehadariskassessmentbyafamily
violenceservice.
Thereisapublicbenefitarisingfromtheproper
operationofthelegalsystem.Iftheintervention
orderisnotenforceditismeaninglessandwill
notserveitsfunctionofpreventingviolence.
Failuretoenforcetheinterventionordermay
haveresultedinfurthersocialcostsincluding
thepersonalsafetyofthemotherandchild,
andothercostssuchasthemotherneedingto
relocatetoavoidthepreviouspartner.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
AccessEconomics2
0 estimatethelifetimecosts
pervictimofdomesticviolenceat$43,285.21This
valueimproperlyincludes$5,97
5intransfers.
Deductingthis,thebenefitisestimatedat
$37,00
0.
Awasgivendirectiononhowtoproceed,facilitating
herengagementwiththelegalsysteminthemost
efficientway.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
11. A
dvic
e
Khadamentalillnessandwasaggrieved
regardinghisinvoluntarycommittal.Hewished
tosuethehospitalbutwasadvisedbytheCLC
thathehadnocourseofaction.
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
TimelyadvicefromtheCLCmayhaveavoided
furthercostselsewhereinthelegalsystemifKhad
pursuedthematterasalitigantinperson.Suchcosts
arelikelytobeexacerbatedbyhismentalillness.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Costshavebeenestimatedpreviouslyat$
330.
Noneidentified.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
12. A
dvic
e
HerintellectuallydisabledchildliveswithL
butthedaughterisviolentandLisconcerned
forthesafetyofherself,herhusbandandher
otherchild.Shewasadvisedtoseetheduty
lawyeratthemagistratescourtandapplyforan
interventionorder.
Thereisaconsiderablecostassociatedwith
familyviolenceandthepurposeofintervention
orders,amongotherthings,istoavoidthese
costs.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofassaultwasestimatedat$
1,80
0per
assaultin20
01,22orabout$2,40
0intoday’s
dollars.Thisdoesnotincludethecostofpolice,
courtactionorincarcerationwiththesecosts
estimatedpreviouslyataround$3,350,givinga
totallikelycostof$
5,75
0forasignificantassault.
Herunderstandingoftheprocesstobefollowed
throughtimelyadviceprobablyreducedpersonal
andadministrativecostsassociatedwithfindinga
solutiontoherproblem.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Ifcircumstancesdeterioratedsothatthe
daughtercouldnolongerlivewithher,thereis
likelytobeasignificantsocialcostinvolvedin
providingsupportedcareandaccommodation
forthedaughter.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 201
0DisabilityServicesintheVictorian
DepartmentofHumanServicesprovided
residentialaccommodationsupportto5,20
0clientsatanannualcostof$
584million,or
$112,300perclient.23Thisisequivalentto
$1.19millioninNetPresentValueover2
0yearsat7%.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
13. A
dvic
e
M’spropertybackedontothreetownhouses.
Herfenceneededrepairinghowevertwoof
threeneighboursrefused.Shewasadvisedto
usethe“NoticetoFence”processtoresolveher
problem.Theprocesswasoutlinedtoher.
Munderstoodwheretheresponsibilitylay,that
isthatitissharedbetweenthelandholders.This
avoidedaneconomicallyinefficientoutcome
wherebyshemayhavepaidforallofthefence,or
alternativelywentwithoutafence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Administrativeandpersonalcostswerealsoreduced
throughknowingthecorrectprocesstofollow.For
example,Mmayhavegonedirectlytocourtwithout
aproperbasisifshehadnotproperlyservednotice
ontheotherparties,incurringadditionalexpensefor
herandforsociety.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
14. A
dvic
e
N’sexpartnerhadbeenmakingpaymentsona
carfinancedandregisteredinN’snameinlieu
ofpayingchildsupport.Thepartneradvised
ofanintentiontodivorceandstoppedmaking
paymentsonthecar,whichwasrepossessed.
Nhadsomesavingsandwasadvisedtocome
toanarrangementwiththefinancecompany
regardingpayingofftheoutstandingamount.
Shewasadvisedshecouldrecoverthismoney
aspartofthepropertysettlementassociated
withthedivorce.Shewasalsoadvisedto
formalisechildsupportarrangements.
Theapportionmentofresponsibilityunder
contractisimportantforensuringfinance,for
example,continuestobeofferedatthelowest
possibleprice.IfNdefaultedonherloan,arange
ofcostswouldbeincurredbysocietyincluding
thecostsofrepossessionandsaleofthecar,with
thiscostprobablybornebyN.Anyshortfallin
valuewouldalsobebornebysocietyintheform
ofhigherinterestrates.Thesecostswereavoided
bytheproperapplicationofthelaw.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Arangeof‘deadweight’costswillbeincurred
withtherepossessionandsaleofacar.The
followingisbasedona 200
6HoldenCommodore
valuedatanaverageof$9,50
0.24
PicklesAuctionsinMelbournechargeafeeof
$770pervehicleforasuccessfulsale.25Vehicles
soldatauctionsellforawholesaleprice,and
sotherewouldbeexpectedtobeanotherloss.
Togivesomeidea,Redbook
26showsa25%
differencebetweentradeinpriceandprivate
saleprice.Ifthetradeinpricereflectswholesale
prices,thentheexpectedlossis$2,40
0.A
repossessionoperatorinMelbourneestimated
around$1,20
0forthisrepossessionincluding
towingchargestoMelbourne.Hencethetotal
costofrepossessionandsaleisestimatedat
$4,370withthiscostbornebythecarowner.
Nobenefitevident
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Formalisingarrangementsarelikelytoleadto
reducedcostsinthefuturearisingfrom‘back
dating’andrecoveryofoutstandingmoney.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thechildsupportagencyreportsacostper
caseof$
585.
27
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
15. A
dvic
e
OcontactedtheCLCregardinginitiationof
divorceproceedings.Hewasgivenanoverview
oftheprocessandprovidedwithacopyofthe
divorcekit.
Relationshipbreakdown,separationanddivorce
areafactofoursocietywithourlegalsystem
facilitatingseparation.Fromaneconomic
perspective,weappeartohavetakentheviewas
asocietythatthebenefitstochildrenfromnot
livinginahomewhereconflictexistsorwhere
parentsareunhappyexceedthesocialcostsof
familybreakdownsuchaswelfarepayments
tosingleparentsandtheeffectsofpovertyon
children.Inaddition,arangeofmeasures,such
assharingpropertyandmaintenance,arein
placetominimisethosesocialcosts.Henceitis
economicallyefficienttofacilitateseparationat
minimumcost.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Itislikelythathavingproperinformationand
understandingthestepstobefollowedledtoa
reductioninadministrativecostsincurredelsewhere
inthelegalsystemassociatedwithdealingwith
inquiriesfromO.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
16. C
ase
PcontactedtheCLCregardinganintervention
ordersoughtbyhisestrangedwife.TheCLC
facilitatedhisagreementtoanintervention
orderwithoutmakinganyadmissionstothe
allegations.Thematterwasresolvedatthe
mentionstage.
Generallyitiseconomicallyefficientforviolence
tobeavoided.Itisnotclearthatthiswasthe
casehere,astheinterventionordermayhave
beenastrategicmovebytheestrangedwifeto
improveherbargainingpositioninanydivorce
proceedingsandthisseemstohavebeenP’s
concern.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
IftheCLChadnotassistedtheman,thenthe
processmayhavegonetocontest,withanincrease
inadministrativecosts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Allow 50%savingonaverageselfrepresented
magistrate’scasecostestimatedaboveat$
330gives
abenefitof$
160.
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
17. A
dvic
e
QcontactedtheCLCregardinghisrejected
claimagainstcouncilfordamagetoacar
causedbyalimbfallingfromatree.Hehadnot
lodgedaclaimwiththeinsurer.Hewasadvised
tolodgeaclaimwiththeinsurancecompany
andtoseektheinsuranceexcessfromthe
council.
IftheCLChadnotassistedQmayhavebeenin
thepositionofpayinginsurancepremiumsand
incurringthecostsofdamageregardless.This
wouldleadtoamarketfailure,astheinsurance
companywouldnotseethefullcostofproviding
insurance.Properadministrationofinsurance
throughengagingthecontractiseconomically
efficient.Insofarascouncilwasresponsible
forthedamage,properallocationofriskis
economicallyefficient.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofrepairswasnotknown.Assuminga
repaircostof$
3,00
0andaninsuranceexcessof
$1,000,thebenefitisassessedat$2,00
0.
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
18. A
dvic
e
PcontactedtheCLCregardingsponsoringa
migranttoAustraliaunderaskilledmigrantion
visa.Hewasreferredtoanimmigrationlawyer
ashedidnotfittheCLCcriteria(theirfocusis
refugeesandfamilyreunification).
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thematterwasnotprogressedfurther
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
19. C
ase
Qhadlostherjobduetostressanddepression,
wasunabletomakeherhomepayments
andhadbeenstrugglingforsometime.She
wasadvisedtosellherhomeandpayouther
debts.Anagreementwasnegotiatedwiththe
bankwherebyshewouldpaytheoutstanding
payments($3,04
0)andplaceherhouseon
themarketratherthanhavethebankseize
possession.Unfortunately,theladydidnot
proceedwithplacingherhouseonthemarket
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobe
responsiblefortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Itwouldbeabetteroutcomeforherifshesold
thehouseratherthanbanksellingit,asany
expensesincurredbythebankcomeoutofher
equityinthehome.Ifthehomeissoldcheaply
thenthebuyerisbetterofftothedegree
thattheownerisworseoff,thatisthereisno
overallsocialcost,howevertransactioncosts
havealsobeenincurredwhichareofnobenefit
tosocietyandtheseshouldbeconsidereda
cost.Hencethenegotiatedsettlementwould
havebeenineverybody’sbestinterestsdueto
thereductionintransactioncosts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. A
dvic
e
Rwasconcernedastowhetheranorganisation
hadaliabilityifdefamatoryorincorrect
informationwaspostedonawebsite.Hewas
advisedthattherewouldbelittleornoliability
howeveranythingthatdoesnothaveapproval
shouldbecorrectedordeleted.Thecasewas
thenclosed.
Nobenefitidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thematterwasnotprogressedfurther.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. C
ase
Thasapsychiatricdisorderresultinginher
keepingalargenumberofcatsaspets.She
hasnotbeenhospitalisedforsomeyears
anditisthoughtthatherattachmenttoher
petshasplayedalargepartinthis.Dueto
thelargenumberofpetsandthestateofher
property,councilissuedheranoticetoreduce
thenumberofpetstotwo.TheCLCcontacted
councilandnegotiatedanarrangement
wherebyshewasabletokeepareasonable
numberofanimals.Shecleanedherproperty
andagreedtomaintaincleanlinessand
installedacatshelter.
Presumablythelawaroundlimitingthenumberofpetsistoensuretheyareproperly
lookedafterandarenotanuisancetoothers.Thisoutcomecouldbeexpectedtobe
economicallyefficienttotheextentthatcosttoothersisavoided,andthosecostsmight
benegativeratherthanpositive,inthesensethatpeoplewouldpayapricetoavoid
consumingthingssuchassmellandnoise.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Clearlythereisacosttoneighboursinreducedamenityfromnoiseorsmell,butthereis
littleornodataonwhichtoestimatesuchcosts.
Negotiatinganagreement
withcouncilprobably
reducedtransactioncosts,
forexampleifcouncilhad
toenforcetheorderfortwo
pets,expensewouldbe
involvedinremovingexcess
petsandhavingthemput
down.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofamagistrate’s
courthearingandpolice
enforcementhasbeen
estimatedpreviouslyat
$2,670.
IfTwasplacedunderstress
fromtheremovalofher
pets,thiscouldresultinher
hospitalisation,withhigh
resultantcostscomparedto
livinginherownhome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efits
In 200
9-10Psychiatric
DisabilityRehabilitationand
SupportServicessupported
13,383clientsatanoutput
costof$
90.3million.
28Thisis
$6,750perclient,or$
72,000
aspresentvalueover20
years.
2. C
ase
TheUsappliedforcustodyoftheirchildV
whocurrentlyresideswiththem.Hermother
hadcustodyofVhowevershewasfoundto
beatriskofharmarisingfromviolenceand
exposuretodruguse.TheCLCfacilitatedthe
grandparent’ssuccessfulapplicationforVtolive
withthem.
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildrengrowinguptobeproductive
membersofsociety.Conversely,ifpeoplehave,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmental
problemsfrompoorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscanresultinsignificant
socialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfaredependence,crimeorusageofarangeofsupport
services.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thelifetimecostofchildabuseandneglecthasbeenestimatedaboveat$
38,000perchild
anditislikelythiscosthasbeenavoided.
TheCLCensuredtheprocess
wasefficientcomparedto
thegrandparentsactingas
litigantsinperson.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asestimatedabove,this
benefitisoftheorderof$
60.
Ifthechildwasplacedin
temporaryorfostercareat
stateexpense,considerable
expensewouldbeincurred.
Inaddition,placementwith
thepaternalgrandparents
wasagoodoutcomefor
Vbecauseshecontinued
tohavecontactwithher
grandparentsandwithother
familymembers.Lossor
reductioninthiscostmay
haveledtoadditionalsocial
costsarisingfrompoor
developmentonthepart
ofV.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assessedabove.
3. C
ase
Wcurrentlyhascustodyofherchildwithher
previousdomesticpartnerhavingaccessrights.
Hehadpreviouslyhadcustodyoftheson
howeverhewasplacedwithXasthechildwas
consideredtobeatrisk.TheCLCassistedXin
obtaininganinterventionorderprotectingboth
herandherchild.
Thelifetimecostofchildabuseandneglecthasbeenestimatedaboveat$
38,000perchild
anditislikelythiscosthasbeenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildrengrowinguptobeproductive
membersofsociety.Conversely,ifpeoplehave,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmental
problemsfrompoorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscanresultinsignificant
socialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfaredependence,crimeorusageofarangeofsupport
services.Thereisalsoacostassociatedwithassault.
Asestimatedabove,this
benefitisoftheorderof$
60.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Wwasrepresentedtoa
contestedhearing.The
processwasmoreefficient
thanifshehadbeena
litigantinperson.
Noneidentified.
Nil.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Sele
cted
‘hig
h va
lue’
case
s
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
4. C
ase
Ylivesonapensionandsuffersfromanxiety
anddepression.Shewascalledbyher
doctor’ssurgerytocomeintoseethedoctor.
Sheconsideredthisurgentanddroveher
unregisteredcartothesurgery.Shewasissued
aninfringementnoticebypolicefor$
511
fordrivinganunregisteredcar.Yapproached
theCLCasthematterwasproceedingto
enforcement.TheCLCwasabletonegotiatea
diversionwherebyYmadea$1
00donationto
acharity.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforthetaxburdentobespreadacrossthecommunityandfor
vehiclestoberoadworthy.Hencedrivingunregisteredvehiclesispenalised.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
ThereisacosttosocietyinthatYdidnotpaythefineandthislowersthepriceofbreaking
thelaw.Conversely,shehaspaidsomepriceanditislikelythatthecourttooktheviewthat
inhercircumstancesthepriceshepaidexceededanybenefittoherfromherunlawfulact.
Hencethebenefitisassessedatnil.
Typicalcourtcostshave
beenassessedaboveat
$330.Inadditionthere
wouldbeenforcementcosts
butnoreadilyavailabledata
isavailable.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Theprocesswas
streamlinedcomparedto
anenforcementprocess
involvingcourttimeand
policetime.
Theadditionalstressand
expenseofpayingthe
finewouldbelikelytobe
displacedelsewherethrough
accessingotherservices.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
5. C
ase
Zisapensionerlivingfromweektoweekand
withlittleornoassets.Hewenttopurchase
newtyresforhiswife’scarandwasencouraged
totakeonacreditcardwith,eventually,a
$10,00
0limit.Itislikelyhedidnotproperly
understandthequantumandtermsof
repaymentofthearrangement.Heincurred
a$9,544debtagainstthecardandlackedthe
meanstomaketherepayments.Thecreditcard
companyissuedadefaultnotice.Zapproached
theCLC.Zwasessentially‘judgementproof’
duetohiscircumstances.Hisdetails,along
withdetailsofanother87casestotallingover
$600,000wereforwardedtothecreditcard
companybyanotherCommunityLegalCentre
undertakinga‘bulkdebtnegotiationscheme’.
Itappearsthat,actingonappropriateadvice
andfullinformation,thecreditcardcompany
madeacommercialdecisiontowaivethedebt,
probablybecauseoftheadministrativecosts
ofundertakingtheprocessandacertaintythat
theexpectedreturnwas$0.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thedefaulthascostaround$ 1
0,00
0whichthecreditcardcompanywillrecoverfrom
increasedinterestrates.IftheactionbytheCLChadtheeffectoftighteningthecredit
cardcompany’slendingpoliciesleadingtoreductionsininterestrates,thentherewillbe
abenefittosociety.Thebenefitisdifficulttoquantify.InMarch 201
1,theReserveBankof
AustraliareportedinterestaccruingcreditcarddebtinAustraliaof$
36.4billion.
29A0.1
percentagepointreductionininterestrateswouldrepresentabenefittothecommunity
of$36.4milliondollars.Thiscalculationgivessomeideaofthemagnitudeofthepublic
benefitassociatedwithexcessiveinterestratesbecauseofhighriskprofilestakenby
lenders.
TheAustralianPrudentialRegulationAuthority(APRA)reported$1,64
0billionofgrossloans
andadvancesbyindividualbanksinAustraliaforApril20
11.TheCommonwealthBankof
Australiaprovides2
1.75%ofthisamount.30Forthe201
0financialyeartheCommonwealth
BankofAustraliareported$2,07
5millioninimpairmentexpense.Grossloanswritten
offfortheperiodwere$2,073millionandLendingAssetswere$5
00,760million,giving
adefaultrateof0.4%.ApplyingthisratetotheAPRAdata,annualimpairmentexpense
(takenasthecostofloandefault)forAustraliaisestimatedtobe$6.56billion(or$
328per
personannuallyacrossapopulationof20million)andthiscostisbornebytheAustralian
community.Thisdoesnotincludeloansheldbythenon-banksector.Again,ifmorejudicious
lendingpoliciesledtoa0.1%(areductionofonedefaultinonethousand)decreasein
default,thebenefittotheAustraliancommunitywouldbearound$7million.
Foranyonelender,itwouldbeexpectedthattheriskpositionwouldbeoneinwhichthe
marginalexpectedprofitfromaloanisequaltothemarginalexpectedloss.Astheloss
increases,thatistheprobabilityoflossmultipliedbytheexposure,somusttheprofit.
Differentpeoplehavegreaterorlesserriskprofiles,andarangeoflendingproductsareon
offerwithinterestratesreflectingtheriskofcustomers.Forexample,homeownersmay
borrowmoneyat 7%,whereashigh-riskborrowersmaybepaying15%interesttoafinance
companyor1
00%interesttoa“paydayloan”company.Thismeansthattheloanmarketis
highlydifferentiatedwithregardtorisk.
Analternativeviewisthathigherinterestratesareaformofinsurance,withthoseless
likelytodefaultpayingalowerinterestrate.Onthisview,thelendingmarketisefficient
becauseofdifferentiation,whicheachindividualriskpricedseparately,althoughinpractice
riskispricedingroups.Thisisthepreferredview,andsothebenefitisassessedaszero.
Tran
sact
ion
cost
sThecreditcardcompanyhasbeensavedaconsiderableadministrativecostiftheywent
throughadebtrecoveryprocessandwereunsuccessful.Thatsavingisanadditionalsaving
tosocietyastheadditionaladministrativecostswouldberecoveredthroughincreased
interestrates.Agooddealofcourttimeisalsolikelytohavebeensaved.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Ifthelenderpursuedtheirmoney,itwouldinvolveadministrativeeffortontheirpart,
acourthearingtoobtainjudgementandenforcementinvolvingthesheriff’soffice.No
informationisavailableontheVictorianSheriff’sOfficecosts,butthecostinNSWis
estimatedbelowat$
213permatter.Courtcostshavebeenpreviouslyestimatedat$
230,
givingatotalbenefitof$
440.
Itislikelythattheadditional
financialstressofattempting
torepaytheloanor
defaultingwouldhave
increasedrelianceonother
supportservices.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Ifthelenderhadsucceeded
inobtainingmoneyfrom
Z,itisquitelikelythatthe
moneywouldhavebeen
sourcedultimatelyfrom
thecommunity,throughfor
example,relianceoncharities
andotherhandouts.The
benefithasbeenassessed
asnilduetolackofdata.It
isalsonotedthattheseare
generallytransfers.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
6. C
ase
Awasinvolvedinamulticarmotorvehicle
accidentwherehewasatfault.Hisvehicle
wasnotinsured.Mhadregularcasualwork
whichherequiredhislicensefor,hadfewassets
andlivedinpublichousing.Hefacedlossof
hislicenseandadebtofaround$2
0,00
0.In
addition,hewasbehindinutilitybillsandowed
moneyforinternetservices.TheCLCwasable
tonegotiatewiththeinsurancecompanyand
twoofthecreditorsforawaiverofthedebt,
probablybasedontheircommercialassessment
thatthelikelyreturnofpursuingtheclaimwas
$0.Hewasrequiredtopayafine,enterintoa
goodbehaviourbondandundertakeadriving
coursebutnoconvictionwasrecorded,andhe
wasabletokeephislicense.
Thereisasocialcostinthatnonpaymentofthisdebtwillleadtoinsurancecostsbeing
higherthantheywouldbeotherwise.Thisisthesocialcostofthemoralhazardofnot
carryinginsurance,withAknowingthathecouldnotbeforcedtopayforhisactions.This
isacosttosociety,asinsurancepremiumsarehigherthantheywouldbeifeveryonewas
insured,therebyreducingtheconsumption(orpurchase)ofinsurance.Inthiscasethat
costappearstohavebeenaccepted,probablywithregardtotheperceivedquantumof
externalitieslikelytobegeneratedfromenforcement.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
Thereisabenefittothe
insurancecompaniesin
thattheydidnotexpend
administrativeeffort
seekingtorecovermoney
wheretheirchancesof
successwereclosetozero.
Thisisasocialbenefitin
thatsuchcostswillbeadded
toinsurancepremiums,
causingthemtobehigher
thantheywouldbe
otherwise.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,avalue
of$44
0hasbeenadoptedas
thecostofrecoveringdebt.
Inthiscasetherewerethree
creditorsandthebenefitis
assessedat$
1,32
0.
Themitigationofhisoffence
hadasignificantbenefit
toAinthatheretained
hislicense.Thismeanthe
couldcontinueworking,
andsocontributetothe
maintenanceofhimselfand
hisfamily,ratherthanliving
onCentrelinkpayments.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
IfAhadlosthisjob,almost
certainlyanotherperson
wouldhavetakenthejob,
therebyreducingtheranks
oftheunemployed,withthe
neteffectonemployment
zero.Hencethisbenefitis
assessedaszero.
7. C
ase
Bwasthesubjectofacommunitytreatment
orderfollowingherreleaseafterinvoluntary
hospitalisationforapsychiatricdisorder.The
episodecoincidedwiththebreakdownof
hermarriage.SheapproachedtheCLCwho
supportedherinahearingwiththeMental
HealthReviewBoard.Hertreatmentplan
wasrevisedandeventuallywithdrawn.Itwas
submittedthatheroriginaltreatmentplanwas
arrivedatbecauseundueregardwasgivento
theviewsofherestrangedhusbandandshe
hadlimitedEnglish.Sheiscurrentlyseeking
work.
Itisprobablethatthereisasignificanteconomicbenefitassociatedwithpeoplewith
psychiatricillnessmanagingtheirillnesswellandremainingsafeandhealthy.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nil
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nobenefitidentified.
Asarguedpreviously,ifshe
obtainedworkitwouldbe
asubstitutioninthatsome
otherunemployedpersondid
notobtainwork.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thereisasocialcost
associatedwiththe
implementationofthe
communitytreatment
ordercomparedto
casemanagementas
anoutpatient.Shehas
previouslyworkedand
thestigmaandside
effectsassociatedwith
thecommunitytreatment
ordermayhavereduced
herchancesofobtaining
employment,resultinginher
needingtoaccesswelfare
payments.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
8. C
ase
ItwasallegedthatChadenteredthehomeof
herformerpartnerandstolesomepersonal
property.Subsequentlybothobtained
interventionordersagainsteachotherwhich
shebreachedbysendinghimtextmessages.
TheCLCrepresentedher,negotiatingthe
withdrawalofeightoftencharges,withthese
chargesrelatedtotheallegedtheft.Cpleaded
guiltytobreachingtheinterventionorderand
themagistrateorderedcommunityservice
andagoodbehaviourbondwithnoconviction
recorded.
Thereisaneconomiccostassociatedwiththeftandwithviolence,andhencethereisan
economicbenefitassociatedwiththelawgeneratingapricefortheftandforviolencein
termsofsanctions.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Cmayhavebeen
unrepresentedatthe
hearing.Theprocessof
negotiationandpleading
guiltyprobablyleadto
reducedadministrative
andcourtcostsassociated
withthematter.Therewas
littlesubstantiationfor
thechargesoftheft.The
withdrawalofthesecharges
savedcourttimeandcosts
andshemayhavebeen
improperlyfoundguilty
whichwouldmeanthelegal
systemhadnotoperated
properly.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Jailtimemayhavebeen
avoided.Assumingtwodays
jail,thebenefitis$68
0.
Chadpreviouslyworkedas
achildcareworkeranda
criminalconvictionwould
havebeendetrimentalto
anyfutureemployment
prospects,increasing
herlikelihoodofbeing
dependentonCentrelink
paymentsinthefuture.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nilduetolikelysubstitution
ofemployment
9. C
ase
Ddroveoveracrestandcameacrossanother
carstoppedintheroadway.Shewasunable
tostopintimeandstrucktheothercar.It
appearedthatDwasselfinsured.Theinsurer
oftheothercarsoughttorecoverthecostsof
damageofaround$1
0,00
0.TheCLCassistedD.
Thecircumstancesweresuchthattherewas
likelytobecontributorynegligencefromboth
parties,andsotheinsurerwithdrewtheirclaim.
Theattemptbytheinsurancecompanytoshifttheirliabilitytoanotherpartyconstitutes
moralhazard,inthatitislikelythatiftheinsurancecompanywasdealingwithanother
insurancecompany,theywouldprobablyhaveagreedquitequicklytocontributory
negligence.Theresultingmarketdistortionisthatthosepayinginsuranceobtaintheir
insurancemorecheaplythanwouldotherwisebethecasetotheextentthattheinsurance
companyisabletoshifttheirliabilitytoothers(needtothinkaboutthissomemore).The
enforcementofanefficientmarketisinthepublicinterest.Againstthismustbesetthe
moralhazardofapersonoflimitedmeansdrivingacaroflittlevalueandnotcarrying
insuranceintheanticipationthattheirexpectedcostinthecaseofanaccidentisrestricted
tothevalueoftheircar.Generallyspeaking,thebenefitsofhavingincome,assetsandaline
ofcreditfaroutweightheadvantagesofbeingdebtproof.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Iftheinsurancecompany
hadpursuedtheclaim,
additionaladministrative
costswouldbeincurred,
bothinternallyandwithin
thecourtsystem.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asassessedpreviously,court
costswouldbeoftheorder
of$33
0,andtherewouldbe
additionaladministrative
coststotheinsurance
company.Thebenefithas
beenassessedat$33
0.
Noneidentified.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
10. C
ase
Ehadstolenatotalof$
520fromheremployer
onnumerous.Shewasunder18andneeded
moneyforamedicalprocedure.Shedidnot
useherownmoneyasherparentstrackedher
accountandshedidnotwantthemtoknow.
WiththeassistanceoftheCLC,sheadmitted
guiltandmaderestitution.Shewasgivena
diversionorder,requiringa$ 1
50donation,with
noconvictionrecorded.
Byoneview,theeconomicpurposeofthecriminaljusticesystemistoensuretheexpected
costofcrimeexceedstheexpectedbenefitofcrime.Hencethereisasocialcostiftheprice
paidbyEwastoosmalltoserveasadisincentivetoothers,meaningthatothersmaybe
morelikelytocommitsimilarcrimesinthefuture.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
PresumablythepricepaidbyEwassufficienttoactasdisincentivetowardsfuturetheftby
herandbyothers.Thebenefitisdifficulttoquantifyandisassessedasnil.
Ifthematterhadprogressed
toacontest,itislikelythat
courtcostswouldhavebeen
muchhigher.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Itseemsthatconsiderable
courttimehadgonetothe
matter,howeverthereis
likelytohavebeensome
saving.Againthisisdifficult
toquantify.
Ifacriminalconvictionwas
recorded,Emayhavehad
futuredifficultyinfinding
workandmayhavebecome
awelfarerecipient.Thereisa
costassociatedwithpeople
enteringthecriminaljustice
system,includingthecostof
incarcerationandthedanger
ofbecomingahabitual
criminal.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,
employmentislikelytobe
asubstitutionandsothe
benefitisassessedaszero.
11. C
ase
Bsufferedfromamentalillnessandhad
difficultymanagingherownaffairs.Shewas
duetobedischargedfromhospitalandwas
infinancialdifficulties.Hercaseworkerhad
appliedtohaveanadministratorappointed
toassistwithB’saffairs.Shepreferredthe
administratortobeapersonalfriendrather
thanStateTrustees.TheCLCfacilitatedthe
executionofapowerofattorney(whichisless
restrictive)andarrangedwiththecaseworker
fortheVCATapplicationforanadministratorto
bewithdrawn.
Thereisaneconomicbenefittosocietyifpeople’saffairsareproperlymanaged.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thebenefitisdifficulttoquantifyandhasbeenassessedaszero.
Settlingthematterby
negotiationreduced
expenditureinconducting
theVCATdetermination,
albeitattheexpenseof
additionalcostsbytheCLC.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,the
costofaVCATfinalisationis
about$
430
Administrationbyafriend
ratherthanthepublictrustee
reducedthepubliccostof
administrationmarkedly,
notingthatthefriendis
likelytoincursomecostsin
administeringheraffairs.
Thereislikelytobeabenefit
inencouragingsomeone
toremainasselfsufficient
aspossibleandavoiding
institutionalisation.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 200
8-09,TheOfficeof
thePublicAdvocatespent
$2.6millionproviding
guardianshipservicesto636
clients,3
1 orabout$4,09
0per
clientperyear.Overatwenty
yearlifeat7%,thisisanet
presentvalueof$
43,000for
oneperson.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
12. C
ase
Cwasfightingwithafriendandsoughtan
interventionorder.TheCLCnegotiatedwiththe
friendtosignanundertaking,withThavingthe
righttore-instatetheoriginalapplicationat
anytime.
Thereisacommunitycostassociatedwithviolence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thematterwasmostlikely
resolved.Itdidnotproceed
tocourt(withadditional
costs)andtheinstitution
ofaninterventionorder
mayhaveledtoescalation
withadditionalsocialcosts
associatedwithpolice
interventionsandcourt
hearings.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,thecost
ofobtaininganintervention
order(unrepresented)has
beenassessedat$33
0,with
alikelycostof$
3,35
0if
enforcementisrequired.
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
13. C
ase
Dhadachild,Ewhoisdevelopmentally
delayedandhasaseriesofbehaviourproblems
leadinghimtoactviolentlyattimes.F’sorthe
neighbour’sresponsetoviolenceoutbursts
hasbeentocallthepolice.Duetothenumber
ofcalloutsandbecauseofconcernsforthe
safetyoftheyoungerchild,policesoughtan
interventionorder,howeverFwantedEto
stayathome.TheCLCfacilitatedarangeof
negotiationsresultinginEprovidingalimited
undertakingandanumberofsupportsbeing
putinplace.
Thereisacommunitycostassociatedwithviolence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofassaultwasestimatedat$
1,80
0perassaultin200
1,32orabout$2,40
0in
today’sdollars.Thisdoesnotincludethecostofpolice,courtactionorincarcerationwith
thesecostsestimatedpreviouslyataround$3,350,givingatotallikelycostof$
5,75
0fora
significantassault.
Thecourtcostsofobtaining
theinterventionorderhave
beenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thishasbeenassessed
previouslyas$
330.
Thereislikelytobea
significantsocialcost
associatedwithboththe
gainingandenforcementof
theinterventionorder,such
aspoliceandcourtcosts
andthecostofthecriminal
justicesystem(escalation,
incarceration),andifEwere
requiredtoliveoutside
thefamilyhome,withthis
requiringsignificantlevelsof
support.Thiscosthasbeen
avoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 201
0DisabilityServices
intheVictorianDepartment
ofHumanServicesprovided
residentialaccommodation
supportto5,20
0clientsatan
annualcostof$
584million,
or$11
2,30
0perclient.Thisis
equivalentto$1.19million
inNetPresentValueover2
0yearsat7%.Thiswouldneed
tobediscountedtosome
degreeasarangeofsupport
serviceswereengaged.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
14. C
ase
Fwasservedwithawarrantrelatingtoa
relativelyminoroffence,involvingbreakinga
windowwhichoccurredmanyyearspreviously.
AtthattimeF’slifewasinsomedisarray
howeversincethenhercircumstanceshave
changedmarkedly.TheCLCapproachedthe
policetodropthechargesbuttheycontinuedto
pressthecharges.Themagistratedismissedthe
chargessubjecttoarestitutionorder.
Byoneview,theeconomicpurposeofthecriminaljusticesystemistoensuretheexpected
costofcrimeexceedstheexpectedbenefitofcrime.Hencethereisasocialcostiftheprice
paidbyFwastoosmalltoserveasadisincentivetoothers,meaningthatothersmaybe
morelikelytocommitsimilarcrimesinthefuture.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thepolicehavelimited
resourcesanditisinthe
publicinterestforthose
resourcestobecommitted
wheretheyobtainthe
greatestvalue.Testcases
suchasthisassistthepolice
innotcommittingresources
pursuingmattersoflittleor
novalue.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
15. C
ase
Gisamiddleagedmanwithaphysical
disability.Over1
0yearsprior,hisfatherH
arrangedforStateTrusteestobeappointedas
G’sadministratorashewasawarethatHmay
notbeabletoassisthissonashadbeenhis
practice.Gsoughttohavetheadministration
orderliftedonthebasisthatitwasnolonger
requiredandwassuccessful.
Thereisaneconomicbenefittosocietyifpeople’saffairsareproperlymanaged.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Gisnowabletomanage
hisownaffairsandthecost
ofpublicadministration
hasbeenavoided.There
isasecondarybenefitin
empoweringsomeoneto
managetheirownaffairs,
withthisperhapsbeinga
growthopportunityforG
inmakinghimlessreliant
onothersocialsupports
generallyinhislife.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 200
8-09,TheOfficeof
thePublicAdvocatespent
$2.6millionproviding
guardianshipservicesto636
clients,orabout$4,10
0per
clientperyear.Overatwenty
yearlifeat7%,thisisanet
presentvalueof$
43,000for
oneperson.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
16. C
ase
Hhadpaidchildsupportforhischildand
wasuptodateuntilhewasseriouslyinjured
inamotorvehicleaccident,resultinginH
beingunabletowork.Duetohischanged
circumstances,hisonlyincomesincethen
hasbeenwelfarepayments.Hehasaccrued
asignificantdebtwiththeChildSupport
Agency,muchofwhichwaspenalties,and
whichheisunabletopay.Itisnotedthatif
hehadcontactedtheChildSupportAgency
regardinghischangedcircumstances,itislikely
hispaymentswouldhavebeenreducedandhe
wouldnothavebeeninthesecircumstances.
TheCLCappliedtohavethedebtwaivedand
wassuccessful.
Ifchildrenareseenasacommodityofmarriage,aneconomicallyefficientoutcomeinterms
ofthenumberofchildrenonehasrequiresbothpartiestopaythepriceofchildrearing.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Zero.
Thereisapubliccost
associatedwithongoing
attemptsbytheChild
SupportAgencytorecover
themoneywhichisno
longerbeingincurred.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,thechild
supportagencyreportsa
costpercaseof$
585.
Therewerepositivehealth
outcomesforH,ashehas
clinicaldepressionand
thestressexacerbatedhis
condition.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
17. C
ase
IwasamigrantwithlimitedEnglish.Hewas
dismissedfromhisjobandapproachedtheCLC
regardingunfairdismissal.Duringconciliation,
itbecameapparentthatmuchoftheproblem
relatedtopoorcommunicationarisingfrom
I’slackofEnglishandtheemployer’sfailure
torespondtoappropriatelytothis.Iwas
reinstated.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobeallocatedtotheirbestuse.Atthesametime,
labourlawsmaynotbeeconomicallyefficientinsofarastheyencouragerentseekingby
certaingroupsinsociety.Alternatively,theymaybeconsideredanequitymeasure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Ihasregainedhisjobrather
thanbeingreliantonwelfare
payments.Hisemployer
hasretainedaskilledand
trainedworker.Theemployer
revieweditscommunication
strategywithitssignificant
Sudaneseworkforce
whichislikelytoleadto
improvedproductivityofthe
enterprise.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,
lossofemploymentisa
substitution.Theemployer
hassavedthecostoftraining
anewemployeebutthereis
nobasisonwhichtoassess
thisbenefit.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
18. C
ase
Jhasanintellectualdisability.Heenteredintoa
mobilephonecontractandincurredsignificant
debtwhichhewasunabletopay.Following
CLCrepresentationandconsiderationbythe
TelecommunicationsOmbudsman,thedebt
waswaivedbythephonecompany.Atthesame
timeanotherpartofthecompanypursuedthe
debtandthistooksometimeandefforttosort
out.
Thereisasocialcostwithdefaultbydebtorsinthatthecostofdefaultisaddedtotheprice
paidbyothersandconsequentlythecostofservicesisgreaterthanitwouldbeotherwise.
Thereisaninherenttensionbetweenthemoralhazardassociatedwithpeopleincurring
debtthattheyneverintendtorepay,therebyplacingacostontherestofsociety,and
misrepresentationorunconscionabilitybysalesman,wherebypeopleunderestimatethe
costofservicesandhenceconsumemorethantheywouldotherwise.Bothoutcomesare
inefficient.Thequestionthenbecomeswhethertheeconomicallyefficientoutcomeisbest
achievedbyplacingtheresponsibilitywiththecreditororthedebtor.Asasocietyweappear
tohavetakenasharedview,withthecreditorhavingsomeresponsibilityduetotheir
exposuretoloss,henceleadingtocreditchecksandthelike,andwiththedebtorhaving
someresponsibilityduetotheirexposuretoloss,suchaslossofassetsandgarnishee
orders.
Thephonecompanymayhaveunlawfullyrecoveredsomeoralloftheirlossbynegotiating
individuallywithuninformeddebtors,therebyrewardingthecompanyforrecklessly
contractingwiththoseunlikelytobeabletopay.Hencetheincurringofthelossbythe
phonecompanyplacesresponsibility(inthesecircumstances)wheretheinefficiencycanbe
bestaddressed,suchasthroughmorestringentvettingofcontractapplications.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Zero.
Thephonecompanycould
havesavedaconsiderable
administrativecostif
theywentthroughadebt
recoveryprocessandwere
unsuccessful.Thatsaving
isanadditionalsavingto
societyastheadditional
administrativecostswould
berecoveredthrough
increasedcostsofphone
rentals.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedabove,thecost
ofdebtrecoveryhasbeen
assessedat$
540.
Noneidentified
19. C
ase
KenteredAustraliaonaspousevisa.Sincethat
timeshehadhadachild.However,hermarriage
hadbrokendownduetodomesticviolence.As
shedidnothavepermanentresidency,shewas
indangeroflosinghervisa.TheCLCsuccessfully
appliedforpermanentresidencyforK.
Thereislikelytobeasignificantsocialcostassociatedwithsituationswhere:
•apersonstaysinasituationofdomesticviolenceduetoconcernsregardingthethreat
ofdeportation
•achildisleftinasituationofdomesticviolenceduetooneparentbeingdeportedor
forcedtoleaveAustralia
•anAustralianchildbeingdeniedthebenefitsofcitizenship.
Thesecostswereavoidedinthiscase.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofdomesticviolencehasbeenassessedaboveas$
37,000.
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Zero
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Zero
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
20. C
ase
L’sfamilyhadfledhiscountryoforiginand
travelledtoaneighbouringcountry,wherehe
livedformanyyearsasarefugee.Hethencame
toAustraliausingforgedIDandagainlived
hereasassylumseeker,andworkinginfulltime
andcasualpositions.HeapproachedtheCLC
toregularisehisstatus.Hisapplicationfora
protectionvisaduetohisrefugeestatuswas
successful.
Theeconomicbenefitsofacceptingrefugeesarenotapparent.Itislikelythatsuch
programsareexplainableinhumanitarianterms.Howeverthisviewalsosuggeststhat
acceptingrefugeesisapublicgood,thatisthatasasocietywearepreparedtopaysome
pricetoacceptrefugees.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Zero
IfLhadbeendetectedbythe
immigrationauthority,costs
wouldhavebeenincurredin
detainingorindeportingL.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
TheDepartmentof
Immigrationand
Citizenshipdoesnot
provideexpendituredata
onaprogrambasis.Using
otherdataabove,the
costofincarcerationhas
beenassessedataround
$340perday.Assuming
sixmonthsincarceration,
thebenefitisassessedat
$62,00
0.Thisislikelyto
beanunderestimate,as
itdoesnotincludecosts
ofassessingapplications
andanyjudicialreview
notingthattheDepartment
spent$
30milliononlegal
expenditurein200
9-10.33
Lisauseful,skilledand
productivememberof
Australiansocietyandhis
outputwouldhavebeen
lost,withanothermigrant
requiredtoreplacehim.
Noneidentified
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
geraldton Resource CentreArandomsampleoftwentycasesandtwentyadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedonecaseevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue,andtheeconomicbenefitsofthiscasewasalsoestimated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 32: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 20 $0 $2,860 $600 $173
RandomCases 20 $168,000 $8,820 $68,000
$12,241($4,241ifatrainingcoursewithanassessedbenefitof$160,000isexcluded)
SelectedCases 1 $224,000 $0 $0 $224,000
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10theAdvocacyandRightsCentrehadtotalexpensesofaround$520,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad684casesand2,645advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$8.8million,acostbenefitratioofabout17.
AlargebenefithasbeenassociatedwithatrainingsessioncarriedoutbytheCLCforanotherorganisation.Itisdebatableastowhetherthisbenefitshouldbeascribedtothelegalcentreratherthantotheotheragency.Excludingthistrainingsession,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$3.4million,acostbenefitrationofoversix.
Theaveragecostovercasesandbenefitsis$137,suggestingthecostbenefitratioonadvicesis1.3.Ascasesarelikelytotakemoreresourcesthanadvices,theeconomicreturnonadvicesislikelytobemarginal.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.Howeverintheworstcase,theCLCwouldneedtobeinstrumentalinoneinsixcasestobreakeven,henceitislikelythatapositivecostbenefitratioisachieved.
Onehighvaluecasewasidentified.IftheCommunityLegalCentrewasinstrumentalinfivesuchoutcomesintwoyears,thiswouldjustifythecostofthecentre.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. C
ase
AhadfourchildrenwithherpreviouspartnerB.They
haddivorcedandtwochildrenlivedwiththefather
whiletheotherchildrenlivedwiththemother.Bwas
chargedwithsexualabuseofthreeyounggirlsliving
inneighbouringhouses.Thechildrenwereremoved
totheirmother’scare.Followingcounselling,the
eldestdaughterrevealedshehadbeensexually
abusedbyherfather’sfriend,C.Cwaschargedand
pleadedguilty.Athenlearntthatherdaughtershad
beensexuallyabusedbytheirfatherfromanearly
age.Bwaschargedwithadditionaloffencesand
alsopleadedguilty.Theepisodehadasignificant
impactonAandherdaughterswithonesuffering
fromdepressionandveryaggressive.Awasunableto
workduetoongoingpersonalandfamilystress.The
CLCassistedAinherapplicationforCriminalInjuries
Compensation(underWAlegislation)forherselfand
forherchildren.Theapplicationwassuccessfulanda
numberofpaymentsweremade,including$6
2,00
0toonechild,$33,000toanotherand$29,000tothe
mother.
Theeconomic,andindeedthegeneral,rationaleforvictim’s
compensationisnotclearlyevident.Anumberofbasesareput
forward.O’Connor3
4 forexampleidentifiesarangeofrationales
includinganincentivetovictimstoparticipateinthecriminaljustice
system,themoralobligationonthestatetorecompensevictimsof
crime,thestate’smonopolyoncrimecontrol,socialcontracttheory,
sharedriskandsocialwelfaretheoryandthehumanitarianrationale.
Fromaneconomicperspective,theeffectofcompensatingvictims
ofcrimeistoplacethepriceforfailuretopreventcrimewiththe
widercommunitythroughgovernment.Againstthisargument,the
approachisunlikelytobeparticularlyuseful,asthecostisnotseenby
thosewhoprovidethecriminaljusticesystem,exceptatahighlevel.
Alternatively,compensationcanbeseenasanequitymeasure.Often
theprovisionofpublicgoods,suchasthecriminaljusticesystem,is
justifiedbyapositivecostbenefitratio,withreferencetotheKaldor-
Hicksprinciple,thatisthatthewinnersonlytheoreticallycompensate
thelosers.Howeverinmanyareas,wherewinnersorlosersareeasily
identifiable,itispossibletousethemorepowerfulParetoprinciple,
withthewinnerscompensatingtheloserstotheextentthatthe
winners,orthelosers,canbeidentified.Thewidercommunityreceives
abenefitfromthecriminalpreventionsystem,butduetolackof
resourcesonthepartofthecommunity,thatbenefitisnotexhaustive
anditiscosteffectivetoacceptsomeleveloffailure.Whileoverallthe
communityarewinners,thelossesarenotspreadevenlyacrossthe
community.Criminalinjurycompensationisonewayofspreading
thoselossesacrossthecommunity.Bothapproachesaresimilar,in
thattheplacethepriceforfailureofthecriminaljusticesystemwith
thecommunity,ratherthansomefinitenumberofindividualswithin
thatcommunity.Fromanalternateperspective,therecanbemoral
hazardassociatedwithsuchanapproach.Ifthevictimcontributed
tothecrimeinsomewaybytheiractions,itisnoteconomically
efficientforthemtoberewardedbythecommunityasthiscouldlead
totheperverseoutcomeofanincreaseincrime.Thisreportadopts
theuntestedviewthatthetribunalassessingclaimsgivesregard
tosuchconsiderations,andthatthepricepaidtothevictimisafair
assessmentofthecosttothevictim,discountedforanycontributory
negligenceonthepartofthevictim,notinghoweverthatadetailed
reviewofavictim’scompensationsystemmaynotinfactfindthis
tobethecase.Inthisregard,victim’scompensationisconsideredto
beanequityconsideration,and,assuchprobablyperformsalimited
functionwithregardtoeconomicefficiency.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Assistancewiththeproper
preparationofapplicationsforVictim’s
Compensationislikelytoreduce
administrativecosts,forexamplein
requestingadditionalinformationand
inrevisitingdecisions.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Theremaybesomebenefits
withmoneyprovidingaccessto
counsellingandthelike.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Rand
om sa
mpl
e of
case
s
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
2. C
ase
Dwasapsychologistinthenongovernmentschool
sector.Shebecameawareofaninstanceofalleged
sexualabusebetweenamaleteacherandafemale
student.Thematterwasdisclosedtothegirl’sparents
andDhadsomediscussionswithboththealleged
victimandtheperpetrator.Theschoolsystempolicy
requireddisclosureofanyallegationsofsexualabuse,
howeverD,inherprofessionaljudgement,believed
thelegalresponsibilityfordisclosurelaywiththe
parents.Theschoolbecameawareofthealleged
abuse.Theallegedperpetratorwascharged,and
wasdismissedfromtheschool.Dwasaskedforher
resignationanddulyresigned.Dthentookaction
forunfairdismissal.Theschoolmadeacomplaint
ofunprofessionalconducttothePsychologyBoard
regardingD’sactions.TheCLCassistedDwithher
response.Theboardfoundtherewasnobreachof
theAct(HealthPractitionerRegulationNationalLaw
(WA)Act),RegulationsorCodeofEthicsalthough
therehadbeenaconflictbetweenprofessionaland
organisationrequirements.Nofurtheractionwas
taken.
Withregardtothiscase,thelawandtheprofessionalbody
appearedtoplacetherightsoftheindividualabovetherightsofthe
organisation.Fromaneconomicperspective,theappropriateaction
wouldbeonethatminimisedfuturecosts.Theframeworkusedin
thisstudyassumesthattheoperationofthelaw,thatischarging
peoplewithcrimes,leadstoaneconomicallyefficientoutcome.In
thiscaseitcouldbearguedthattheactionsofDmeantthatthelaw
didnotoperate.Usingthemodelofcriminalpunishmentbasedon
makingtheexpectedcostofcriminalactivitiesexceedtheexpected
benefit,theorganisation’spolicyofdisclosurewaslikelytobecost
effectivewithpeoplebearingtheconsequencesoftheiractionsand
thoseconsequencesbeingseenpublicly.Thealternativestrategy
couldleadtomattersbeingcoveredupandnopricebeingpaidfor
acrimecommitted.Whilethemattersraisedbythepsychologist
indefenceofheractions,suchasthebestinterestsofthestudent
andresponsibilityfordisclosurebeingwiththeparentsseem
reasonableandarenotcontrarytothelawortothecodeofethics,
thereisevidencethatstrategiesrelatedtointernalmanagementof
complaintsofsexualabusehave,inthepast,fosteredaninstitutional
climatethatfacilitatessuchabuse.Clearlytheorganisationwasof
thisview.Itisinterestinginthisregardthattheresponsefromthe
professionalbodyisnotanendorsementofD’sactions,butrather
statestheactionswerenotcontrarytotheAct,RegulationsorCodeof
Ethics.Thiscaseseemstodemonstratetheimportanceofperspective
as,fromawholeofsocietypointofview,theoperationofthelegal
systeminthereportingofcrimeisinthebestinterestsofsociety.
Howeverfromtheviewpointoftheindividual,reportingofthecrime
mayleadtoincreasedcostssuchaspublicshame.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefitsidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Afindingofprofessional
misconductislikelytohave
reducedD’sfutureabilitytoearn
alivingasapsychologist.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asarguedpreviously,suchlossis
likelytobeasubstitution.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
3. C
ase
Eownedahouseandotherpropertywithher
husbandinSouthAustralia.Theyhadbeenmarried
threeyearsandhadason.Therewasanalleged
historyofdomesticviolenceandErelocatedwith
heryoungsonandteenagedaughtertoWestern
Australia.Hwasalsoingenerallypoorhealth.She
wasreferredtotheCLCbyasexualassaultand
familyviolencesupportservice.Shewasassisted
witharangeofmattersoveratwoyearperiod
relatingtothesettlementofhermaritalaffairs.These
includedadviceregardingasuccessfulapplication
foraViolenceRestrainingOrder;anapplicationfor
childsupportpayments;applicationsforlegalaid
relatedtocustodyissuesandtopropertysettlement
issues;obtainingpriorityhousingandacomplaint
regardingabreachoftheViolenceRestraining
Order.LegalAidapplicationswerecomplicatedby
jurisdictionalmattersbetweenthestates,however
aidwasobtainedforthecustodymattersandan
arrangementwasbrokeredwithaprivatesolicitorto
manageherpropertysettlementwithpaymenttobe
madeonpropertysettlement.
Therearearangeofmattersinthiscase.Violenceisnotinthe
economicinterestsofsociety,forexampleitincurscoststhroughlost
productiononthepartoftheinjuredpersonandcostsassociated
withmedicaltreatment.Furthermore,preventionofviolenceis
likelytoresultinlowercoststhanthepunishmentofviolencealone.
Accordingly,applicationandenforcementofViolenceRestraining
Ordersarelikelytoresultinaneconomicallyefficientoutcometo
society.
Ifchildrenareseenasacommodityofmarriage,aneconomically
efficientoutcomeintermsofthenumberofchildrenonehasrequires
bothpartiestopaythepriceofchildrearing.
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildren
growinguptobeproductivemembersofsociety.Conversely,ifpeople
have,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmentalproblemsfrom
poorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscanresultin
significantsocialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfaredependence,
crimeorusageofarangeofsupportservices.Forthesereasonsour
legalsystemfacilitatesaccesstochildrenbybothparentsinthe
caseofseparation,appearingtotakeaviewthathavingaccessto
bothparentswillleadtothebestdevelopmentaloutcomeforthe
child,howeveritalsorecognisesthatsometimesaccessbyparents
canresultinharmtothechildren.Hencethelegalsystemhasan
importantroleinbalancingbetweentheseconsiderations.
Relationshipbreakdown,separationanddivorceareafactofour
societywithourlegalsystemfacilitatingseparation.Froman
economicperspective,weappeartohavetakentheviewasasociety
thatthebenefitstochildrenfromnotlivinginahomewhereconflict
existsorwhereparentsareunhappyexceedthesocialcostsoffamily
breakdownsuchaswelfarepaymentstosingleparentsandthe
effectsofpovertyonchildren.Inaddition,arangeofmeasures,such
assharingpropertyandmaintenance,areinplacetominimisethose
socialcosts.
Itisnotedthatgenerallyacrossthesebenefits,theCLCplayeda
brokeringrole,enablingEtocarryoutwhatfunctionsshecould,
obtainingalegalaidgrantwhereappropriate(itselfanequityconcern
andperhapsmadescarcebyrationingratherthanbyindividual
price)andobtainingprivateassistancewiththepropertysettlement,
therebyinternalisingthecostswiththeparties.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
TheCLCprovidedHwithguidance
throughthelegalsystem,witha
probablereductioninadministrative
costs,forexampletimewiththecourt
registryorwithinlegalaid.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thisbenefitisdifficulttoquantifyand
isassessedatnil.
Thefacilitationofpriority
housingforEmeantthatcosts
associatedwithhomelessness,
suchasemergencyhousingand
disruptionofschoolingwere
minimised.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thisbenefitisdifficulttoquantify
andisassessedatnil.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�00-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
4. C
ase
Fwasemployedasakitchenhandataminesite.
Shecutherthumbandreceivedfirstaidtreatment,
howevertheinjurywasquitesevereandtheinjury
eventuallyrequiredplasticsurgeryinPerth.Inthe
meantime,andpriortotheplasticsurgery,shehad
obtainedotheremploymentasafirstaidofficeron
anotherminesite.Shewasconcernedthatshehad
beenunderpaidwhileworkingasakitchenhand
andthatherworker’scompensationpayments
ceasedwhensheresigned.Shewasadvisedthather
compensationpaymentsappearedtobeappropriate.
Acopyofheremploymentcontractwasobtained
fromherpreviousemployer,anditappearedshehad
beencorrectlypaid.
Itisintheinterestsofsocietythatcontractsbeupheldandthat
insuranceclaimsbeproperlyadministeredtoensurethatriskis
appropriatelypriced.Inthiscasethisoutcomeoccurredconsequently
therewasnobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Properadviceislikelytohave
minimisedadministrativecosts
elsewhere,forexampleifFhad
pursuedaclaimwithnomerit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
5. C
ase
GhadreceivedaCriminalInjuriesCompensation
Claim.Shefelttheamountassessedwasinadequate.
TheCLCobtainedacopyoftheAssessor’sReasonsfor
DecisionanddiscussedthiswithG.Gdecidednotto
progressherclaim.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Appropriateandtimelyadviceislikely
tohavesavedfurtheradministrative
costsarisingfromanadministrative
appealagainstthedecision.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Costsassociatedwithadministrative
reviewhavebeenestimatedelsewhere
asoftheorderof$
350.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
6. C
ase
TheCLCundertookasubmissiontomodelprovisions
regulatingResidentialTenancyDatabases.Theproject
didnotproceedduetoresignationofastaffmember.
AsubmissionwasmadebytheNationalAssociation
ofCommunityLegalCentresortheNational
AssociationofTenancyOrganisations.
Suchdatabasesaresubjecttoabuseandcanseriouslylimitatenant’s
accesstohousing.Therearecostsandbenefitsonbothsides.Where
tenantshaveapoorhistory,furtherdamageornonpaymentofrent
canleadtoanincreasedcosttosociety.Rentsmayincrease,orthe
supplyofrentalaccommodationmaydecrease,asaresponseto
effectiveaveragerentsbeinglowerthantheapparentmarketrate.
Atthesametime,thereisasocialcostassociatedwithhomelessness,
suchasthecostofemergencyhousing,overcrowding,disruptionof
schooling,inabilitytocookmealsandrelianceoncharitiesoronpublic
institutions.Theislikelytobeaconcernthattenancydatabases
undulyfavourtheinterestsoflandlordsinminimisingcosts,butcan
dosoattheexpenseofgeneratingexternalities,therebyincreasing
publiccosts.Onthisbasis,regulationofTenancyDataBaseswould
appeartobeeconomicallyefficienttoensureanoptimumtradeoff
betweenthesetwoareasofsocialcostleadingtoaminimisationof
overallsocialcost.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
7. C
ase
H’sdaughterwasterminallyillandthedaughter
wishedHtohavethecareofherchildrendueto
concernsregardingthechildren’sfather.TheCLC
assistedHinobtainingagrantoflegalaidwith
regardtoparentingorders.Duetothefather’s
imprisonment,theparentingorderscouldnotbe
finalised,andtheCLCassistedHwithafurther
applicationforagrantoflegalaidtosupportan
applicationforaViolenceRestrainingOrder.
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildren
growinguptobeproductivemembersofsociety.Conversely,ifpeople
have,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmentalproblemsfrom
poorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscanresultin
significantsocialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfaredependence,
crimeorusageofarangeofsupportservices.Forthesereasonsour
legalsystemfacilitatesaccesstochildrenbybothparentsinthe
caseofseparation,appearingtotakeaviewthathavingaccessto
bothparentswillleadtothebestdevelopmentaloutcomeforthe
child,howeveritalsorecognisesthatsometimesaccessbyparents
canresultinharmtothechildren.Hencethelegalsystemhasan
importantroleinbalancingbetweentheseconsiderations.Inthis
case,theCLCfacilitatedthisprocess.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thelifetimecostofchildabusehasbeenassessedelsewhereas
$38,00
0.Thereappeartobeatleasttwochildrenandsothebenefitis
takenas$76,000.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
8. C
ase
TheCLCassistedIinobtaininghisdeceasedwife’s
superannuationbycompilingdocumentationand
preparingandforwardingcorrespondencetothe
insurancecompany.Thematterwasfinalisedwithout
Ineedingtoapplyforprobate.
Thenotionofconsumersovereignty(intheabsenceofmarketfailure)
isaxiomatictoeconomicallyefficientoutcomes,thatiseconomically
efficientoutcomesareaboutmaximisingutilityacrosssociety,and
thisisbestachievedbysummingindividualtransactiondecisions.
Usingthismodel,thetradeoffbetweenconsumingone’sassetsand
divestingthemtoone’sheirscanbeseenasawayofmaximising
one’sutility,withtheultimatedivestmentofassetsreflectingone’s
values.Givingsomethingawayisthesameasspendingit,althoughit
isdifficulttoseewhatutilityapersonmaygetfromsomethingwhen
theyaredead.Perhapsthebestviewisthatonegetsutilityfromthe
promiseofexpenditure.Henceensuringthatassetsaredisbursedin
accordancewithawillmaybeseenasawayofensuringconsumer
sovereigntyismaintained.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Becausethematterwasfinalised,
therewasnoneedtoincurthecostsof
obtainingprobate.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
TheSupremeCourtofWAdoesnot
providefinancialinformationintheir
AnnualReview.HencetheVictorian
costof$
6,85
0perfinalisationhasbeen
adoptedasthebenefit.
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
9. C
ase
Jsustainedaseriousworkplaceinjurywhileworking
asanapprentice.Theinjurywaspoorlymanaged,
withtheemployeroriginallyclaimingJwasa
subcontractorratherthananemployee.Theinjury
occurredinFebruary,howeverpaymentswere
notreceiveduntilOctober.Atreatmentprogram
commencedandheunderwentsurgeryinJuneofthe
followingyear.Jwasseverelydepressedasaresult
oftheinjury.Theinsurancecompanythenwroteto
JofferingasettlementandJsoughtadvice,through
hisfather,astowhethertoaccepttheoffer.Theoffer
appearedquitelowasJ’sfutureearningcapacitywas
uncertainfollowingtheinjury.TheCLCarrangedforJ
toberepresentedbyacommercialfirminfurthering
thematterwiththeinsurancecompany.Therewere
anumberofconcernswiththeinsurancecompany’s
managementofthecasewithsomesuggestionthey
mayhavebeenattemptingtotakeadvantageofJ’s
relativeinexperience.
Insuranceisabouttheproperallocationofrisk.Inthecaseofworkers
compensation,theprincipleisthattheemployerisbestsituatedto
ensureasafeworkenvironment,andthattheimpositionofcoston
theemployerthroughinsurancepremiumswillensurethatitisin
theinterestsoftheemployertoprovideasafeworkplaceatthemost
economicallyefficientprice.Atthesametime,thenotionofinsurance
allowsthespreadingofriskacrossanindustry.Forexample,an
individualemployermaynotbepreparedtoundertakeanenterprise
iftheyweretobefullyliableforanyworkplaceinjuriessufferedby
theirworkersassuchinjuriescouldalwaysoccur,andmaynotbe
reasonablypreventableormayhaveanexpectedcostthatsocietyis
preparedtoaccept.Finally,workerscompensationactstointernalise
costs.Intheabsenceofworkerscompensation,theemployermayget
thebenefitsofanunsafeworkplace,whilethewidersocietypaysthe
priceoftheunsafeworkplace.Forthesereasonstheproperoperation
oftheworkerscompensationsystemislikelytobeeconomically
efficient.
Itappearsthattheemployerandtheinsurancecompanysought
totakeadvantageofJ’srelativelevelofinexperiencetoobtainan
outcomethatwasintheirinterestsbutwasnoteconomicallyefficient
acrossthecommunity.Iftheyhadavoidedorreducedtheircosts,then
workerscompensationwouldbeincorrectlypriced,oralternatively,
wageswouldneedtobehighertoincludetheriskofworkers
beingeffectivelyselfinsuredagainstinjury.Byarrangingforproper
representation,theCLCincreasedthelikelihoodthataneconomically
efficientoutcomewouldbereachedthroughtheemployerand
insurancecompanyproperlypayingtheirliability,andwithJproperly
compensatedenablinghimtomanagehisownaffairs,ratherthan
beingforcedtorelyonwelfarepaymentsandthelike.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Theeconomicbenefitinthiscaseisdifficulttoestimateasany
economicbenefitfromtheproperinternalisationofcostsarising
fromasinglecasearelikelytobemarginal.Withregardtopayment
ofWorkersCompensationinaparticularcase,suchpaymentis
effectivelyatransferandisbestseenasaredistributionofbenefits
fromthosewhoeitherdonotexperienceindustrialinjuriesorwho
takeadvantageoflowerpricedgoodsandservicesfromlower
levelsofworkplacesafety.ThecostofworkplaceinjuryinAustralia
wasestimatedat$
38billionin200
5-06.35Thiswasaround3.8%of
AustralianGDPfortheperiod.
36Attheeconomicallyefficientpoint,
itisexpectedthattosave$1inworkplaceinjurywouldrequirethe
expenditureofmorethan$1inworkplaceprotection,sothatsociety
asawholewouldbeworseoffbyprovidingahigherlevelofsafety
thencurrentlyexists.Atthesametime,amarketwillonlyreach
thispointifcostsarefullyinternalisedandsothereisanimportant
economicfunctioninensuringthatcostsareproperlyinternalised.
InthiscasetheCLChasfacilitatedthisfunction,buttheeconomic
benefitisdifficulttoestimateduetothemarginalnatureofthe
impactofasingleincident.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�04-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
10. C
ase
KapproachedtheCLCanumberoftimesoveraseven
yearperiodregardingaCriminalInjuryCompensation
claimrelatingtoinjuriesandsexualabuseshe
sufferedasafosterchildwhileunderthecareofDCP.
Kwasitinerant,andwasinandoutofprisonand
women’srefugesmakingregularcontactdifficult.
Therewasnorecordofcriminalproceedingsrelated
totheallegedabuse,andKdidnotsignandreturna
formrequestinghermedicalrecords.Thematterdid
notprogressfurther.
Asdiscussedpreviously,suchcompensationislikelytobeatransferin
responsetoequityconsiderationsratherthaneconomicallyefficient
inandofitself.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Itappearstherewasinsufficientbasis
toprogressaclaim.ByadvisingKof
therequirementstosubstantiate
aclaim,theadministrativecostof
assessingaclaimthatmaylackmerit
wasavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofadministrativereviewhas
beenestimatedelsewhereataround
$350.
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
11. C
ase
LcontactedtheCLCinfinalisingherdeceased
husband’sestate.TheCLCadvisedherthat
superannuationpaymentswerenotpartofthe
estate,butratherweretobepaidtoherasa
beneficiary.Theyassistedherwithcorrespondence
andnegotiationswiththethreeinsurancecompanies
andshereceivedthevarioussuperannuation
payments.Theestatewasinsolventandthey
preparedcorrespondencetovariouscreditors
advisingofthis.UnderWAlaw,funeralexpenseshave
priorityinsettlingtheestate,consequentlyLcould
receivetheonlyassetoftheestate,arefundcheque
fromtheAustralianTaxationOffice,asapartialoffset
forfuneralexpensesshehadincurred.
Withregardtobankruptcy,thereareanumberofareasofeconomic
consideration.Ifpeopleundertakeconsumptionandthendefault
ontheirdebt,theeffectwillbetoincreasethepriceofcredit,either
throughhigherinterestratesorhigherpricesforgoods.Henceitis
economicallyefficienttoensurepeopleareresponsiblefordebtsthey
incur.Atthesametime,circumstancescanoccurwheresomeone
isunabletopaytheirdebts.Lawsaroundbankruptcythenseemto
havetwoeffects.Firstly,theprocessofwindingupassetsasagroup
andpayingeachcreditorashareislikelytoreducetransactioncosts
significantlycomparedtoeachcreditorindividuallysuingthedebtor
andthenattemptingtocollecttheirdebt.Thecostofthebankruptcy
isspreadacrossalldebtors,notingthatsecuredcreditorshavepriority,
whichhastheeffectofspreadingrisk.Secondly,comparedtothe
alternative,saydebtorsprison,externalitiesareavoidedinthesense
thatthepersoncancontinuetoworkiftheyhaveemploymentand
maycontributetothewealthofsociety.
Inthiscontext,theeconomicefficiencyofsuperannuationgoingto
beneficiariesordependentsratherthantotheestateisnotclear.Itis
alsonotclearwhyfuneralexpensesaretreatedsimilartoasecured
creditorunderWesternAustralianLaw.Suchmattersarelikelytobe
equityconsiderations.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
12. C
ase
TheCLCconductedaDITaccreditedmediation
coursetoTheDepartmentofCorrectiveServices
(DoCS)forAboriginalCommunityMediators.Four
peoplereceivedtraining.Thepurposewastoavoid
aboriginalcommunityviolence(familyfeuding).DoCS
hasaprogramofengagingrespectedaboriginal
communitymemberstoactasmediatorswhen
violenceeruptstoavoidviolenceandescalation.Costs
ofviolenceincludeassaults,injuries,criminaljustice,
propertydamageincludingbystandersanddamage
topublichousing.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytobesavingsincourt
timeandpoliceactionfromearly
mediationofdisputes.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofpoliceaction,courtaction
andincarcerationassociatedwithone
assaulthasbeenassessedpreviously
at$3,35
0.Thebenefitislikelyto
dependheavilyonoutcomeandthere
isnodataonwhichtoformaview.
Assumingthateachmediatorhasone
successfuloutcomeperyearoveraten
yearperiod,thevalueofthebenefitat
7%is$23,000overfourmediators,or
$92,00
0.
Itislikelythatproperlytrained
mediatorscanreducecostsinthe
legalandenforcementsystems
byresolvingdisputesatan
earlystageandhencethereare
likelytobesignificantsavingsin
externalities.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efits
Thecostofassaulthasbeen
assessedpreviouslyat$
2,40
0.
Againassumingeachmediator
hasonesuccessfuloutcome
peryearoveratenyearperiod,
thevalueofthebenefitat7%is
$17,00
0overfourmediators,or
$68,00
0.
13. C
ase
M’sfriendhadagreedtoprovideMwithaninterest
freeloanof$
10,000toberepaidat$
20perweekand
askedMtosignastandardformofloanagreement
coveringtheloan.TheCLCreviewedtheloan
agreementforMandproposedsomeamendments,
anumberofwhichwereagreedtobythelender.The
agreementwasthensignedbybothparties.
Thebasiceconomicpurposeofcontractsistoensurethatexchanges
arehonouredwhentheydonotoccursimultaneously.Alternatively,
ifcontractlawdidnotexist,partiestoatransactionwouldneedto
buildasurchargeintothepricenegotiatedtoallowfortheaverage
probabilityofdefault.Finally,contractsallocateriskandresponsibility,
soeachpartyisclearontheirrelativeposition.IfMhadsigned
theoriginalcontract,hemayhavebeentakenadvantageofsome
timeinthefuture,andhencepaidmorethanexpected.Thecaseis
complicatedbythefactthattheloanwasinterestfreeandbetween
friends,howeveritcouldbethatatsometimetherelationshipsoured
andthelenderthenusedthecontracttohisadvantage.Similarly,if
therewasnocontractandAdefaulted,thelendermayhavehadlittle
recoursetorecoverhismoney.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Whilethereislikelytobeabenefit,anybenefitascribedtoa
particularcaseislikelytobemarginalasitwouldbeexpectedina
properlyfunctioningsystemthatthemarginalcostsareequaltothe
marginalbenefits.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
14. C
ase
Nwasapartaboriginalchildwhowastakenfromhis
mother,and,alongwithhisbrother,placedunderthe
guardianshipofaMrWhite.Thetwochildrenworked
asunpaidagriculturallabourersuntil19
58when
themattercametotheattentionofDepartmental
WelfareOfficers.Theboysreceivednoschoolingand
Nisilliterate.TheCLCassistedNwithhisapplication
forcompensationundertheRedressSchemesetup
bytheWAgovernmenttoin 200
8toacknowledge
andapologisetoadults,whoaschildren,wereabused
and/orneglectedwhiletheywereinthecareofthe
State.Redressalsoprovidesaccesstosupportand
counsellingservicesand,foreligibleapplicants,anex-
gratiapaymentofbetween$5,000and$45,000.
Theeconomicpurposeofthepaymentisnotevident,aspayment
undertheschemewasex-gratia.Thereisnoacceptanceofnegligence
onthepartofgovernment,andthepaymentisnotassessedinterms
ofdamages.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Someoftheseclientscouldhave
broughtnegligenceclaimsagainstthe
governmentsotheredressschemewas
probablycosteffective.Alternatively,it
wasastreamlinedprocessforsettling
anumberofmattersoutofcourt.Itis
notclearthateitherofthesebenefits
canbeascribedtothiscase.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
15. C
ase
O’sbiologicalfatherwasrecentlydeceased.His
biologicalfatherhadtwochildrenfromamorerecent
relationshipandoneofthesechildrenhadadvertised
herintentiontoapplyforLettersofAdministration
overthefather’sestate.Ounderstoodhewasnot
namedasabeneficiaryinhisfather’swill.TheCLC
assistedOinpreparationandsubmissionofacaveat
againstthemakingofagrantorresealintheestate,
andassistedOinobtainingprobonoassistancefrom
theNTLawSocietywithregardtohisclaim.
Thereappeartobesomecaseswhereoverridingtheintentionsofa
person’swillmightbejustifiedeconomically.Thesearelikelytobe
areaswheretheperson’sestateincludesassetsthatanotherperson
mayhavecontributedtoinonewayandanother,andsoiftheassets
arelefttoathirdperson,thesecondpersonhaspaidforsomething
andnotreceivedabenefit.Asanexample,aperson’sspousemaybe
leftoutoftheirwillhowevertheassetsoftheirestatemayincludea
significantcontributionfromtheeffortsoftheirspouse.Presumably
thereisatransactioncostassociatedwithcontinuallycalculating
andprotectingeachperson’sshareoftheassetsofamarriage,or
alternatively,acostassociatedwitheachpersonmaintainingtheir
personalassetsandaffairs.Ifthelawoverridesawillinsuchcases,
partnerstoamarriagewillnotfeelcompelledtoincursuchcosts.
SuchconsiderationsdonotappeartobeapplicableinthiscaseasO
hadhadlittleornocontactwithhisbiologicalfather.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
16. C
ase
Plivedwithherpartnerfromtheageof13untilthe
ageof19.Duringthattimeshehadtwochildren,
oneattheageof14andoneattheageof17.She
wassubjectedtodomesticviolenceonanumberof
occasions,sufferinginjuriesincludingbruisingand
brokenbones.In200
1thepartnerwasfoundguilty
ofanassaultonherandwasjailed.Prelocatedand
islivingwithhermother.Asaresultofthehistoryof
violence,P’sschoolingwasinterrupted.Onanumber
ofoccasionssheobtainedemployment,buthadto
leaveherjobbecauseofcontinuingviolencefromher
partner.TheCLCassistedPwithasuccessfulapplicant
forCriminalInjuryCompensationandsheobtained
$19,00
0.
Asdiscussedpreviously,victim’scompensationislikelytobeanequity
consideration,and,assuchprobablyperformsalimitedfunctionwith
regardtoeconomicefficiency.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Assistancewiththeproper
preparationofapplicationsforVictim’s
Compensationislikelytoreduce
administrativecosts,forexamplein
requestingadditionalinformationand
inrevisitingdecisions.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assuming20%savingfora
selfrepresentedlitigantonan
administrativecostof$
350,thebenefit
isassessedat$
70.
Itisnotclearthatthemoneyhas
hadaparticularimpactonJ’s
lifeorhasoffsetthedamageshe
hassufferedtoanyextent.She
reportedinfollowupthatthe
moneyhasbeenspentandsheis
feelingdepressed.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
17. C
ase
Q’schildRwasinvolvedinanallegedmishandlingof
incidentsinvolvingassaultandbullyingatthechild’s
HighSchool.TheCLCprovidedQwithwrittenadvice
regardingtherequirementstomakeasuccessful
claimforpersonalinjuriescompensationinvolving
demonstrationofnegligenceandestablishinga
quantum(oramount)ofcompensationthatRwould
beentitledtoreceive.Theseincludedpain,suffering
andlossofenjoymentinlife;medicalexpenses;travel
expenses;andgratuitousservicesreceived.
Theattributionofnegligenceaddressesmarketfailurearisingfrom
externalities,wherebyonepartyreceivesabenefitinsomeway,but
thecostispaidbyothers.Alternatively,theremaybeasocialcost
fromexternalitiesandnobenefit,howeverbytheCoasetheorem,the
attributionofpropertyrights(inthiscaseownershipoftheproblem)
willleadtoaneconomicallyefficientoutcome.Foreffectiveness,itis
importantthattheresponsibilitybeplacedwiththepartybestable
tomanageit.Hencetheattributionofnegligenceincasesofbullying
andthelikewillensurethattheschoolwillallocateresourcesto
managesuchproblems,andthecommunitywillbesavedarangeof
othercosts,suchascostsassociatedwithinjury,depressionorthelike.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Qreceivedtimelyadvice,wasmade
awareoftheappropriateprocess
andwasabletoformaviewasto
whetherornottoprogressaclaim.If,
asappearstobethecase,shedecided
hercasehadinsufficientmerit,then
thereislikelytohavebeenasignificant
savingoftransactioncostsincluding
correspondence,inquiriesandcourt
time.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedpreviously,thecost
ofadministrativereviewhasbeen
assessedat$
350.
Noneidentified.
Assessmentofbenefit
Nil
18. C
ase
Sjointlyrentedaresidentialpropertywithher
partnerfortwoyears.Therelationshipbrokedown,S
couldnolongeraffordtherentanddecidedtomove
out.Therealestateagent,onbehalfoftheproperty
owner,claimedthatthepropertywasnotleftinthe
sameconditionthatthetenantfounditandmadea
claimtotheLocalCourtforanorderthatSmakeall
paymentforallrepairs,wateraccountsandunpaid
rent.TheCLCwrotelettersonbehalfofStothereal
estateagentregardingherpositionagainsttheclaim.
Smadeandpaidformanyoftherepairs,butdisputed
others.Thepartiescouldnotcometoacompromise
withthecourtapplicationandthecostsassociated
withtheorder.Thematterwasreferredtothe
MagistratesCourtandadjudicated.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpartiestobearthecostoftheiractions
sothatpricesarenotdistortedtherebyincurringaneconomiccost
througheitherreducedconsumptionorexcessivesupply.Inthecase
oftenancylaw,thecostofdamagetothepropertyisplacedwith
thetenantastheyareinthebestpositiontocontroldamage.Ifit
laywiththelandlord,rentswouldbegenerallymuchhigherthan
otherwise,astheywouldincludeanadditionalamounttocover
likelydamageorunpaidrentandfewerpropertieswouldbeoffered
forrent.Atthesametime,iflandlordsarbitrarilyseizedbonds,the
rentpaidwouldactuallybehigherthanthatnegotiated,andpeople
wouldrentfewerpropertiesthantheywouldotherwise.Herrentwas
$180perweekoveratwoyeartenancyandthedisputedamountfor
damageswas$3,50
0.TheassistanceoftheCLCallowedStoproperly
preparehercaseandprovideappropriatedocumentationtomaximise
thelikelihoodofthecostsofdamagebeingproperlyapportioned
betweentheownerandthetenant.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedpreviously,inaproperlyfunctioningsystemthemarginal
costoflandlordsincorrectlyseizingbondswouldbeexpectedtobe
equaltothemarginalcostassociatedwithanincreasinglevelofproof.
Hence,whilesuchcasesarevaluable,thebenefitofanindividualcase
islikelytobelow
Assistanceprobablyreducedcosts
associatedwithselfrepresented
litigants.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assuminganadministrativereview
costof$
350,thesavingfromaself
representedlitigantis$
70,although
theactionoftheCLCislikelytohave
onlyoffsetsomeofthiscost.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
19. C
ase
Tmaintainedatenancyforsevenyears.Theproperty
wassoldandT’stenancyterminated.Trequested
assistancefromtheCLCtoreclaimaportionofher
rentalbonddisputedwiththenewowner.TheCLC
actedonbehalfofTtorequestcopyofBondDisposal
FormfromBondAdministratorattheDepartmentof
Commerce,whichshowedthatTallowedthebond
tobetransferredtothenewowner.TheCLCactedon
behalfofTtorequestacopyofrentalpaymentspaid
duringthetenancytothenewowner.Theserecords
showedthatoutstandingrentwasowed.Thenew
owneragreedtorefundthebondifTcouldproduce
bankstatementstoshowthattherenthadbeenpaid.
Thebasiceconomicpurposeofcontractsistoensurethatexchanges
arehonouredwhentheydonotoccursimultaneously.Alternatively,
ifcontractlawdidnotexist,partiestoatransactionwouldneedto
buildasurchargeintothepricenegotiatedtoallowfortheaverage
probabilityofdefault.Finally,contractsallocateriskandresponsibility,
soeachpartyisclearontheirrelativeposition.Inthiscaseitappears
thatthepartiesactedinaccordancewiththecontractandthetrue
pricewaspaid.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
Anegotiatedsettlementwas
obtained,therebysavingarangeof
administrativecostsandcourtcosts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofreview,basedonVCATdata,
isassessedat$
430
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. C
ase
UsoughttomakeaCriminalInjuriesClaimfora
numberofoffencesbymultipleperpetrators.TheCLC
actedonbehalfoftheclienttorequestinformation
foreachoftheoffencesfrommultipleagencies
includingtheDepartmentforPublicProsecution,
DistrictCourtHouse,GeraldtonCourtHouse,
GeraldtonPoliceStation,GeraldtonRegionalHospital,
CarnarvonCourtHouse,VictimsSupportServicewith
Centacare.Limitedinformationwasreceivedfromthe
letterssent.Theapplicationwasnotprogressed.
Asdiscussedpreviously,victim’scompensationislikelytobeanequity
consideration,and,assuchprobablyperformsalimitedfunctionwith
regardtoeconomicefficiency.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Itisprobablethatanapplicationwith
limitedmeritwasnotprogressed,
therebysavingadministrativecosts
associatedwiththeclaim.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Itislikelyanadministrativecost
estimatedataround$ 3
50hasbeen
saved
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�0�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
Vhadbeenchargedwithanumberofsexual
offencesrelatedtochildren.Heismentally
impairedandsohasbeenfoundunfittoplead
tothecharges.Consequently,hewasdetained
undertheCriminalLaw(MentallyImpaired
Defendants)Actin200
3.Areleaseplanwas
preparedin200
5withtheassistanceofthe
CLCandapre-releaseprogramagreedbythe
reviewboardin 200
6.Theprogressofthatpre
releaseprogramhasbeenslow,principally
relatedtofindingpeopleandservicestoprovide
thenecessarysupportstoV.In201
1,Vhadnot
yetbeenreleasedandhaseffectivelybeenheld
injailwithouttrialfortenyears.Duringthat
period,theCLChascontinuedtoadvocateon
V’sbehalf,includingensuringthathereceived
alldocumentationrelatedtocasereviewand
ongoingbrokeragewithsupportservices.
Theeconomicviewofcriminallawisthattheexpectedpriceofcrime(theprobabilityof
convictionmultipliedbythepenalty)exceedstheexpectedbenefits.Thereareanumberof
caveatsaroundthis.Firstly,thereisanargumentthatpunishmentshouldbegraduated,as
otherwisethereisnoincentivenottocommitamoreseriouscrime,astheseriouscrimewill
attractthesamepunishmentasthelessseriouscrime.Secondly,thereisapubliccostoflaw
enforcementandpunishment,sothataslevelsofcrimeenforcementandpunishmentgoup,the
marginalpubliccostwilleventuallyexceedthemarginalpublicbenefitoftheincreasedlevelof
enforcementandpunishment.Someofthosepubliccostsincludethecostofincarceration,loss
ofproductivityfromimprisonedpeopleandthecostofmaintainingapoliceforceandjudicial
system.Henceitcouldbeexpectedthattherewillbeanoptimumlevelofpunishmentacross
arangeofcrimes.Thirdly,weacceptthattherewillbesomepubliccostofcrimeasaresultof
adecisiontoselectaneconomicallyoptimumlevelofcrimeenforcementandpunishmentand
thatthatcostwillbedifferentiallydistributed,thatisitwillbebornebyvictimsofcrime.
Withrespecttothiscasethereappeartobeanumberofmatterswhichdonotreflectan
economicallyoptimumoutcome.Byoneview,theprimarypurposeoftheprovisionsoftheActis
toprotectamentallyimpairedpersonfromanunfairtrial.Howeverinthiscasetherehasfirstly
beennotrial,fairorunfair,andsecondlyiftherehadbeenatrialandtheallegationswerefound
proven,thesentencemayhavebeenfiveyears.Hencetheeconomicallyefficientpunishment
islikelytohavebeenexceeded,particularlyifthematterwenttocourtandMwasnotfound
guilty.Thishasanumberofeffectswithrespecttocommunitycostsandthemattersdiscussed
previously.
Theprincipleofgraduatedpunishmenthasbeenexceeded,asbyoneview,ifonewasmentally
impairedandcommittedasexualoffence,onemightdecidetothengoonarampageofsexual
offencesasthepunishmentwouldnotincrease.
Aconsiderablecostofincarcerationhasbeenincurred,withthepublicsupportingMinprison
overaperiodoftenyears.Furthermore,heisunderstoodtobecapableofworking,andsosociety
haslostwhateverproductiveoutputhemayhaveproducedintheperiod.
Whileitmightbearguedthathiscontinuedincarcerationwillpreventthepossibilityofany
furthercrime,thisisatoddswithoursystemofjustice,whichfromaneconomicpointofview,
appearstoacceptanoptimalleveloffailure.
HenceactionbytheCLCthatresultsinanoutcomethatalignswiththisviewofaneconomically
efficientoutcomeislikelytobecosteffective.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofincarcerationhasbeenassessedpreviouslyat$
340perday,or$
124,00
0peryear.
Othercostsincludethecostofongoingadministrativereview.Usingthenumbersabove,andif
fiveyearsistakentobetheeconomicallyefficientsentence,thecosttothecommunityfromthe
continueddetentionhasbeen$6
20,000.Whiledifficulttoestimatetheimpactwithrespectto
time,iftheCLCactionbroughtforwardhisreleasebytwoyears,thesavingwouldbe(asPresent
Valueat7%)$22
4,00
0.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
A st
rate
gic c
ase
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��0-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. A
dvic
e
Whadrecentlybeenretrenched.Hewassufferingfromsevere
Parkinson’sDiseaseandrequiredassistanceinfillingoutaclaim
formunderhisUnemploymentProtectionPolicyinrelationto
hiscreditcarddebt.
Ifthecontractwasnothonoured,therewouldhavebeenan
economicallyinefficientoutcomeinthatWhadpaidtoohigha
priceforsomethingandhenceconsumedmorethananoptimal
amountoralternatively,toomuchoftheproductwassupplied.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
2. A
dvic
e
Xhasrecentlyseparatedfromhiswifeandiscaringfortheir
twochildren.Hiswifehasaproblemwithalcoholabuse.The
CLCprovidedhimwithadviceregardingpropertysettlement
proceduresincludinganinformationpack,custodymatters
includinganinformationpackandinformationonhowtoaccess
aprivatelawyer.
Ifchildrenareseenasacommodityofmarriage,aneconomically
efficientoutcomeintermsofthenumberofchildrenonehas
requiresbothpartiestopaythepriceofchildrearing.
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildren
growinguptobeproductivemembersofsociety.Conversely,if
peoplehave,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmentalproblems
frompoorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscan
resultinsignificantsocialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfare
dependence,crimeorusageofarangeofsupportservices.For
thesereasonsourlegalsystemfacilitatesaccesstochildrenbyboth
parentsinthecaseofseparation,appearingtotakeaviewthat
havingaccesstobothparentswillleadtothebestdevelopmental
outcomeforthechild,howeveritalsorecognisesthatsometimes
accessbyparentscanresultinharmtothechildren.Hencethe
legalsystemhasanimportantroleinbalancingbetweenthese
considerations.
Relationshipbreakdown,separationanddivorceareafactof
oursocietywithourlegalsystemfacilitatingseparation.From
aneconomicperspective,weappeartohavetakentheviewas
asocietythatthebenefitstochildrenfromnotlivinginahome
whereconflictexistsorwhereparentsareunhappyexceedthe
socialcostsoffamilybreakdownsuchaswelfarepaymentsto
singleparentsandtheeffectsofpovertyonchildren.Inaddition,a
rangeofmeasures,suchassharingpropertyandmaintenance,are
inplacetominimisethosesocialcosts.
Xreceivedcleardirectionsonhow
tonegotiatethelegalsystemandto
accessaprivatelawyer,andthisis
likelytohaveledtoadministrative
savings,bothinhisowntimeandin
timetakenincourtsandtribunals.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 201
0,theFamilyCourtofWestern
Australiareported12,88
7finalisations
againstexpenditureof$
20.0million,
37
or$1,55
2perfinalisation.Usingthe
figureof20%forthecostimpostfrom
alitigantinperson,theadvicefromthe
CLCmayhavesaved$3
10compared
tothepersonbeinganunrepresented
litigant.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
3. A
dvic
e
Yhadboughtacarforcashfromherpreviouspartnerfollowing
thebreakdownoftherelationship.Theregistrationonthe
carwasduehoweverthepreviouspartnerhadnotsigned
theregistrationtransferpaperssoSwasunabletopaythe
registration.ShewasadvisedtocontacttheRTA,advisethemof
thecircumstancesandseektheiradvice.
Therearelikelytobeanumberofeconomicbenefitsfromvehicle
registrationincludingtheabilitytotraceownershipwithregardto
trafficinfringements,insuranceandthelike.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytohavebeensome
savingofY’stime.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Rand
om S
ampl
e of
Adv
ices
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
4. A
dvic
e
AHUGS(hardshiputilitygrantsscheme)applicationwasmade
toenableZtopayhergasbill.
Nobenefitasthisisatransfer.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Acorrectassessmentandproperly
filledoutapplicationislikelytoresult
insomeadministrativesavings.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Similarbenefitshavepreviouslybeen
assessedat$
70
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
5. A
dvic
e
Ahadboughtitemscosting$1,845onacreditcardwitha40
monthinterestfreeperiod.Hehadmademinimumpayments
butwhentheinterestfreeperiodended,thepaymentwas
insufficienttocovertheinterestof2
9.49%perannum.His
currentdebtwas$42
94.20.Hewasadvisedthattheminimum
paymentwasinsufficienttocovertheinterestandthatlate
paymentincursadditionalcosts.Adecidedtocontinuepaying
theminimumamount.
Thereisasocialcostwithloandefaultinthatpartofthe
interestratepaidbysocietyingeneralwhenborrowingincludes
acomponentfordefault.Theconsequenceofdefaultthen
isthatpeoplepaymoreforloansthentheywouldifdefault
neveroccurred.Thereisaninherenttensionbetweenthemoral
hazardassociatedwithpeopleincurringdebtthattheynever
intendtorepay,therebyplacingacostontherestofsociety,and
misrepresentationbylenders,wherebypeopleunderestimatethe
costofloansandhenceconsumemorecreditthantheywould
otherwise.Bothoutcomesareinefficient.Thequestionthen
becomeswhethertheeconomicallyefficientoutcomeisbest
achievedbyplacingtheresponsibilitywiththeborrowerorthe
lender.Asasocietyweappeartohavetakenasharedview,with
thelenderhavingsomeresponsibilityduetotheirexposuretoloss,
henceleadingtocreditchecksandthelike,andwiththeborrower
havingsomeresponsibilityduetotheirexposuretoloss,suchas
lossofassetsandgarnisheeorders.
Howeverinterestratesarehighlydifferentiated,andbythis
viewreflectthelendersassessmentoftheriskassociatedwitha
particularborrower.Bythisview,inaproperlyoperatingmarket,
eachpersonwouldpayapremiumequaltotheirprobabilityof
default,andinthiswayhigherinterestratescanbeseenasaform
ofinsurance.Consumerprotectionlegislationisthenseenasan
equitymeasureratherthananefficiencymeasure.
Itisnotclearthathisdecisiontokeeppayingtheminimum
amountwillleadtothebestoutcome.Ifthecreditorstookactionto
recoverthedebt,hiscircumstancesaresuchthatitislikelythecost
ofrecoverywouldgreatlyexceedanymoneytheycouldlawfully
recover.Thiswouldplacetheresponsibilitywiththelender,and
theyarethepartymostabletotakeactiontoensureanefficient
outcomebynotrecklesslylendingmoneytopeoplewhoareunable
topay.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Aisanagedpensioner
withnoassetsandliving
insocialhousing.His
incomegoestorental,
foodandutilities.His
attemptstopayoffthe
debtarelikelytoresult
inconsiderablehardship
tohimandrelianceon
widersocialservices.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Anycostsarelikelyto
beatransferandsoare
assessedatzero.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
6. A
dvic
e
BhadreceivedarentalincreaseonherHomesWesthome.She
wasadvisedthattherenthadincreasedasshehadhergrandson
andgreatgrandsonlivingwithher.Shehadsomeconcernswith
regardtomaintenanceandrepairsthathadbeencarriedouton
herproperty.TheCLCcontactedHomesWestonherbehalfto
requestmaintenance.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
7. A
dvic
e
Cwasadisabilitypensioner.Hewasoneweekbehindinhisrent
andhadarrearswithregardtoaccounts,owing$5
15intotal.
TheCLCnegotiatedwiththeRealEstateAgentforCtopayan
extra$6
0perfortnightandarrangedwithCentrelinktotakean
additionalamountfromhispaymentsuntilthedebtwaspaid
off.
Economicallyefficientoutcomesareachievedbypeoplepaying
theirdebtsandforcontractstobeenforced.Thiswasachievedin
thiscase.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Anegotiatedprocessislikelytohave
savedsignificanttransactioncosts
onthepartofthelandlord,including
recoverythroughthecourtsand
possiblelostrentalincome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Administrativereview,suchasbythe
rentaltribunal,hasbeenestimated
elsewhereat$
430.
IfCwasevicted,he
mayhavehaddifficulty
findinganothertenancy,
leadingtoadditional
costssuchasemergency
housingandrelocation
fees.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Emergencyandsocial
housingisatransferand
soisnottreatedasa
cost.Typicalremovalist
feesarearound$ 6
00for
alocalmoveinvolving
limitedfurnitureand
withpackingdonebythe
tenantandthisistaken
asthebenefit.38
8. A
dvic
e
Dhasconsentordersinplaceregardingaccessarrangements
withherpreviouspartner,E,tohertwochildren.Duetolackof
compliancebyEandchangedcircumstancesonthepartofEshe
wishestochangetheconsentorders.Shehastriedtonegotiate
privatelywithEbuthasbeenunsuccessful.TheCLCsuggested
thebestapproachmaybetohaveanindependentthirdparty
drawupparentingplanandreferredhertoFamilyDispute
Resolutionservice.
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildren
growinguptobeproductivemembersofsociety.Conversely,if
peoplehave,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmentalproblems
frompoorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscan
resultinsignificantsocialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfare
dependence,crimeorusageofarangeofsupportservices.For
thesereasonsourlegalsystemfacilitatesaccesstochildrenbyboth
parentsinthecaseofseparation,appearingtotakeaviewthat
havingaccesstobothparentswillleadtothebestdevelopmental
outcomeforthechild.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Amediatedprocesswillreducecourt
timeinDpursuingactionforabreach
ofconsentordersandvaryingconsent
orders.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofafinalisationinthe
WAFamilyCourtisestimatedat
$1,552notingthisisanaverage
cost.Mediationservicesarefunded
byFASCHIAbutnoinformationis
availableonfundingoroutcomesin
theirannualreport.Consequentlythis
benefitcannotbeestimated.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
9. A
dvic
e
Fhadseparatedfromherhusband.Shesoughtadviceregarding
propertysettlementandcustodyfurthertoadviceshehad
obtainedfromLegalAid.TheFamilyLawAdvicesheetand
PropertySettlementAdviceChecklistwerereviewedwithher,
andanumberofothermattersdiscussed.Itappearedshehad
preparedadraftlettertoherhusbandregardingcustodyand
propertysettlementhowevertheletterwasnotdiscussed
anditseemedshemightreconsiderthecontentinthelightof
discussions.
Thereisaconsiderablesocialbenefitassociatedwithchildren
growinguptobeproductivemembersofsociety.Conversely,if
peoplehave,forexample,psychologicalordevelopmentalproblems
frompoorparentingorparentalconflictinthehome,thiscan
resultinsignificantsocialcostthroughsuchthingsaswelfare
dependence,crimeorusageofarangeofsupportservices.For
thesereasonsourlegalsystemfacilitatesaccesstochildrenbyboth
parentsinthecaseofseparation,appearingtotakeaviewthat
havingaccesstobothparentswillleadtothebestdevelopmental
outcomeforthechild.
Relationshipbreakdown,separationanddivorceareafactof
oursocietywithourlegalsystemfacilitatingseparation.From
aneconomicperspective,weappeartohavetakentheviewas
asocietythatthebenefitstochildrenfromnotlivinginahome
whereconflictexistsorwhereparentsareunhappyexceedthe
socialcostsoffamilybreakdownsuchaswelfarepaymentsto
singleparentsandtheeffectsofpovertyonchildren.Inaddition,a
rangeofmeasures,suchassharingpropertyandmaintenance,are
inplacetominimisethosesocialcosts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
ItappearedthatFwasseekinga
secondopinion.Itmaybethatproper
advicewillleadtoareductionin
disputeinfinalisingtheseparation
arisingfromunrealisticexpectations
onthepartofF.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thisisdifficulttoassess,asthe
availabledatadoesnotallow
discriminationbetweenlevelsof
dispute.
Litigiousdisputes
arelikelytoleadto
considerablefamily
resourcesbeing
expendedonlegalcosts,
therebyincreasingthe
likelihoodthatpeople
mayneedtodependon
thewelfaresystem,for
examplepublichousing,
howeversuchcostsare
transfers.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
10. A
dvic
e
Gwasconcernedshewasabouttoreceiveanevictionnotice
fromDoHandhadbeencalledtoameetingattheiroffice.She
hadputbackapropertyinspectionduetoattendingafuneral
inPerth.Duringthattimethepoliceraidedherhomeandfound
hersoninpossessionofstolengoods.Shecurrentlyhasanotice
tocleanupheryardandintendedtodothatnextweekbutit
waslikelytoputherinfinancialhardship.Gwasreferredtothe
service’sindigenoustenancyadvocate.DoHwascontactedand
advisedthatGwouldnotattendameetinguntilshehadmet
withthetenancyadvocate.AfoodvoucherwasprovidedtoG.
Itisimportantforeconomicallyefficientoutcomesthatpeoplebear
theconsequencesoftheirdecisions.Inthiscase,thereisariskto
thelandlordfrompoormaintenanceordamagetotheproperty.
Henceregularinspectionsareallowable,tradedoffagainstthe
tenant’sinterestinquiteenjoyment,asanoverzealouslandlord
mighteffectivelyincreasetherentpaid(forexamplebywastingthe
tenantstime)oralternativelyreducetheamenityofthepropertyto
thetenant.Thisreportassumesthatpositionofthelawreflectsthe
optimumtradeoffbetweenthesetwocompetinginterests.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
IfGwasevicteditcould
resultinarangeof
problemsforherandfor
herson,includingsharing
housingwithothersor
homelessness.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��4-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
11. A
dvic
e
Hwasfinalisingherdivorcefromherhusband.Shewaspregnant
andintendedtoremarryandrelocatetotheUSAwithher
otherthreechildren.Shehassoldherhouseandhasnowhere
elsetolive.Duetoherpregnancy,itwasalsoimportantthat
herdivorcebefinalisedwithintwomonthssothatshecould
remarryandrelocate.Herhusbandiscurrentlynotcontactable.
Shewasadvisedthattherearearangeofproceduralmatters
thatneedtobedealtwith,includingtheneedforherhusband’s
agreement,oralternativelyarelocationorderfromthecourt,
ifshewishestorelocatethechildrenoverseas.Similarly,the
divorceneedstobefinalisedifshewishedtoremarry.TheFamily
Courtwascontactedandthenextavailablecourtdatesand
circuitdateswerearoundthreemonthsaway.Shewasadvised
thatshewouldhavetodemonstrateurgencytobringmatters
forward,howeverservice,orsubstitutedservicewillberequired
toherhusband.
Thisreportassumesthatoneofthefunctionsofthecorrect
operationofthelawistoprovideeconomicallyefficientoutcomes.
Conversely,ifthelawdoesnotoperatecorrectly,forexampleby
makinganincorrectdecision,asocialcostisincurred.Itwould
seemaxiomaticthatthelessinformationisavailable,themore
likelyitisthatanincorrectdecisionwillbemadeandasocialcost
incurred.Inthecurrentcasesuchsocialcostsmightincludetheless
thanoptimumdevelopmentofthechildrenduetolackofcontact
withtheirbiologicalfather.Thelawappearstooperateinthisway,
givingbothpartiestoadisputethechancetobeheard.Thelaw
alsorecognisesthatthecostofobtainingevidenceneedstobe
limited,thatistherearediminishingreturnsandeventuallythe
costofobtainingadditionalevidencewillexceedthebenefitfrom
theincreaseincertainty,orthatnodecisionoradelayeddecision
mayalsoresultinaneconomicallyinefficientoutcome,andthe
longerthedelay,thegreatertheimpact.
WhileHappearstoincuracostfromthedelayinhousingcostsand
relocationcosts,anincorrectdecisionmayalsoleadtoasocialcost.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
12.
Adv
ice
Ihadappliedforadisabilitysupportpensioncitingdepression
andanxiety.TheCLCcontactedCentrelinkandwasadvised
thatI’sapplicationhadbeenrejectedasamedicalassessment
saidtheconditionwasnotpermanentandshewasassessed
ascapableofworking15hoursperweek.I’scaseworkerwas
contactedandundertooktoarrangeapsychiatricassessment.
Themajordifferencesbetweenadisabilitysupportpensionand
unemploymentbenefitsisthatthelatterrequirestherecipient
tobeactivelyseekingworkandunemploymentbenefitsare
around$10
0perweekless.Whileunemploymentbenefitsarea
transferandsoeconomicallyneutralexcepttotheextentthat
administrativecostsareincurred,thereisacosttosocietyfrom
aperson’slostproductivitywhentheyarenotintheworkforce,
howeversuchbenefitisdependentontheunemploymentrate.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
13. A
dvic
e
Jwasfinalisingherdivorcefromherhusband.Shecurrentlyhad
solicitorsrepresentingherwithregardtocustodymattersunder
agrantfromlegalaid.Theyhadadvisedhertoapplyforanother
grantwithrespecttopropertysettlement.TheCLCassisted
herwithpreparationofherapplicationandgaveheradvice
regardingAlternativeDisputeResolution.
Bothpartiesarelikelytohavecontributedtotheassetsofa
marriage,howeveronepartymayhavecontributedearnings
withtheotherpartyfacilitatingtheirabilitytoearn.Effectively
economicefficiencyisexpectedwhenpeoplereceivethebenefits
oftheirlabour.Consequently,divorcetypicallyinvolvesaproperty
settlement.Aproperengagementofthelegalsystemwouldbe
expectedtoleadtoaneconomicallyefficientoutcome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Itislikelythatacorrectapplication
savedsomeadministrativecosts
elsewhere.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
14. A
dvic
e
Kwishedtochangehereldestson’ssurnametoincludeher
currentfamilynamehyphenatedwithhissurname.Shewas
advisedthatshewouldneedtoseekherpreviouspartner’s
agreement,oralternatively,ifshesoughtanorderfromthe
familycourt,shewouldneedtodemonstratethatshehadtaken
allreasonablestepstoobtainhisagreement.Shewasprovided
withaLegalAidfactsheetregardingchangingachild’sname.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
IfKhadappliedforcourtorders,itis
likelyherapplicationwouldberejected
withsomeadditionaladministrative
cost.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofafamilycourtfinalisation
hasbeenestimatedpreviouslyat
$1,550.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
15. A
dvic
e
Lisasingleparentwithtwochildrenandinreceiptofa
parentingpayment.Shehasarangeofdebtsamountingto
around$12,000withbothabankandwithafinancecompany
andsheisunabletoservicethesedebts.Herassetsconsistofa
carvaluedataround$5,000.Shehastriedtonegotiatewiththe
bankregardingapaymentplanbuttheywerenotresponsive.
Shewasadvisedthatloanconsolidationwasunlikelytobe
anoption,asshehadnoincomeotherthanherpension.Her
alternativewasbankruptcy.
Thereisasocialcostwithloandefaultinthatpartofthe
interestratepaidbysocietyingeneralwhenborrowingincludes
acomponentfordefault.Theconsequenceofdefaultthen
isthatpeoplepaymoreforloansthentheywouldifdefault
neveroccurred.Thereisaninherenttensionbetweenthemoral
hazardassociatedwithpeopleincurringdebtthattheynever
intendtorepay,therebyplacingacostontherestofsociety,and
misrepresentationbylenders,wherebypeopleunderestimatethe
costofloansandhenceconsumemorecreditthantheywould
otherwise.Bothoutcomesareinefficient.Thequestionthen
becomeswhethertheeconomicallyefficientoutcomeisbest
achievedbyplacingtheresponsibilitywiththeborrowerorthe
lender.Asasocietyweappeartohavetakenasharedview,with
thelenderhavingsomeresponsibilityduetotheirexposuretoloss,
henceleadingtocreditchecksandthelike,andwiththeborrower
havingsomeresponsibilityduetotheirexposuretoloss,suchas
lossofassetsandgarnisheeorders.
Inthiscaseitseemssomewhatsurprisingthatthebankwasnot
preparedtonegotiate.Itislikelythatthefinancecompanyhad
alienoverheronlyasset,thecar,sotherewouldbenoassets
forthebanktogetaccessto.Ifshedefaultedonpayment,her
circumstancesaresuchthatanyrepaymentordersreceivedwould
bemuchlessthanthecostofpursuingtheclaimagainsther,and
inanyeventwouldbelikelytobesimilartoanyarrangementthey
couldnegotiatewithher.
Fromaneconomicperspective,economicefficiencywouldappear
tobebestachievedbyhavingthebankbeartheexpenseof
recklesslylendingmoneytosomeonewholackstheabilitytorepay.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Ifthebankchaseddebts,theywould
beunlikelytorecovertheirmoney.
Negotiationwouldseemtobe
warrantedanditisnotclearwhythe
bankdidnotdoso.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Lossofhercarislikelyto
haveasignificantimpact
onher,butitmaybethat
shewouldbebetteroff
withoutitasthecostof
repaymentsandrunning
costsmighteasilyexceed
thecostofusingpublic
transport.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
16. A
dvic
e
M’sdefactopartnerpassedawayfromnaturalcausesanddied
intestate.Thedeceasedhadasuperannuationpolicyworth
$23,00
0ofwhichtheclientwasnamedasthesolebeneficiary.
Thedeathcertificatealsolistedtwochildrenasbeneficiariesof
theestate.TheCLCadvisedtheclientthattheywereentitledto
claimonthesuperannuationpolicy,althoughthetrusteecan
makeadiscretionarydecisionifthereareotherpartieswithan
interestintheestate.TheCLCadvisedtheclientwouldrequire
lettersofAdministrationfromthesupremecourtinPerthand
wouldhavetosatisfyrequirementstodemonstratetheirde
factomarriage,includingobtainingStatDecsfromfriendsand
familytosupportherclaim.
Therulewhenpeopledonotmakeawillseemstobetoleavethe
estatetoclosefamilymembers.Theeconomicjustificationmaybe
thatwheretheperson’sestateincludesassetsthatanotherperson
mayhavecontributedtoinonewayandanother,andiftheassets
arelefttoathirdperson,thesecondpersonhaspaidforsomething
andnotreceivedabenefit.Asanexample,aperson’sspousemay
beleftoutoftheirwillhowevertheassetsoftheirestatemay
includeasignificantcontributionfromtheeffortsoftheirspouse.
Presumablythereisatransactioncostassociatedwithcontinually
calculatingandprotectingeachperson’sshareoftheassetsof
amarriage,oralternatively,acostassociatedwitheachperson
maintainingtheirpersonalassetsandaffairs.Ifthelawoverrides
awillinsuchcases,partnerstoamarriagewillnotfeelcompelled
toincursuchcosts.Extendingthisapproach,itmaybethatthose
closesttothepersonaremostlikelytohavecontributedinsome
waytotheassetsoftheestate.Onthisbasis,ifYhadcontributedto
theassetsoftheestate,itisnoteconomicallyefficientforhertobe
deprivedofhershareofthoseassets.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
17. A
dvic
e
Nhadcounselledacouple,bothindividuallyandseparately,
regardingtheirrelationship.Duringcounsellingthehusband
hadmadeadmissionstoNregardingasexualassaultalleged
bythewife.Thewifehadreferredthemattertothepoliceand
wishedNtoprovideevidenceregardingthesessionswiththe
husband.Shewasadvisedthatthehusband’spermissionwould
berequiredtoreleaseinformationregardingthesession.Ifthe
policerequestedtheinformation,sheshouldaskthemtoadvise
theirauthorityforrequestingtheinformation.
Theeconomicbenefitofclientconfidentialityprincipleswould
appeartobethatthebenefitsoffullinformationintreatingor
assistingsomeoneingeneraloutweighthecostsofwithholding
thatinformation.Inthisrespect,thereappeartobecategories
wherethepublicgoodoutweighstheprivategood,forexample
whenrevealingaconfidentialtransmissionmightprotectothers
fromimmediatedanger.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
18. A
dvic
e
O’shusbandpassedaway.Hiswillmadebequeststohisson
anddaughter,withOreceivingthebalanceoftheassets.Her
step-sonhasmadeaclaimonthesuperannuationclaimworth
$65,94
9.14,althoughtheclientanddaughterarelistedasthe
solebeneficiaries,and,accordingtoO,therelationshipbetween
herhusbandandhissonhadbrokendown.Thecasehadanon-
bindingdeathnomination,thusthetrusteehaddiscretionary
powersregardingthewishesofthedeceased.Shewasadvised
thatthesoncouldmakeaclaim,andthatitwouldbeinherbest
interesttobepartytothecomplaintinordertohaveavoiceat
thetribunalregardingherhusband’srelationshipwithhisson.
Thereappeartobesomecaseswhereoverridingadeceased
person’sintentionsmightbejustifiedeconomically.Thesearelikely
tobeareaswheretheperson’sestateincludesassetsthatanother
personmayhavecontributedtoinonewayandanother,andsoif
theassetsarelefttoathirdperson,thesecondpersonhaspaidfor
somethingandnotreceivedabenefit.Asanexample,aperson’s
spousemaybeleftoutoftheirwillhowevertheassetsoftheir
estatemayincludeasignificantcontributionfromtheeffortsof
theirspouse.Presumablythereisatransactioncostassociatedwith
continuallycalculatingandprotectingeachperson’sshareofthe
assetsofamarriage,oralternatively,acostassociatedwitheach
personmaintainingtheirpersonalassetsandaffairs.Ifthelaw
overridesawillinsuchcases,partnerstoamarriagewillnotfeel
compelledtoincursuchcosts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
19. A
dvic
e
Pwasrentingapropertywhichwascondemnedduetofaulty
electricalwork.Hethenhadtorelocate.Hewasoftheviewthat
hehadsufferedstressandmentalstrainfromlivinginproperty
forapproximatelysixmonthsindangerousconditionsandwas
forcedtomovewithshortnotice.Hewasthenseparatedfrom
hissonformanyweeksuntilappropriateaccommodationfound.
Hewasadvisedtherewaslittlebasisonwhichtoprogresshis
claim.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytobeasavingin
administrativeandcourttimefroma
personnotprogressingaclaimwith
littlemerit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Tribunalcostshavebeenpreviously
assessedat$
430.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. A
dvic
e
Qwasassaultedbyherex-partnerandherex-partner’scurrent
partner.Shesufferedsignificantinjuriesfromtheassault
includingbrokenarmrequiringmultipleplatestobeinserted,
multiplebrokenribs,stabbingwoundtotheleg,afractured
cheekrequiringplasticsurgery,adamagedeyesocketand
otherheadinjuries.SheiscurrentlyintheWomen’sRefugefor
herpersonalsafetyandisseparatedfromherchildren.TheCLC
providedtheclientwithinformationregardingtheprocessof
makingaclaimforCriminalInjuriesCompensationandthe
necessaryinformationtheclientwillneedtoprovide.
Asdiscussedpreviously,suchcompensationislikelytobeatransfer
inresponsetoequityconsiderationsratherthaneconomically
efficientinandofitself.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Properpreparationofaclaimislikely
toleadtoareductioninadministrative
costsassociatedwiththeassessment
oftheclaim.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Previouslyassessedat$70
Noneidentified
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
Consumer Credit legal CentreArandomsampleoftwentycasesandtwentyadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedcasesevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue.Typicallytheeconomicbenefitsofthesecasesweresimilartothoseintherandomsampleofcases,consequentlythesewerenotevaluated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 33: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 20 $0 $54,047 $17,850 $3,595
RandomCases 20 $0 $11,670 $35,910 $2,379
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10theConsumerCreditLegalCentrehadtotalexpensesofaround$1,378,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad619casesand12,410advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$46.1million,acostbenefitratioofaround33.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.Howeverthereisconsiderablecomfortinthehighcostbenefitratio,suggestingthatifonlyoneinthirtyoutcomeswasattributabletotheCommunityLegalCentre,costswouldstillexceedbenefits.
Noparticularhighvaluecaseswereidentified,howeverthereisabenefitassociatedwithmostmatters,theaveragebenefitisquitehigh,andaverylargenumberofadvicesareprocessed.Ofparticularinterest,particularlywithregardtomortgagedispute,theearlierthecentrewasinvolvedparticularlypriortolegalaction,thegreaterthebenefit.Theoverallimpressionisthatthecentredealswitharangeofpeopleandmattersanddoesthisinaveryefficientway,particularlynotwastingpeople’stimeandthecentre’sresourceswherethereisnocase,andstrategicallyfollowingthroughonselectedmattersforarangeofreasons.Thisisaneffectiveuseofcommunityresourcesandisreflectedinthehighbenefitcostratio.
Theeconomicbenefitsoftheproperprocessofthelawwithrespecttocontractsaredifficulttodetermine.
Theeconomicbenefitofcontractlawlargelycomesfromallowingpeopletoconducttransactionsovertimebymakingsurethatcustomersgetwhattheypayfor,andsuppliersprovidenomorethantheyhavebeenpaidfor,thatisthatpricesreflectaccuratelyreflectservices.Theeconomiccostsifsocietydidn’thaveaproperregulatorysystemaroundcontractscouldbeenormous,butbecausesocietydoeshavesuchasystem,it(probably)functionsatalevelwherecostsjustequalbenefits.Itisexpectedthatonaverage,themarginalcostsofpursuingaclaimwouldbeequaltothemarginalbenefitshoweverthiswillnotalwaysbethecase,particularlywherethereisasymmetricinformation.TheConsumerCreditLegalCentreperformsanimportantfunctioninthisregard,byprovidingexpertadviceatlowcosttooffsetthehighcosttoindividualsinobtainingsufficientinformationtoreachaninformedview.Insurancecompaniesandfinanciersaredealingwithclaimsandthecourtsallthetime,andsowouldbemuchmorelikelytoknowthelawthananindividualwhomayhaveoneortwomattersinalifetime.Thisprovidesanopportunityformoralhazard,whereacompanymayrejectaclaimwithoutappropriatesupport,buttakingadvantageofthecustomer’slackofsophistication.Thisbenefitisbestassessedintermsofwillingnesstopay,thatiswhatpriceisthecommunitypreparedtopaytohaveaccesstogoodlegaladviceatnocost.
Bywayofexample,thecostofthecentreperadviceis$111.Thismayrepresentgoodvalueintermsofthecommunity’swillingnesstopay,asa“flagfall”withaprivatesolicitorislikely
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
tobearound$300,andthecentrehasaveryhighlevelofexpertiseastheydealwiththesemattersallthetime.OnapercapitabasisandtakingtheadultpopulationofNSWas4.9million,57thecostofthecentreperadultis$0.30peryear.Inthisregard,eventhoughtheaveragebenefitassociatedwithcasesisabouthalfthebenefitassociatedwithadvices,thecasesprobablyserveatrainingorcurrencypurpose,ensuringthatsolicitorsinthecentreareuptodatewiththelaw.Moreimportantly,thereisanadditionalbenefitarisingfromcaseworkasmatterscanoftenbesettledquicklyascreditorsandinsurersknowthattheCLCispreparedtoruncasesthroughcourtorexternaldisputeresolutionandarethereforemoreinclinedtosettlethaniftheCLCofferedadviceonlywithnoopportunitytoengagethelegalsystem.
57 ABSCensus2006
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��0-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. C
ase
A’shousehadbeenpartiallyburntin200
8.Theinsurance
companyhadpaidtheestimatedcostofrepairsandthe
insuredamountforcontents.Abelievedhewasentitledto
paymentforactualvalueofcontents,costsoftemporary
accommodation,costsofremovalofdebrisandthe
differencebetweentheestimatedcostofrepairsand
theactualcostexpendedbythenewownerofthehome
inrepairs.Asubsequentlyreceivedadecisionfromthe
FinancialOmbudsmanService.ThatdecisionfoundAhad
generallyreceivedhisentitlements,howeverhewasadvised
hewasentitledtothecostofremovalofdebrisandsome
accommodationcosts,subjecttoprovidingproofofpayment
fortemporaryaccommodationandforremovalofdebris.
TheCLCadvisedAtoacceptthedeterminationandprovide
copiesofreceiptswithregardtodebrisandtemporary
accommodation.
Theproperoperationofcontractsandrisksharingunder
insuranceisimportantforarangeofreasonsrelatedto
economicefficiency.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Themarginalbenefitassociatedwithasinglecaseis
difficulttoestimate.Itisexpectedthatonaverage,the
marginalcostsofpursuingaclaimwouldbeequaltothe
marginalbenefitshoweverthiswillnotalwaysbethe
case,particularlywherethereisasymmetricinformation.
TheConsumerCreditLegalCentreperformsanimportant
functioninthisregard,byprovidingexpertadviceatlow
costtooffsetthehighcosttoindividualsinobtaining
sufficientinformationtoreachaninformedview.Insurance
companiesaredealingwithclaimsandthecourtsallthe
time,andsowouldbemuchmorelikelytoknowthelaw
thananindividualwhomayhaveoneortwomattersin
alifetime.Thisprovidesanopportunityformoralhazard,
whereacompanymayrejectaclaimwithoutappropriate
support,buttakingadvantageofthecustomer’slackof
sophistication.
TheCLCmayhavereducedadditional
administrativecoststhroughproviding
externaladviceandifhehadgonetocourt
itwouldhavecostbothpartiesandhemay
havelostthesettlement.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Notclear.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
Rand
om sa
mpl
e of
case
s
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
2. C
ase
Breceiveda“NoticebyMortgageerequiringPossession”
duetoarrears.TheCLCcontactedthelenderadvisingofB’s
hardshipduetoastrokeandproposingapaymentplan.
TheCLCcanvassedanumberofoptionswithB,including
refinancingthroughIndigenousBusinessAustralia.Bdecided
tosellherhouseandobtainaccommodationthroughthe
localaboriginalcorporation.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Brokeredagoodoutcome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Possessionbythemortgagee
islikelytohaveresultedin
considerablelosstoS,both
intermsofsalepriceand
intermsofadministrative
costsdeductedbythelender.
Enforcementcostssuchas
thecourtandsheriffarealso
incurred.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Financialdataisnotprovided
intheNSWSupremeCourt
AnnualReview.Thenet
costpersettlementinthe
VictorianSupremeCourthas
beenestimatedelsewhere
at$6,85
0andthisistaken
asthecostofobtaining
appropriatejudgements.
In201
0theNSWSheriff’s
Officeprocessed445,191
operationalmatters.39Court
SupportServiceshadtotal
expensesof$
94.9million
notingthatthisincludes
otherservices.4
0 Thisgivesa
costpermatterof$
213.
Thetotalbenefitisassessed
at$7,06
0.
3. C
ase
Cwasapensionerondisabilitysupport.Chadenteredinto
amortgageforsixmonthswitha‘predatorylender’and
hadsubsequentlybeenissuedwithapossessionnotice.
Thatpossessionnoticewassetasideonthegroundsof
unconscionabilitywiththesettlementallowingCtimeto
refinance,reducingthelegalcostsandreducingthedefault
interest.Thatrefinancingwashinderedbyadefaultlisting
relatedtoacreditcarddebt.TheCLCnegotiatedwiththe
creditcardprovidertopayoutstandingamountsandthen
negotiatedfortheremovalofthedefaultlistingwiththe
creditagency.TheCLCsubsequentlycomplainedtoASIC
regardingthelicensingoftheoriginallender.
Theproperoperationofcontractsandrisksharingunder
loancontractsisimportant.Creditagenciesareimportant
inavoidingmoralhazard.Withrespecttothe‘predatory
lender’,consumerprotectionlegislationislikelytoservean
equityoutcome,ratherthananefficiencyoutcome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thecreditcardmatterwassettledoutof
courthencesavingalargeamountofcourt
time.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assessedaboveat$
540
Thearrangedsettlementhas
allowedAtostayinhisown
home,probablyatalower
costtohimself.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
4. C
ase
Dwasindefaultonamortgageandhadbeenissuedwitha
possessionnotice.TheCLCnegotiatedpaymenttermswith
thelendertoaddressthearrears.
Theproperoperationofcontractsisimportant.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
TheCLCislikelytohavereduced
administrativecostsassociatedwith
mortgagedefault,suchasappealingtothe
FOS,howeverexpensesofaround$ 6,000
hadbeenincurredincourtandlegalcoststo
generatethepossessionnotice.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Theclientwouldprobably
havebeensomewhatworse
offifshehadlostherhome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Amortgageesaleislikely
toinvolvearangeofcosts
whichwereavoided.
Theseincludeagents
andauctioneerscosts.In
December 2
010,themedian
salespriceforahousein
NSWwas$44
0,00
0.41Typical
agentsfeesinNSWare2.5%,
givingacostof$
11,000for
amedianpriceddwelling.
42
Thisistakenasthebenefit.
5. C
ase
Ewasafiftyyearoldilliteratemanwhohadsufferedthree
heartattacksandcouldnolongerworkasacleanerandwas
receivingtheDisabilitySupportPension.Hecontactedthe
CLCashewasinfinancialhardshipregardingacreditcard
debtwhichhewashavingdifficultyrepaying.Arepayment
planwasnegotiatedwiththecreditcardcompany.The
CLCresearchedhissuperannuationanddiscoveredhehad
eightseparatepolicies,threeofwhichhadcoverforTotal
andPermanentDisability(TPD).TheCLCassistedWwith
thevariousapplicationsandprovisionofsubstantiating
documentationrequiredtomakeTPDclaims.Henegotiated
withdoctorstopaythemfollowinghispayout.He
subsequentlyreceivedpaymentsforaround$1
30,000.
ThelawworkedinthiscaseandWreceivedhisentitlement.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asdiscussedpreviously,benefitsarelikelytobemarginal
withrespecttocosts.Benefitnotquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Wwasdepressedasaresult
ofhisfinancialsituationand
thismayhavehadacost.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
6. C
ase
Fhad10unsecuredloanswithpaydaylenders.Hehadno
assets.Onelenderwenttocourttorecoverthedebt.TheCLC
negotiatedarepaymentschemewiththelenderandthis
wasagreedtoatapretrialreview.Thelenderhadlentthe
moneytoFovertheinternetandtherewereanumberof
irregularitieswhichtheCLCadvisedtoASIC.Theseincluded
thecompanynotbeingregisteredwithASIC,havingacredit
licenceorbeingamemberofanexternaldisputeresolution
scheme.TheCLCusedthiscase,andothers,asabasisfor
lobbyingforchangestolegislationtoaddressproblemswith
paydaylendingincludingindependentdisputeresolution,
licensing,responsiblelendingpracticesandaninterest
ratecap.Thefirstthreehavenowbeenaddressedthrough
legislativechanges.
Variationininterestratesisaneconomicallyefficient
outcomewitheachborrowerpayinganinterestrate
commensuratewithhislikelylevelofdefault.Government
regulationoflendingismostlikelyanequitymeasure,or
perhapsintendedtoavoidmarketfailureassociatedwith
asymmetricinformationwherebylendersknowmoreabout
thetruecostthanborrowers.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Anegotiatedsettlementisabetteroutcome
thanonethroughthecourts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit.
Nobudgetaryinformationisavailable
fortheNSWLocalCourt.Thecostofan
unrepresentedmatterintheVictorian
MagistratesCourthasbeenpreviously
assessedat$
330.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
7. C
ase
Ghadpurchasedamathslearningprogramonhirepurchase
fromadoortodoorsalesmaninanticipationthatthere
wouldbeanimprovementinherchildren’sgrades.The
computerandprogramsuppliedstoppedworkingaftersome
monthsandwerenotrepairedbythesupplier.Thedebtwas
subsequentlysoldtoadebtcollectionagencywhoobtained
judgementfor$10,000andanordertohaveG’shousesold
torecoverthedebt.GwasonCentrelinkpaymentsand
wasunabletorepaythedebt.TheCLCwassuccessfulin
applyingtosetasidethejudgementonthegroundsthat
Gwasdisadvantagedduetoherlackofunderstanding
andliteracyandasshehadnotobtained,orindeedhad
notbeencounselledtoobtain,legaladvice.TheCLCthen
negotiatedwiththedebtcollectionagencyandtheyagreed
nottopursuethedebt,probablybecauseofconcernsraised
regardingtheoriginalcontractandthehighpressuresales
tacticsused.
ConsumerLawismostlikelyanequitymeasure,or
perhapsintendedtoavoidmarketfailureassociatedwith
asymmetricinformationwherebylenders/suppliersknow
moreaboutthetruecostthanborrowers.
Anegotiatedsettlementisabetteroutcome.
Thealternativewouldbethecostsof
enforcementincludingtransactioncosts
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thishasbeenassessedpreviouslyat$
6,85
0in
courtandenforcementcostsand$11,000in
agentsfees,givingatotalbenefitof$
17,850.
.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
8. C
ase
Hhadbeeninvolvedinaworkplaceaccidentandwas
receivingworkerscompensation.Asaresulthewasbehind
inhismortgagepaymentsandwasissuedwithadefault
notice.Hehadaccessedhissuperannuationinordertopay
offarrearsandexpectedtoreceivealumpsumworkers
compensationpaymentinthefuturewhichhewoulduseto
reducehishomeloan.Hehadaskedthebankforadditional
hardshipreliefbutthebankrefusedonthegroundsthat
hiscircumstanceswereunlikelytochange.Thematterwas
referredtotheFinancialOmbudsmanServiceandwas
pursuedbytheclient.
Thereisaeconomicbenefitintheproperenforcementof
contracts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
9. C
ase
Iwasa79yearoldnonEnglishspeakerwithslightdementia.
Hehadacarcrashandmadeasuccessfulclaimagainsthis
insurancecompany.Onfurtherinvestigation,theinsurance
companyconcludedtheclaimmayhavebeenfraudulent,
asMhadprovidedadifferentaccountofeventstoan
investigator.Theinsurancecompanysoughttorecoverthe
moneypaidforrepairsandthecostofinvestigations.TheCLC
referredthemattertotheFinancialOmbudsmanServiceand,
subsequenttoCCLCmakingsubmissionsonbehalfofI,the
insurancecompanydroppedtheirclaim.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeproperly
enforced.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
CostsofrecoverythroughtheCourtshave
beenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thesecostshavebeenpreviouslyassessedat
$330forthemagistratescourtand$21
3for
theSheriff’sOffice,givingabenefitof$
540.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��4-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
10. C
ase
Owingtoachronicillness,Jwasnolongerabletowork.She
wasunabletopayhermortgagerepayments,andduetoa
dropinvalueofherhome,therewaslikelytobeamortgage
shortfall.JapproachedtheCLCforadviceregarding
accessinghersuperannuationandmakingatotaland
permanentdisabilityclaim.Shewasadvisedifsheaccessed
hersuperannuationandmadetheclaim,themoneycould
beaccessedbyhercreditorsintheeventofbankruptcy,
howeverifsheaccessedsuperannuationafterbankruptcy
themoneywouldbeprotected.Shedecidedtoaccessher
superannuationtoassistwithherlivingexpenseswhileshe
finalisedhermortgagethroughsaleofherhouse.CCLCdid
notassistwiththisprocessbutgavehertheinformationshe
needed.
Theeconomicpurposeofmakingsuperannuationimmune
frombankruptcyisnotclear,howeveritmaybeaway
ofshiftingthecostofretirementfromgovernment(via
pensions)tocreditors(viaprotectingsuperannuation).
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
11. C
ase
K’shusbandhadreceivedadefaultnoticefromhiscredit
cardproviderwithregardtobeingbehindinpaymentsand
approachedtheCLCtoprovideadvice.Herhusbandhad
beenilltwoyearsearlierandhadreceivednoincomefor
threemonths.Hehadrecentlylosthisjobandhadbeen
reemployedatalowerincome.Hewasreferredtoafinancial
counsellor.TheserviceassessedK’sfinancialpositionand
concludedsheandherhusbandwereinsolventasthey
couldnotpaytheirdebtsastheyfelldueandtheirassets
weresimilartotheirliabilities.Theyhadaround15creditors.
Theywerefurtheradvisedthatahardshipapplicationwas
unlikelytobesuccessfulastherewaslittleevidencethat
theircircumstanceswerelikelytochangeforthebetter
intheforeseeablefuture.Kwasreferredtoaface-to-face
financialcounsellingservicetoassistinnegotiatingpayment
arrangementsandtoexplorebankruptcy.
Itiseconomicallyefficientthatpeoplebeheldliablefortheir
debts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Itwaslikelytobebettertoprogress
bankruptcythantodelaytheinevitable.If
thecoupledidnotgobankrupt,thevarious
creditorswouldpursuetheirdebtsseparately
atconsiderablecostandwithnolikelyreturn.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
$540(estimatedpreviously)multipliedby15
creditorsgivesatotalbenefitof$
8,10
0.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
12. C
ase
Lwasnolongerworkingandwasinreceiptofacarer’s
pension.Shewasinfinancialdifficulties.Herlenderhad
foreclosedonherloanandherhousehadbeensoldwitha
shortfall.Shehadarangeofotherdebtsandonecreditor
hadservedherwithastatementofclaim.TheCLCadvised
shehadlittlebasisforahardshipvariationorotherclaims
againstherlenders.Ldecidedtoapplyforbankruptcy.As
aresultofinvestigationscarriedoutaspartofthecase,
theCLCfoundthatarepresentativeofoneorganisation,a
majorlender,providedmisleadinginformation.Inaddition,
thecontactdetailsfortheorganisationontheFinancial
OmbudsmanServicewereoutofdate.Asaresultofa
complaintbytheCLC,thelenderprovidedfurthertrainingfor
staffandupdateditsdetails.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts,howeverthereisconsiderableexpensein
pursuingdebt,especiallywheretherearenoassets.Hence
thelawfacilitatesbankruptcy.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Timelyadvicetoseekbankruptcyislikelyto
savetransactioncostsasthevariouscreditors
chaseuptheirdebtsindividuallyand
eventuallyseekbankruptcyorgetpayment
ordersthatareunenforceable.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thenumberofcreditorsisnotknown,but
assumingtwo,thebenefitisassessedat$54
0times2,or$
1,08
0.
Noapparentbenefit.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
13. C
ase
M’shomehadbeendamagedinfloods.Shewasadvised
bytheinsurancecompanythatdamagefromfloodingwas
notcoveredbyherpolicyandthattheywereawaitinga
hydrologyreportpriortofinalisingherclaim.Thematterwas
takenoverbyLegalAidQueensland.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeenforced.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
TheCLCwasinvolvedinthesemattersto
assistLegalAidQueenslandwithalargecase
loadarisingfromflooding.
Assessmentofbenefit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
14. C
ase
Nhadmadeaclaimagainsthisinsuranceasaresultofflood
damagetohishome.Nwasconcernedabouttheprogress
ofhisclaim.TheCLCcontactedtheinsurancecompany
andremindedthemoftheirobligationsundertheGeneral
InsuranceCodeofPracticetoprovidetimelyinformation.N
receivedacompassionatepaymentfromtheinsurerwhich
wasinlinewithwhathebelievedhisentitlementtobe.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeenforced.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Nil
15. C
ase
O’sinsuranceclaimforherstolenanddamagedcarhadbeen
rejectedbytheinsurancecompanyasinvestigationsrevealed
anumberofinconsistencieswhichledthemtosuspectfraud.
TheCLCadvisedherofanumberofareaswhereshemaybe
inbreachoftheInsuranceContractsAct198
4andconfirmed
thelegalbasisoftheinsurersactions.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeproperly
enforcedandthatmoralhazardisavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Courtactionmayhavebeenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assessedpreviouslyat$
540.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
16. C
ase
Pbelievedthathewasincorrectlylistedasdefaultingwith
acreditagency.UponreviewofdocumentstheCLCadvised
himthatthedefaultlistingappearedtobeappropriateand
thatactionbythecreditortorecovertheunpaiddebtwould
alsoappeartobesupported.
Creditlistingsareimportantastheyprovideinformation
toinformtheproperallocationofrisk,itselfeconomically
efficient.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
17. C
ase
Qhadmadeaclaimforstormdamagetoherhomewith
herinsurer.Theinsurancecompanyassessedthedamage
claimedasbeinglongtermdamageasaresultofpoor
buildingpractices.TheCLCadvisedherofthecontractual
basisfortheinsurancecompany’sdecisionandadvisedher
whatactionwouldberequiredtosubstantiateherclaim.The
matterwasnotprogressed.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeproperly
enforcedandthatmoralhazardisavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
TheCLCadviceavoidedcorrespondenceanda
rangeofadministrativecostswithinsurerand
possiblecostsofmediationorcourtaction.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Previouslyassessedat$33
0.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
18. C
ase
Rhadsufferedaworkplaceinjurythatlefthimunableto
work.HewasreceivingtheDisabilitySupportPensionand
wasawaitingaworkerscompensationsettlement.Hehad
receivedadefaultnoticeonamortgageforapropertyowned
byhim.Thepropertyhadbeenofferedforsalebutprices
offeredwerenotsufficienttopayofftheoutstandingdebt.
Hishardshipapplicationhadbeenrejectedasthelender
wasoftheviewthathiscircumstanceswerelikelytobe
permanent.Avariationtopaymenttermswasnegotiatedto
provideadditionaltimeforRtosellhishome.Duetoafailure
tosellthepropertyanddifficultyinservicinganumberof
otherdebts,Rdecidedtohandovervacantpossessiontothe
lenderandthenfileforbankruptcy.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts,howevertherecanbeconsiderable
administrativeexpensepursuingdebtswherethereareno
assets.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Voluntaryhandoverprobablyreduced
administrationcoststosomeextent,
howeverthiswasmostlikelyoffsetbyother
negotiations.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
19. C
ase
Sandhispartnerhadrentedarangeofhouseholdfurniture
fromasupplier.TheywerereceivingCentrelinkpayments.
Duetofinancialdifficulties,theyterminatedthelease
agreementandwererequiredtopayanoutstanding
amountof$
290,orifnotpaid,totalcostsof$
825.Therewas
someevidencethatthesuppliermayhaveenteredintoan
unsuitableleasecontractasitwaslikelytheleasepayments
wouldhaveinvolvedsubstantialhardship.Sdidnotprogress
thematter.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobeliablefortheir
debts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. C
ase
Thadresignedfromherpreviousjobasaresultofpersonal
stress.Shehadfallenbehindinherloanpaymentsandher
applicationforahardshipvariationhadbeendeclined.She
wasexpectingtorecommenceworksoonwithadifferent
employer,andappealedtotheFinancialOmbudsmanService.
AmediationsettlementwasreachedhoweverTdecidednot
toacceptthatsettlementanddecidedtoseeklegaladvice
elsewhereregardingthesettlement.
Theprocessworkedbutitappearedthatshewasunhappy
withtheoutcome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. A
dvic
e
Aisonworkerscompensationandhadreceivedadefault
noticefromhishomeloanlender.Hehadbeenadvisedbythe
banktoconverthisloantofixedinterest,butwasnotableto
paythehigherpaymentsandsowasissuedadefaultnotice.
Hechangedbacktoavariableloanbutwasrequiredtopay
abreakfee.Thebankdidnotadvisehimoftheoptionofa
hardshipvariationwhentheysuggestedhefixtheinterest
rate.TheCLCadvisedtheclienttolodgeinFOSandwhat
toargueoveraseriesoftelephoneadvices.Theclientwas
successfulinhavingthebreakfeerefunded.Thelikelybasisof
thebank’sdecisionwastheirfailuretoadviseAofthehardship
variationoption.
ConsumerLawismostlikelyanequitymeasure,or
perhapsintendedtoavoidmarketfailureassociated
withasymmetricinformationwherebylendersknow
moreaboutthetruecostthanborrowers.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Therewaslikelytobeconsiderableexpense
associatedwithdefaultandenforcement.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assessedasexternality.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thishasbeenassessed
previouslyat$
6,85
0incourt
andenforcementcostsand
$11,00
0inagentsfees,givinga
totalbenefitof$
17,850.
2. A
dvic
e
Bownedarentalpropertywhichhadburntdownwhile
unoccupied.Theinsurerrefusedtheclaimonthebasisthatthe
propertywasnotstructurallysound.Followingadvicefromthe
CLC,BarguedthatBhadmetherdutyofutmostgoodfaithas
Bhadregularlymaintainedthepropertyandwasnotaware
ofproblemswithsecurityattheproperty.Theinsureroffered
$50,00
0insettlementagainstherclaimof$
70,000whichshe
accepted.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeenforced.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Inaproperlyoperatingsystem,marginalcostswouldbe
expectedtoequalmarginalbenefits,consequentlythe
benefitisnotquantified.
Ifthematterhadbeenpursuedthrough
thecourtstherewouldbeaconsiderable
administrationcost.
Asse
ssem
ent o
f ben
efit
Courtandrecoverycostshavebeenpreviously
assessedat$
6,85
0.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
3. A
dvic
e
Chadmultipledebtsincludinga$9
0,00
0shortfallona
propertyhehadsold.Hiswifehasstoppedworkingdueto
medicalproblemsandtheyareunabletoservicetheirdebts.
Therewasnoequityintwootherpropertiesheowneddueto
apoorhousingmarket.Hewasadvisedthat,consideringhis
circumstances,avoidingbankruptcywasunlikelyandheshould
considerearlybankruptcyratherthandrawingdownsuper,as
thiswouldbeprotectedfrombankruptcy.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts,howevertherecanbeconsiderable
administrativeexpensepursuingdebtswherethereare
noassets.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efits
Notquantified.
Voluntarybankruptcymaybealowcost
optionallaround,ascourtactionisavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thisbenefithasbeenpreviouslyassessedat
$6,850.Acrosstwoproperties,thisisabenefit
of$13,700.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
4. A
dvic
e
Dhadguaranteedaloanforanotherpropertywithher
home.Theotherpropertywasoccupiedbyhersonandinher
husband’s,son’sandhername.Thesondefaultedonpayment
andthelenderobtainedpossessionofthepropertybuthas
beenunabletosellit.Shewishedtorefinanceandsubdivide
herhomebutisunabletodothatbecausethereisacaveat
onthepropertyarisingfromtheguarantee.Shewasadvised
thattheactionsofthebankappearedtobewithintheirrights
(givenherinstructions)butshewasalsoreferredtoaprivate
solicitorforfurtherassistanceshouldshewishtopursuethe
matterfurther,ortrytonegotiatewiththebank.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeproperly
enforced.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Rand
om sa
mpl
e of
Adv
ices
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
5. A
dvic
e
Ewasinfinancialdifficultiesoverunpaidratesandloan
repayments.Hehadnoequityineitherhishomeorhis
investmentproperty.Hisapplicationforhardshipprovisions
wasrefusedastherewasnolikelihoodthathiscircumstances
wouldchange.Hehasmadeapplicationtopaybyinstalments,
takenmatterstotheFinancialServicesOmbudsmanand
discussedbankruptcyoptionswiththeCLC.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
6. A
dvic
e
Fwaspursuedbyapolicecarwhilespeeding.Thepolicecar
struckhim,incurringdamage.Theinsurerhassoughtto
recoverthemoneyfromhim.Hewasadvisedthathewaslikely
tobeliableforthemoney,thatheshouldmakeanofferto
settleandofthestepsheshouldtakeifhewishestodispute
thequantumofthedamage.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobeliablefor
theirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Itislikelythatcourtrecoveryactionhasbeen
avoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Previouslyassessedat$54
0.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
7. A
dvic
e
Gwasunabletoworkduetomedicalproblems.Shewas
unabletopayhercreditcarddebts.Shehadsoughtahardship
concessionhowevershewasrefusedasherproblemwaslong
term.Shewasadvisedtoreferthemattertoindependent
disputeresolutionandtomakeaclaimagainstherincome
protectionpolicyattachedtohersuperannuation.Shewas
alsoreferredtoaface-to-facefinancialcounsellingservicefor
furtherassistance.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
8. A
dvic
e
Hwasinvolvedinacarcrashandhasnotworkedsince.Heis
ontheDisabilitySupportPension.Hehasreceivedajudgement
againsttheotherside’sinsurer,howevertheinsurerhas
appliedforaninjunctionagainstenforcingthejudgement.He
hasengagedinindependentdisputeresolutionwithanother
creditorandtheyhaveofferedtoacceptanirrevocableorder
guaranteeingpaymentfromthecarcrashpayment.Hewas
advisedtoseriouslyconsidertheoffersubjecttoobtaining
furtheradvicefromhiscompensationsolicitorregardingthe
quantumofthecarcrashsettlementandthelikelihoodofthe
injunctionbeingsustained.Hewasalsogiveninformation
aboutfacetofacefinancialcounsellingandbankruptcy.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
9. A
dvic
e
IcontactedtheCLCregardinganenforcementmatterin
Queensland.TheCLCwasunabletoadviseandhewasreferred
toQueenslandLegalAid.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
10. A
dvic
e
Jhadlostherjobandwasinfinancialhardship.Shehad
consolidatedherdebtand,ontheadviceoftheCLC,had
successfullysoughtahardshipvariation.Howeverattheend
ofthehardshipperiod,hercircumstanceshaddeteriorated
furtherduetoillhealth.TheCLCadvisedagainstrefinancing
withahighcostlenderandrecommendedthatsheput
herhomeonthemarketasitappearedinevitablethatshe
wouldlosethehome.Bysellingitherself,shewouldbe
likelytomaximiseherreturnandminimiselegalcosts.Jdid
notprogressthematterandwasthenissuedwithadefault
notice.Shewasadvisedwhatstepsshewasrequiredtotake
inresponsetothedefaultnoticeandwascounselledto
makesomedecisionsregardingherfuturecomparedtothe
alternativeofbeingovertakenbyevents.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
11. A
dvic
e
Khasenteredintovoluntarybankruptcyoveradebtof
$80,00
0.Toavoidlosinghishome,hewantedtonegotiate
withthetrusteetoaccept$
35,000putupbyfamilymembers
andannulthebankruptcy.Hewasadvisedthatheshould
demonstratetothetrusteewhythetrusteeandcreditorswill
bebetteroffacceptinghisofferthanbysellinghishome.Itis
likelythereturnonsaleofthehomewillbearound$35,000
howevertherewillbeothercostsassociatedwithrecovering
thisamount.
Itappearshehascalculatedtheminimumhecanoffer
thetrusteetoretainhishome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Anegotiatedprocessislikelytobeagood
outcomehoweverinthiscasetheoutcomeis
unknown.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
12. A
dvic
e
Lhasbeenrecentlypursuedbyadebtcollectionagency
regardingadebtdatingtosomeyearsago.Thetwelveyear
periodtoenforcethedebtpursuanttoajudgmentexpires
soon.Lwasadvisedtoconfirmwhethertherewasajudgement
regardingthedebt.Ifnotheshouldlodgeanappealwiththe
FinancialOmbudsmanServicearguingthatthedebtisstatute
barred.Ifthereisajudgement,thecreditorcanapplyforan
extensionoftimetoenforcethedebt.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
forpayingtheirdebts.Theeconomicbenefitsof
limitationsontimearenotclear,howeveritmay
relatetotheextendedcostsindealingwithmatters
thataremanyyearsoldandthedifficultyinobtaining
information.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-��0-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
13. A
dvic
e
MwasworkinginAustraliabutintendedtoreturnoverseas
soon.Shewasinvolvedinamotorvehicleaccidentwhereshe
wasatfault.Shewasuninsuredandtheinsurancecompany
soughtthecostofrepairstotheothervehicle.Mcanvasseda
rangeofoptionsincludingleavingthecountrywithoutpaying
thedebt.OntheadviceoftheCLCshemadeanoffertothe
insurancecompanywhichwasaccepted.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletopaytheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Thereislikelytohavebeenasavingin
recoverycostsbytheinsurancecompany
includingcourttime.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecosthasbeenpreviouslyassessedat
$540.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
14. A
dvic
e
Nwasoutofworkandhadaccrued$2
5,00
0inarrearson
hismortgagethroughenteringintohardshiparrangements.
Hehadsincereturnedtoworkandthelenderwasseeking
paymentofthearrears.Hewasadvisedhisoptionswereto
capitalisethearrearswiththeagreementofthelenderorsell
hishometopayoffhisdebt.Hewasalsoadvisedtolodgea
complaintwiththeFinancialOmbudsmanServiceintheevent
thatthelenderissuedastatementofclaimbeforeasolution
couldbenegotiated.
ConsumerLawismostlikelyanequitymeasure,or
perhapsintendedtoavoidmarketfailureassociated
withasymmetricinformationwherebylendersknow
moreaboutthetruecostthanborrowers.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Anegotiatedprocessislikelytobeagood
outcome,asisengagingtheFinancial
OmbudsmanService.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
15. A
dvic
e
Ohasbeenoutofworkduetoillnessbutisnowrecovering.
Shehasanumberofdebtswithpaymentarrangements
inplace.Shehadrecentlyreceivedanoticefromadebt
collectionagencyfor$
450andastatementofclaimfromher
homelender.Shewasadvisedtoprepareahardshipcasefor
alternativedisputeresolutiononhermortgageproposing
capitalisingarrears,extendingthelifeoftheloan,reducing
repaymentsandthelike.Shewasadvisedtomakeanofferto
thedebtcollectionagency.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Anegotiatedprocessislikelytobeagood
outcome.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thisbenefithasbeenpreviouslyassessed
at$54
0forthesmallclaimand$17,850for
theavoidanceofmortgagedefaultandthe
retentionofherhome,givingatotallikely
benefitof$
18,390.
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
16. A
dvic
e
Phadincurredcostswhenherholidayaccommodationwas
cancelledduetoinsolvencyonthepartofhertravelagency.
Thecancelledaccommodationhadbeenpaidwithhercredit
card.Whenshecontactedhertravelinsuranceprovider,she
wasadvisedthatdefaultbythetravelagentwasexcludedby
thepolicy.Shehadbeenadvisedbytheliquidatorsthatthe
travelagencyhadnoassets.ShewasadvisedbyCCLCtohave
thedebitchargedbackunderthetermsandconditionsofher
creditcardinstead.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletogetwhatthey
payfor.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
17. A
dvic
e
Duetoreductionsinincome,Qhadfallenbehindinpayments
onhisinvestmentproperty.Thelenderhadobtained
judgementandwasinpossessionoftheproperty.Qexpected
therewouldbeashortfallonthedebtifthepropertywassold.
Qhopedtogetthepropertybackandnegotiateanextended
loanwhichhecouldafford.Hewasadvisedthathehadlimited
optionsapartfromnegotiatingwiththelender.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
18. A
dvic
e
Rhadadebtof$
100,00
0onhisfarmandhome,withboth
valuedataround$1,000,000.Duetoinjurieshecannolonger
operatethefarmasabusiness.Hehadapaymentplanin
placeandhasthepropertyforsale,howeverthebankwas
threateningtotakeactiontorecovertheirdebt.Ontheadvice
oftheCLC,hewassuccessfulinnegotiatingtimewiththebank
toenablehimtoselltheproperty.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Arangeofrecoverycostshavebeenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Courtactionbythebankisassessedat
$6,850.
Seizurebythebankislikelyto
haveresultedincoststoP.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil.
19. A
dvic
e
Shadincurredadebtofsomehundredsofdollarsinunpaid
tollroadcharges.Shehashaddifficultyinnegotiatingwiththe
provideroverthephone.Shewasadvisedtocommencepaying
byinstalmentsandtomakeanofferinwriting.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsible
fortheirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Anofferofsettlementislikelytoleadto
reducedadministrationcostsonbehalfofthe
tollroadcompany.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Assessedpreviouslyas$
540.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. A
dvic
e
T’svehiclehadbeendamagedinacarcrash.Shewasuninsured
andtheothervehiclewasacompanyownedcar.Shewas
advisedtoforwardaletterofdemandalongwithquotes
supportingherclaimtotheotherparty.Shewasadvisedthat
negotiationsareusuallybetterthantakinglegalactionand
wasadvisedoftimelimitsregardingherclaimintheevent
thatlegalactionshouldbenecessary.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobearthecostof
theirnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Notquantified
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
Marrickville legal CentreArandomsampleoftwentycasesandtwentyadviceswereselectedandtheeconomicbenefitsevaluated.Inaddition,staffprovidedcasesevaluatedbythemasbeingofhighvalue,howevertheeconomicbenefitsofthesecasesweresimilartothoseintherandomsampleofcases,consequentlythesewerenotevaluated.
Theresultsoftheanalysisaretabulatedbelow.
Table 34: economic benefits of selected cases
group number tHe lAW tHe proCess externAlities AverAge benefit
RandomAdvices 20 $0 $4,490 $6,850 $567
RandomCases 20 $0 $6,168 $1,140 $365
Source:JSAresearchandanalysis
In2009-10MarrickvilleLegalCentrehadtotalexpensesofaround$877,000.Inthatperiod,thecentrehad425casesand5,328advices.Usingtheaveragesfortherandomsampleabove,thetotalbenefitisestimatedat$3.2million,acostbenefitratioofaround4,andsufficientlyhightojustifytheexpenditureonthecentre.
ThemajoruncertaintyisthedegreetowhichthebenefitwouldnothavebeenachievediftheCommunityLegalCentredidnotexist,thatiswhethertheoutcomemayhavebeenachievedbyotherprocesses.IfoneinfouroutcomeswasattributabletotheCommunityLegalCentre,costswouldstillexceedbenefits.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-133-
Deta
ils
the
law
the
pro
cess
exte
rnal
itie
s
1. C
ase
A, a
n 18
year
old
on
Cent
relin
k pa
ymen
ts, h
ad e
nter
ed in
to a
n ag
reem
ent w
ith a
mob
ile p
hone
pro
vide
r. She
exc
eede
d th
e ca
p on
her
initi
al p
lan
and
so e
nter
ed in
to a
mor
e ex
pens
ive
plan
whi
ch sh
e w
as u
nabl
e to
affo
rd. S
he h
ad a
ccru
ed a
deb
t of
$1,800
whi
ch th
e co
mpa
ny so
ught
to re
cove
r. The
re w
ere
som
e irr
egul
ariti
es in
her
orig
inal
pla
n ap
plic
atio
n, a
s she
wou
ld n
ot
have
bee
n el
igib
le u
nder
the
prov
ider
’s gu
idel
ines
due
to h
er
low
inco
me.
The
CLC
succ
essf
ully
neg
otia
ted
with
the
prov
ider
to
hav
e th
e de
bt w
aive
d du
e to
E’s
inab
ility
to p
ay.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
peo
ple
to b
e re
spon
sible
for
thei
r deb
ts. A
t the
sam
e tim
e, m
arke
t fai
lure
can
arriv
e fr
om a
sym
met
ric in
form
atio
n w
hich
may
be
the
case
in
this
mat
ter.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Ther
e is
likel
y to
hav
e be
en a
n ad
min
istra
tive
savi
ng, a
s the
com
pany
wou
ld h
ave
incu
rred
re
cove
ry co
sts,
with
thos
e co
sts a
lso in
clud
ing
cour
t tim
e.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
This
bene
fit h
as b
een
prev
ious
ly a
sses
sed
at
$540
.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
No
bene
fit.
2. C
ase
At t
he a
ge o
f 15,
B h
ad b
een
invo
lved
in a
car c
rash
whi
le
driv
ing
a fr
iend
’s fa
ther
’s ca
r and
a fe
nce.
He
curr
ently
has
no
inco
me.
The
CLC
neg
otia
ted
for a
redu
ctio
n in
the
debt
and
for
a pa
ymen
t pla
n, h
owev
er B
did
not
agr
ee to
the
paym
ent p
lan.
It
appe
ared
his
pref
erre
d st
rate
gy w
as vo
lunt
ary
bank
rupt
cy.
Subs
eque
ntly
the
owne
rs o
f the
car a
nd o
f the
fenc
e ob
tain
ed
defa
ult j
udge
men
t aga
inst
him
for $
21,000
.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
peo
ple
to b
e lia
ble
for t
heir
debt
s.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
3. C
ase
C re
nted
a p
rote
cted
pre
mise
s und
er th
e La
ndlo
rds a
nd
Tena
nts A
ct fr
om th
e RT
A. T
he R
TA so
ught
to e
vict
her
whe
n sh
e re
ques
ted
repa
irs, c
laim
ing
imm
unity
from
the
Act a
s a
repr
esen
tativ
e of
the
crow
n. T
he C
LC a
ssist
ed C
in a
ppea
ling
to
the
tena
ncy
trib
unal
, how
ever
the
trib
unal
foun
d fo
r the
RTA
. Th
e m
atte
r the
n w
ent t
o th
e N
SW S
upre
me
Cour
t and
fina
lly to
th
e H
igh
Cour
t of A
ustr
alia
, whi
ch fo
und
for t
he te
nant
. The
CLC
as
siste
d C
in o
btai
ning
a n
umbe
r of g
rant
s for
lega
l aid
thro
ugh
the
proc
ess.
Law
s aro
und
cont
rolle
d te
nanc
y ar
e lik
ely
to b
e ba
sed
on
cons
ider
atio
ns o
f equ
ity ra
ther
than
on
cons
ider
atio
ns o
f ec
onom
ic e
ffici
ency
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
4. C
ase
D h
ad b
een
assa
ulte
d w
hich
resu
lted
in h
er b
eing
seve
rely
in
jure
d an
d re
quiri
ng su
rger
y. Th
e CL
C as
siste
d he
r in
prep
arin
g he
r suc
cess
ful c
laim
for v
ictim
’s co
mpe
nsat
ion
in th
e am
ount
of
$18
,000
.
As d
iscus
sed
prev
ious
ly, v
ictim
s com
pens
atio
n is
mos
t lik
ely
an e
quity
mea
sure
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Ther
e m
ay b
e so
me
redu
ctio
n in
adm
inist
ratio
n tim
e fr
om a
pro
perly
pre
pare
d ap
plic
atio
n.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Sim
ilar b
enefi
ts h
ave
prev
ious
ly b
een
asse
ssed
at
$70
.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
5. C
ase
The
pro
pert
y oc
cupi
ed b
y E
had
rece
ntly
bee
n so
ld. T
he n
ew
owne
r ini
tially
offe
red
a six
mon
th le
ase,
how
ever
late
r sou
ght
poss
essio
n of
the
prop
erty
. An
agre
emen
t was
reac
hed
durin
g co
ncili
atio
n fo
r a th
ree
mon
th le
ase
with
a re
ntal
incr
ease
.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
cont
ract
s to
be p
rope
rly
enfo
rced
.A
trib
unal
hea
ring
was
avo
ided
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 200
9-10
, the
CTT
T fin
alise
d 62
,068
ap
plic
atio
ns fo
r a to
tal b
udge
t of $
26.6
m
illio
n,43
or $
429
per a
pplic
atio
n. T
he b
enefi
t is
asse
ssed
at $
430
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Rand
om sa
mpl
e of
case
s
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-134-
Deta
ils
the
law
the
pro
cess
exte
rnal
itie
s
6. C
ase
F w
as ch
arge
d w
ith b
eing
an
unlic
ense
d dr
iver
and
driv
ing
negl
igen
tly. T
he C
LC a
ssist
ed h
er w
ith h
er co
urt a
ppea
ranc
e w
here
she
plea
ded
guilt
y an
d re
ceiv
ed a
redu
ced
fine
of $70
0.
She
agre
ed to
pay
the
fine
by in
stal
men
ts d
educ
ted
from
her
Ce
ntre
link
paym
ents
.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
peo
ple
to b
ear t
he co
st o
f th
eir n
eglig
ent b
ehav
ior.
The
cost
s of a
litig
ant i
n pe
rson
wer
e av
oide
d,
as w
ere
reco
very
cost
s fro
m e
nfor
cing
the
judg
emen
t.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
No
budg
etar
y in
form
atio
n is
avai
labl
e fo
r th
e N
SW Lo
cal C
ourt
. The
cost
of a
mat
ter
in th
e Vi
ctor
ian
Mag
istra
tes C
ourt
has
bee
n pr
evio
usly
ass
esse
d at
$27
0, a
nd 20%
(the
ad
ditio
nal c
ost o
f a li
tigan
t in
pers
on b
ased
on
WA
info
rmat
ion)
is $56
. The
cost
of a
ctio
n by
the
Sher
iff’s
Offi
ce h
as b
een
prev
ious
ly
asse
ssed
at $
213,
giv
ing
a to
tal b
enefi
t of $
270.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
7. C
ase
G h
ad li
mite
d En
glish
and
was
a re
cent
mig
rant
with
no
inco
me.
He
had
incu
rred
aro
und
$1,300
in fi
nes f
rom
trav
ellin
g on
trai
ns w
ithou
t a ti
cket
. The
CLC
repr
esen
ted
him
at C
ourt
. He
plea
ded
guilt
y, th
e fin
e w
as re
duce
d an
d a
paym
ent p
lan
was
en
tere
d in
to.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
peo
ple
to b
e lia
ble
for t
heir
debt
s.Pl
eadi
ng g
uilty
and
ent
erin
g in
to a
pa
ymen
t pla
n ha
s pro
babl
y sa
ved
a ra
nge
of
adm
inist
rativ
e an
d co
urt c
osts
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Asse
ssed
abo
ve a
t $27
0.
No
bene
fit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
8. C
ase
H re
nted
a p
rope
rty
from
a C
omm
unity
Hou
sing
Prov
ider
. As
a re
sult
of ch
ange
s in
the
way
of c
alcu
latin
g in
com
e hi
s ren
t w
as in
crea
sed
how
ever
he
had
not p
aid
the
incr
ease
d re
nt. T
he
prov
ider
had
writ
ten
to h
im re
ques
ting
the
outs
tand
ing
rent
. Th
e CL
C ad
vise
d hi
m th
at th
e re
ntal
incr
ease
was
app
ropr
iate
an
d w
ithin
curr
ent g
uide
lines
.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
cont
ract
s to
be e
nfor
ced.
Tim
ely
advi
ce is
like
ly to
lead
to re
duce
d ad
min
istra
tion
cost
s bot
h by
the
prov
ider
and
in
the
tena
ncy
trib
unal
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
CTTT
cost
s hav
e be
en a
sses
sed
at $43
0.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
9. C
ase
I had
wor
ked
as a
casu
al cl
erk
for t
en ye
ars w
hen
she
was
di
smiss
ed. S
he b
elie
ved
she
had
been
unf
airly
dism
issed
, and
th
e CL
C ne
gotia
ted
an o
utco
me
with
her
form
er e
mpl
oyer
in
clud
ing
thre
e w
eeks
’ pay
and
a w
ritte
n re
fere
nce.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
cont
ract
s to
be p
rope
rly
enfo
rced
. How
ever
ther
e is
unlik
ely
to b
e an
eco
nom
ic
effic
ienc
y as
soci
ated
with
unf
air d
ismiss
al la
ws,
with
th
ese
likel
y to
be
an e
quity
mea
sure
.
Neg
otia
ted
outc
ome
save
d tim
e an
d ad
min
istra
tive
effo
rt b
y al
l par
ties a
nd b
y th
e In
dust
rial R
elat
ions
Com
miss
ione
r.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Data
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
for t
he In
dust
rial R
elat
ions
Co
mm
issio
n, h
ence
the
bene
fit h
as b
een
take
n as
sim
ilar t
o th
e CT
TT, t
hat i
s $43
0.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
10. C
ase
J had
pre
viou
sly b
een
a De
part
men
t of H
ousin
g te
nant
, but
was
ev
icte
d du
e to
non
pay
men
t of r
ent.
She
has s
chiz
ophr
enia
and
is
in p
rivat
e re
ntal
acc
omm
odat
ion.
Her
app
licat
ion
to b
e pl
aced
on
the
DoH
hou
sing
list h
ad b
een
refu
sed.
The
CLC
ass
isted
her
in
bei
ng p
lace
d on
the
gene
ral h
ousin
g w
aitin
g lis
t and
ass
isted
he
r with
a su
bmiss
ion
for p
riorit
y ho
usin
g.
Publ
ic h
ousin
g is
an e
quity
mea
sure
and
is n
ot su
ppor
ted
by n
otio
ns o
f eco
nom
ic e
ffici
ency
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-135-
Deta
ils
the
law
the
pro
cess
exte
rnal
itie
s
11. C
ase
K w
as a
schi
zoph
reni
c who
had
a su
stai
ned
a se
rious
inju
ry
durin
g a
sexu
al a
ssau
lt in
her
DoH
flat
. The
CLC
ass
isted
her
w
ith a
succ
essf
ul cl
aim
for v
ictim
’s co
mpe
nsat
ion
for $
29,000
. Th
e CL
C th
en a
ppea
led
and
obta
ined
$45
,000
.
As p
revi
ously
disc
usse
d, v
ictim
’s co
mpe
nsat
ion
is an
eq
uity
mea
sure
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Prop
er a
pplic
atio
n w
ith su
ppor
ting
pape
rwor
k is
likel
y to
hav
e sa
ved
adm
inist
rativ
e co
sts b
y th
e as
sess
or.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
This
bene
fit h
as p
revi
ously
bee
n as
sess
ed a
t $7
0.
No
bene
fit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
12. C
ase
L was
a D
epar
tmen
t of H
ousin
g te
nant
. Due
to a
leak
ing
roof
, his
flat h
ad b
een
dam
p or
wet
for a
four
year
per
iod.
The
pr
oble
m w
as o
ngoi
ng. T
he C
LC a
ssist
ed L
in a
pply
ing
to th
e Te
nanc
y Trib
unal
for n
eces
sary
repa
ir w
ork
to b
e ca
rrie
d ou
t. Th
e de
part
men
t dec
ided
to u
nder
take
the
wor
k an
d he
was
re
loca
ted
to a
noth
er fl
at w
hile
that
wor
k w
as ca
rrie
d ou
t. Th
e CL
C ne
gotia
ted
with
the
Depa
rtm
ent r
egar
ding
dam
ages
su
ffere
d by
thei
r clie
nt a
s a re
sult
of th
e po
or m
aint
enan
ce a
nd
obta
ined
an
ex g
ratia
pay
men
t of $
4,00
0 fo
r L.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
cont
ract
s to
be p
rope
rly
enfo
rced
and
for p
eopl
e to
be
resp
onsib
le fo
r the
ir ne
glig
ence
.
Ther
e is
likel
y to
hav
e be
en a
savi
ng in
cour
t tim
e.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Prev
ious
ly a
sses
sed
at $27
0 pl
us 20%
for a
self
repr
esen
ted
litig
ant,
i.e. $33
0.
The
dam
p co
nditi
ons
appe
ar to
hav
e ha
d so
me
impa
ct o
n N
s hea
lth.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Diffi
cult
to a
sses
s and
ta
ken
as n
il.
13. C
ase
M h
ad b
een
livin
g in
a si
tuat
ion
of d
omes
tic v
iole
nce
for 3
0 ye
ars.
She
had
rece
ntly
obt
aine
d an
AVO
whi
ch h
ad b
een
brea
ched
by
her h
usba
nd. T
he C
LC a
ssist
ed h
er w
ith in
itial
pr
epar
atio
n of
an
appl
icat
ion
for v
ictim
’s co
mpe
nsat
ion.
The
m
atte
r was
refe
rred
to th
e pr
o bo
no se
ctio
n of
a la
rge
lega
l fir
m.
As d
iscus
sed
prev
ious
ly, V
ictim
’s co
mpe
nsat
ion
appe
ars t
o be
an
equi
ty m
easu
re.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
14. C
ase
N a
nd h
er h
usba
nd h
ad b
orro
wed
mon
ey to
inve
st in
a
timbe
r pla
ntat
ion
sche
me.
The
sche
me
was
frau
dule
nt a
nd
the
com
pany
wen
t ban
krup
t. Th
e cr
edito
rs o
f the
com
pany
ob
tain
ed a
judg
emen
t aga
inst
N a
nd h
er h
usba
nd, h
owev
er
they
had
no
asse
ts a
nd li
ttle
inco
me.
The
y w
ere
advi
sed
they
m
ay h
ave
a ca
se a
gain
st th
e co
mpa
ny fo
r bre
ache
s of t
he tr
ade
prac
tices
act
, and
this
clai
m co
uld
be o
ffset
aga
inst
the
debt
. Th
e co
uple
dec
ided
to g
o in
to vo
lunt
ary
bank
rupt
cy, a
s the
y ha
d no
sign
ifica
nt a
sset
s or i
ncom
e.
It is
econ
omic
ally
effi
cien
t for
peo
ple
to b
e re
spon
sible
fo
r the
ir de
bts,
how
ever
it is
not
eco
nom
ical
ly e
ffici
ent f
or
peop
le to
be
rew
arde
d fo
r the
pro
ceed
s of c
rime.
No
bene
fit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Reco
very
and
enf
orce
men
t ac
tion
was
avo
ided
.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Sim
ilar b
enefi
ts h
ave
been
as
sess
ed e
lsew
here
at
$540
.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
15. C
ase
Owasahomelesspersonasaresultoflosingherjobdueto
injuryandlivinginacar.Herapplicationforpriorityhousing
withtheDepartmentofHousingwasdeniedasaresultof
administrativeerrors.Followingareview,shewasgranted
prioritystatusandapprovedfortheSpecialAssistanceSubsidy,
subsidisingheraccommodationintheprivatehousingmarket.
Asdiscussedpreviously,publichousingislikelytobean
equitymeasure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
TheCLCappearstohaveactedasaninformal
ombudsman.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
TheNSWOmbudsmanreceived 32,50
9complaintsandnotificationsin200
9-10,44with
atotalexpenditureof$
21.1million.
45Thisisa
costpercomplaintof$
649andthisistakenas
thebenefit.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
16. C
ase
Phadasmallbusinessorganisingswinger’sfunctions.He
contractedwithawebdesignertoprovideawebsiteforhis
business.Thewebsitewasdefectiveinanumberofwaysand
heheldthedesignerresponsible.TheCLCadvisedhimthat
hehadlimitedchanceofsuccessintheCTTTduetolackof
certaintyaroundthecontractualarrangement,howeverhe
progressedthematterseeking$30,000,thecostofawebsite
withcompletefunctionality.Inconciliation,heaccepted$1,00
0insettlement.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeproperly
administered.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Additionalcostsmayhavebeenincurredifthe
matterprogressedtocourt.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Similarbenefitshavebeenpreviouslyassessed
at$33
0.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
17. C
ase
QapproachedtheCLCforadviceregardingobtaining
victim’scompensationforaclaimedassault,payingoff
outstandingfineswithaWorkandDevelopmentOrderand
possiblediscriminationwithregardtohiscriminalrecord.
AnFOIapplicationwaspreparedandonthebasisofthatFOI
applicationhewasadvisedthattherewaslittlesupportforhis
victim’scompensationclaim.Hewasadvisedoftheappropriate
avenueswithregardtoworkingofffinesandprogressing
discriminationclaims.
Victimscompensationislikelytobeanequitymeasure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytohavebeenasavingin
administrativereviewfromnotprogressinghis
application.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Previouslyassessedat$35
0.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
18. C
ase
Rhadbeenemployedatahotelonacasualbasisasabar
attendantandotherdutiesforovernineyears.Thehotelwas
purchasedbynewowners,andaftersixmonthsshewastold
thattherewerenoshiftsavailabletoher.Shesubsequently
foundalternativework.TheCLCassistedherwithreferring
themattertoFairWorkAustraliaandinnegotiationswithher
previousemployer.Thematterwassettledfor$
3,00
0withno
admissionofguiltbythepreviousemployer.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeenforced,
howeverlabourlawsarelikelytobeanequitymeasure
ratherthananefficiencymeasure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Anegotiatedoutcomeledtoreduced
administrationcosts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
In 200
9-10.FairWorkAustraliahad42,51
6matters,withatotalexpenditureof$
66.7
million,or$
1,56
9permatter.Thisistaken
asthebenefit,althoughitisnotedthatthe
matterhadbeenreferredtoFairWorkAustralia.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
19. C
ase
Swasatraineeteacher.Duetoanadversereport,hefailedhis
finalpracticaltrainingwhichmeanthecouldnotcompletehis
degree.TheCLCassistedhiminpreparationofacasebeforethe
universityassessmentcommittee.Hewasexcludedfromthe
universityforoneyear,allowinghimtore-enrolthefollowing
year.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. C
ase
ThadamentalillnessandwasinaDepartmentofHousing
dwelling.TheDepartmentreceivedallegationsoffraud
claimingthatThadsubletthepropertytoothers.TheCLC
assistedTinpreparingaletterwithsupportingdocumentation
refutingtheallegations.Thematterwasnotprogressed.
Asnotedpreviously,publichousingisanequity,rather
thananefficiency,measure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
ACTTTmatterappearstohavebeenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thebenefithasbeenpreviouslyassessedat
$430.
Mcouldhavelosthishome
andassociatedsupport
networks.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Removalistcostshave
beenassessedelsewhere
at$60
0.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
1. A
dvic
e
Awasseparatedfromhiswife.Hewantedtofinaliseaccess
arrangementsregardinghisson.Hiswifehadnotattended
mediation.Herequiredassistanceindraftingparentingorders
whichwasprovidedbytheCLC.Theyalsogavehimadviceand
informationregardingtheprocesstobefollowed.
Aspreviouslydiscussed,itiseconomicallyefficientfor
accessarrangementstobeinthebestinterestsofthe
child.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Likelytobeasmallbenefitinhavingtheorders
draftedproperlyandfromunderstandingthe
process.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Similarbenefitshavebeenassessedataround
$70.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
2. A
dvic
e
Bhadagamblingproblemandhadborrowedaround$7
0,00
0fromarangeofcreditorssuchascreditcardprovidersand
banks.Hedidnotwishtogointobankruptcyandhadarranged
tosellahouseheco-ownedwithhisbrother.Hewasreferred
toafinancialcounsellortoworkouthisassetsandabilityto
payandtodevelopafinancialplan,includingprioritisinghis
debtsandtoprioritiseclaims,includingseekingtimetopayand
paymentbyinstalments.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Itislikelythatplanningonhispartwillsave
thecostofrecoveryactionbyhiscreditors.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Similarmattershavebeenassessedat$54
0per
creditor.Assumingfivecreditors,thiswouldbe
abenefitof$
2,70
0.
Thereislikelytobesome
costsavingsfromvoluntary
saleoftheproperty.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Previouslyassessedat
$6,850.
3. A
dvic
e
ChadworkedfortwodaysforDepartmentofCorrective
Servicesunderalabourhireagency.Hewasdismisseddueto
apoorreferencecheckandwasnotpaidforthedayshehad
worked.Hewasadvisedastotheprocesstobefollowedto
recoverthelostwages,firstthroughthefairworkombudsman,
andthenbydebtrecoveryinthelocalcourt.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforcontractstobeenforced,
howeverlabourlawsarelikelytobeanequitymeasure
ratherthananefficiencymeasure.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
4. A
dvic
e
Dhadreceivedanoticetoattendcourtregardinganunpaid
trafficfine.TheCLCreviewedtheirfineschecklistwithD
andadvisedherofthelimitedlikelihoodofsuccessandthe
additionalcourtcostslikelytobeincurred.Ddecidedtopaythe
fine.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirdebtsandfortheirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytohavebeenasavingincourt
timeandinenforcementcosts.Thesehave
beenpreviouslyassessedat$54
0.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
5. A
dvic
e
Ewasrequiredtoattendadisciplinaryinterviewwithhis
employerrelatingtoanumberofmatters.Hisunionis
representinghim.HesoughttheCLC’sassistanceinalso
representinghimandwasadvisedtheywereunabletohelp.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Rand
om sa
mpl
e of
Adv
ices
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-���-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
6. A
dvic
e
Fhadreceivedanoticetoattendcourtregardingunpaidtraffic
fines.TheCLCreviewedtheirfineschecklistwithAandadvised
himofthelimitedlikelihoodofsuccessandtheadditionalcourt
costslikelytobeincurred.Fdecidedtopaythefines.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirdebtsandfortheirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thereislikelytohavebeenasavingincourt
timeandinenforcementcosts.Thesehave
beenpreviouslyassessedat$54
0.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
7. A
dvic
e
Ghasreferredacomplaintagainstothermembersofherstrata
schemetotheCTTT.Shewasassessedasbeingcompetentto
representherselfasshehaspreviouslydonesosuccessfully,and
wasgivenadviceaboutbeingclearregardingtheissuesand
compromisingwithreasonablesuggestions.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
8. A
dvic
e
Hsoughttohaveparentingorderswithherex-husband
revised.Shewasadvisedthatshemustfirsttryfamilydispute
resolutionandwasadvisedoftheprocess.Shewasfurther
advisedthatshewouldqualifyforlegalaidandwasreferredto
herprevioussolicitor.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforthelawtoactinthebest
interestsofthechild.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Therewaslikelytobeabenefitinreduced
administrationtimefromHunderstandingthe
processtobefollowed.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
9. A
dvic
e
Ihadbeenbulliedandharassedbyaco-workeroveratwoyear
periodculminatinginherbeingassaulted.Thematterwas
referredtothepolicewhorecommendedanAVO.Theco-worker
hasbeensuspendedandsheisconcernedwhatwillhappenif
theco-workerreturnstowork.Shewasadvisedtoreportthe
mattertoheremployerandprogresstheAVO.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforemployerstobearthecost
ofprovidingasafeworkplace.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
10. A
dvic
e
J’sdaughter,son-in-lawandchildrenwerelivingwithherand
herhusband.Asaresultofanaltercation,theson-in-lawhad
assaultedJandJhadappliedforanAVO.Theson-in-lawwas
nolongerlivingwithher.ItappearedthatJhadarrangedthe
meetingwithregardtoconcernsregardingDVagainsther
daughter,howeverthesituationwascomplexandthedaughter
hadnotmadeanyreporttopoliceandwasreluctanttodiscuss
thematter.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�40-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
11. A
dvic
e
Kwassupervisingalearnerdriver,L,whocommittedatraffic
offence.Lobtainedherlicensebutthepointsfromtheoffence
meantherlicensewassuspended.Kwantedtoknowifthe
pointscouldbetransferredtohislicenseashewassupervising
J.Hewasadvisedthattheycouldbothhavebeenfined,andif
Lwantedtoappealthematter,shewouldneedtoattendcourt
andaskthemagistratenottorecordthepointshoweverthe
magistrateisunlikelytoviewtheapplicationfavourably.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobearthe
consequencesoftheirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thecostofanappealhasbeensaved.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Amagistratescourthearingforaself-
representedlitiganthasbeenassessedat$
320.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
12. A
dvic
e
Mhadresignedhisjobasheconsideredhewasbeingbullied
andharassed.ThematterhadbeeninvestigatedbyWorkcover
andtheyfoundnoactioncouldbetakenagainsttheemployer.
Mwasadvisedthathewasunlikelytohaveacourseofaction
andadiscriminationclaimwasunlikelytohaveanymerit.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforemployerstoprovideasafe
workplace.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Thecostofanappealhasbeenavoided.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Thecostofamagistrateshearingbyaself
representedlitiganthasbeenassessed
previouslyat$
320.
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
13. A
dvic
e
Nwasridinganunregisteredmotorscooterwhenhenoticed
policebehindhim.Heparkedthescooterandwalkedaway
buthenoticedthepoliceattempttoremovetheplates,and
thenremovetheregistrationlabelholder.Hewantedtoknow
whatwouldhappen.Hewasadvisedhewaslikelytoreceive
twoinfringementnotices,oneforunregisteredandonefor
unlicensed.TheCLCreviewedtheirfinechecklistwithhim.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletobearthe
consequencesoftheirnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
14. A
dvic
e
O’ssuperannuationwasinapreviousnameusedbyher.She
wishedtohavehersuperannuationinherlegalname.The
CLCassistedherindraftingaletterandadvisedthetypeof
supportingdocumentationthatwouldberequired.Following
correspondencewiththeSuperannuationprovider,shewas
furtheradvisedtoobtaincertifiedcopiesofsupporting
documentation.
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
15. A
dvic
e
Phadinvested$47,000withanotherpartywhohaddefrauded
herandleftthecountry.Shehadobtainedadefaultjudgement
for$
53,000andthepolicewerepursuingfraudchargesagainst
theotherparty.Shewasinarrearswithrespecttoanotherbank
loan,andwantedtoknowheroptionstoobtainthemoney.She
wasadvisediftheotherpartyisfoundguiltyoffraudthanshe
couldusethatasabasistorecoverthemoney,otherwiseshe
willneedtoprogresscivilaction.
Itisnoteconomicallyefficientforcrimetoberewarded.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4�-
detA
ils
tHe
lAW
tHe
pro
Cess
exte
rnAl
itie
s
16. A
dvic
e
Qhadbeendismissedforfailingtocomplywithadirection.
Hewishedtodisputethedismissal.HewasreferredtotheFair
WorkOmbudsman.
Unfairdismissallawsarelikelytobeanequitymeasure
ratherthananefficiencymeasure.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
17. A
dvic
e
Rhadadisputewithaschoolregardingunpaidschoolfees.
Whiletherewereoutstandingfees,therehadalsobeenclerical
errorsininvoicingandRhadofferedtopayofftheproper
outstandingamountbyinstalments.Shereviewedherdraft
statementwiththeCLCandwasgivenareferralincaseshe
wantedrepresentation.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirdebts.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
18. A
dvic
e
Shadbeenchargedwithatrafficoffencewhichhadresultedin
atrafficcrash.Hebelievedtheotherdriverhadchangedtheir
intentions.Hesoughttocontestthefineandinsuranceclaim.
Swasadvisedofthelegalbasishecouldusetocontestthefine
andoftheconsequencesofbeingfoundguilty,includingthe
maximumpenaltyandcourtcostsandwasreferredtoaprivate
solicitor.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
19. A
dvic
e
ThadanupcominghearingforalowrangePCAoffence.She
hadanumberofconvictionsforspeedingwhichshehadnot
contestedbutnowwishedtocontestandhaveremovedfrom
herrecord.Shewasadvisedherproperfocusshouldbeonthe
PCAoffenceandthatthepreviousoffenceswillbetimelimited.
Tdecidedtoproceedwithcourtactionaroundtheprevious
offences.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
20. A
dvic
e
Uandhisfriendhiredacar,usingU’sfather’screditcard
withoutpermission.A15yearoldunlicenseddriverwasdriving
thecarwhenitwasinvolvedinacrashandwrittenoff.The
crashwasnotcoveredbyinsurance.Thecarhirecompany
soughtfullrecoveryofthedebtfromUasthefriendwasin
hiding.Hewasadvisedthathewasliableforthefulldebtunder
thehirecontract,andthatheshouldnegotiatepaymentterms
withthecreditorandhonourthosepaymentterms.
Itiseconomicallyefficientforpeopletoberesponsiblefor
theirdebtsandfortheirownnegligence.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Nobenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Noapparentbenefit.
Asse
ssm
ent o
f ben
efit
Nil
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4�-
Appendix Footnotes1 Bauserman,R.(2002)ChildAdjustmentinJoint-CustodyVersusSole-Custody:AMeta-AnalyticReview,Journal of Family Psychology,AmericanPsychologicalAssociationAPA,Inc.2002,Vol.16,No.1,91-102
2 Taylor,P.,Moore,P.,Pezzullo,L.,Tucci,J.,Goddard,C.andDeBortoli,L.(2008),The Cost of Child Abuse in Australia, AustralianChildhoodFoundationandChildAbusePreventionResearchAustralia:Melbourne.
3 AccessEconomics(2004),The Cost of Domestic Violence to the Australian Economy.
4 Magistrates’CourtofVictoriaAnnualReport2009-10,page102.
5 Ibid, page25.
6 Malcolm,D.(2004)2004 Annual Review of Western Australian Courts,page50.
7 ABSHouseholdexpendituredata.
8 VictorianPolice,Annual Report 2009-2010,page70.
9 Ibid,page24.
10 DepartmentofJustice,Annual Report 2009-2010,pages24and87,withJSAcalculation.
11 DepartmentofImmigrationandCitizenship,Annual Report 2009-10, page337withJSAcalculation.
12 Ibid, page2.
13 Bauserman,R.(2002)ChildAdjustmentinJoint-CustodyVersusSole-Custody:AMeta-AnalyticReview,Journal of Family Psychology,AmericanPsychologicalAssociationAPA,Inc.2002,Vol.16,No.1,91-102
14 Taylor,P.,Moore,P.,Pezzullo,L.,Tucci,J.,Goddard,C.andDeBortoli,L.(2008),The Cost of Child Abuse in Australia, AustralianChildhoodFoundationandChildAbusePreventionResearchAustralia:Melbourne.
15 AccessEconomics(2004),The Cost of Domestic Violence to the Australian Economy.
16 SupremeCourtofVictoria,Annual Report 2008-09,pages2-3(notedataestimatedfromgraphicalpresentation).
17 Ibid,page41.
18 VCAT,Annual Report 2009/10,page5.
19 Op cit, pages46and142.NotethattheNetburdenofdiseasehasnotbeenincluded.Thiscanbeunderstoodasthepricetheindividualwouldpaytoavoidthetraumaofabuseandneglectandisestimatedat$7.7billion.HoweverGovernmentexpenditureof$3billioncouldbeseenasthepricesocietyispreparedtopaytoavoidthetraumaofabuseandneglectandisincludedintheestimateof$6,712million.
20 Op cit, Table51.
21 Thisvalueexcludesthevalueofsufferingandprematuredeath.Thewriterbelievestheinclusionofthisestimateiscontentiousforreasonsstatedelsewhere,essentiallythatthevaluemayrepresentanindividual’swillingnesstopayratherthansociety’swillingnesstopay,withsociety’swillingnesstopayincludedinAdministrativeandOtherCosts.
22 Mayhew,P(2003)Counting the Costs of Crime in Australia, AustralianInstituteofCriminology,page3.
23 VictorianDepartmentofHumanServices,Annual Report 2009-10,page25.
24 http://www.redbook.com.au/used-cars/details.aspx?r=66124&__Qpb=1&Cr=0&__ns=p_make_string|0||p_Classificationtype_string|0||p_family_string|0||p_year_string|1||p_sequencenum_int32|0&__n=2994%204294958234%204294843515%204294965618&silo=1300&seot=1&__nne=15&trecs=27&__sid=130758b4C0fdaccessed9June2011.
25 Telephoneinquiry,10June2011.
26 Op cit.
27 DepartmentofHumanServices,Annual Report 2009-10, page39.
28 VictorianDepartmentofHealthAnnual Report 2009-10, page168.
29 http://www.rba.gov.au/statistics/tables/index.htmlaccessed10June2011.
30 http://www.apra.gov.au/statistics/monthly-banking-statistics.cfmaccessed10June2011.
31 VictorianOfficeofthePublicAdvocate, Annual Report 2008-09, pages8and55.
32 Mayhew,P(2003)Counting the Costs of Crime in Australia, AustralianInstituteofCriminology,page3.
33 DepartmentofImmigrationandCitizenship,Annual Report 2009-10, page410.
34 MichaelO’Connell,M(2003);PaperpresentedattheInnovation:PromisingPracticesforVictimsandWitnessesintheCriminalJusticeSystem.ANationalConference,Canberra,23–24June,2003.UniversityHouse,ANU,Australia.
35 AustralianSafetyandCompensationCouncil(2009),The Cost of Work-Related Injury and Illness for Australian Employers, Workers and the Community: 2005-06, table2.2.
36 AustralianBureauofStatistics,5206.0 Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product.
37 FamilyCourtofWesternAustralia(2010)Annual Review 2010, page5.
Economic cost BEnEfit AnAlysis of community lEgAl cEntrEs
-�4�-
38 Telephoneenquiry15June2011.
39 NSWDepartmentofJusticeandAttorneyGeneral,Annual Report 2009-10, page236.
40 Ibid, page166.
41 NSWGovernment,Rent and Sales Report No. 95, Table8.
42 http://www.irec.com.au/index.php?c=4accessed16June2011.
43 Consumer,TraderandTenancyTribunal(2010),Annual Report 2009-2010, pages7&53.
44 NSWOmbudsman,Annual Report 2009 2010, page7.
45 Ibid, page119.