North West Law

The Monthly Publication of the Manchester Law Society

March 2013NewsJust Costs Solicitors granted ABS licence

page 6

Hill Dickinson acquires DLA Piper’sSheffield and Manchester DefendantInsurance Practice page 7

Weightmans appoints new Managingand Senior Partner page 8

The Manchester Legal Awardspage 14

FeaturesTALKING HEADSThe Jackson Reforms page 12

Personal Injury marketing and referralfees page 18

RegularsNews from Bridge Street

page 4Key for the City - offers for Members

page 17

MLS Advantage page 22

Management Matters page 24

Monthly CompetitionWin a 3 course meal and a bottle of housewine for 2 in Opus One (Radisson Edwardian Hotel) page 28

Single issue £3.50, 12 month subscription £54.00free to members

In principle additional flexi-bility in the workplace mustbe welcomed.

“But does it take us any fur-ther forward then where weare currently?” Since April2011 fathers have alreadybeen able to share the 52weeks of parental leave withmothers – they can alreadytake up to 6 months leave in asingle block after the babyreaches the age of 20 weeks.And what is the evidence this

has been taken up to anygreat extent by fathers?

The Business Minister JoSwinson’s comment thatchanges to flexible leave will‘shatter the perception’ that itis mainly a women’s role tostay at home and this willstop women dropping out ofthe work place in later yearsseems, at best, naïve.

The changes could be a costlyburden for smaller businesses

to manage as they will allowparents to ‘chop up’ periodsof leave between them (intoperiods as short as one week).This is unhelpful to businesscontinuity and there is an ad-ditional cost if an employee’sposition needs to be coveredby other staff or temporarycover on a frequent basis. Thiscould create particularheadaches if both parentswork in the same workplace.And inevitably it will bring anincreased risk of litigation for

Flexibility in workplace welcome, but reforms willbring burden for business Emma Harvey, Partner in Gorvins Employment team comments on implications for employers of newChildren and Families Bill reform, announced recently...

1 April 2013, promises toherald the start of a sub-stantial change the fundingand management of legalcosts in litigation in Eng-land and Wales. Fundamen-tal changes which are beenintroduced with arguablyindecent haste. At the timeof preparing this Article, theproposed new CPR changeshave just been released.They run to over 60 pagesand this does not includethe supporting new Prac-tice Directions which havenot yet been released.

It is not possible in a single ar-ticle, to comment on any-where near all the changesand the consequences forpractitioners and clients alike.I therefore propose to dealwith just one of them, the in-troduction of a new land-scape under the heading ofCosts Management (CPRRules 3.12 to 3.18).

To paraphrase judicial com-ment in the decision in HIT Fi-nance v Lewis & Tucker ( )– “Costs are an art not a sci-ence, but they are not astrol-ogy either.” Never were thesewords more apt, when oneconsiders the pending funda-mental changes to the con-duct of litigation. Viewedcollectively, the purpose ofthe new Rules are to place thecontrol of legal costs to theforefront of the process, notas has been historically the

case, when costs were prima-rily considered by the Court atthe conclusion of the sub-stantive litigation.

This requires solicitors to con-sider the costs of the pro-posed litigation at the outsetof the anticipated proceed-ings. I am sure many readerswill say that has always beenthe case. But the new Rulesprovide a framework andsanctions to make the actual-ity of this philosophy a reality.I have lectured on the topic ofCosts Budgeting for over 15years. In reality, absent consis-tent judicial control and iden-tified sanctions fornon-compliance, the existingprovisions have only had alimited impact on the con-duct of litigation. The recentdecision of the Court of Ap-peal in Henry v MGN ( ) hasled to commentators pro-claim that the new rules willmake no difference. They arewrong. The judgement in thatcase, made clear that it wasarrived at based on what willsoon be referred to as the oldrules.

The new provisions apply toall multi-track cases com-menced after 1 April 2013, inthe county court and theChancery and Queens BenchDivision of the High Court. Itdoes not relate to proceed-ings in the Commercial or Ad-miralty Courts. It remains tobe seen how quickly the

Court will incorporate thenew provisions and approach,to proceedings already com-menced before 1 April 2013.The purpose of the new rulesare made clear (3.12 (2)) – forthe court to manage both thesteps taken and the costs tobe incurred by the parties toany proceedings so as to fur-ther the overriding objective.

KEY CHANGESWhen a defence is served theCourt will issue a notice iden-tifying the date by which abudget must be filed or if nosuch date is specified, thebudget must be filed withinseven days before the firstcase management confer-ence.

If no budget is filed as pro-scribed, the Court will treatthe party as having filed abudget limited to the applica-ble court fees!

A new concept is introducedof Costs management orders.It is likely that these budgetswill become contentious. Thefirst Case Management Con-ference, may well turn into abattleground as both sidesargue for budgets to servetheir client’s cases and expec-tations. This is the first timedefendants will be providedwith detailed information asto their likely costs exposureby contesting the litigation.What historically may havebeen consensual predictable

directions hearings may be-come a different animal alto-gether. Preparation of thesebudgets and attendance at ahearing if they cannot beagreed, are likely to requiredetailed preparation and spe-cialist advocacy skills.

The recognition of this likeli-hood is incorporated in thenew rules by the creation of anew type of hearing. A costsmanagement hearing. Unfor-tunately, the historical abbre-viation of CMC, is no longer asclear as it once was.

This approach continuesthrough the lifetime of a case.When making any case man-agement decision, the Courtis required to consider boththe existing budgets and theavailable budgets of the par-ties. There is a definite rewardfor compliance with the Courtapproved budgets, as is madeclear in CPR 3.18. At the con-clusion of the case the Courtwill not only have regard tothe budgets for each stage ofthe proceedings, they will notdepart from any such ap-proved or agreed budget un-less satisfied that there isgood reason to do so.

The awaited final version ofthe supporting practice direc-tion is awaited with interest.

A Rapidly Changing Costs landscape -Everyone Ready?Paul Shenton, Managing Director of Just Costs Solicitors outlines the changes tothe funding and management of legal costs coming into force on 1st April 2013...

Practitioners discuss thechanges in ‘TalkingHeads’ on page 12

3Manchester Law Society President’s Column

President’s Columnindividual growth and devel-opment but also to add valueback to our members. Adam was very open aboutthe work he does and also therecent changes which cameinto force on 1st February.Briefly, the LeO has had75,000 contacts each year al-though it expects this to in-crease with the main changein the scheme, which is to ex-tend the time limits from 12months from the date of theincident (or date of knowl-edge) to 6 years (or 3 yearsfrom date of knowledge). Thereason for this is to come intoline with other regulatorybodies such as the FSA andour duty to preserve files for 6years.

Of interest, firms specialisingin family law generate thehighest level of complaintswith the influence simplybased on the fact that clientsare rarely happy with the out-come. The previous “2 freecases” rule has gone whichwill impact barristers thehardest, as very rarely wouldmore than 2 cases be referredto LeO in the same year. How-ever, the LeO currently waives40% of cases where a fee ischargeable and Adam ex-pects that trend to continue.I was surprised to hear thatwhen a complainant contactsLeO with details of a com-plaint, the LeO will write to

the firm in question with de-tails. Often the complaint thathas been expressed to LeOwill no longer be an accuratereflection of the original com-plaint to the firm. This can befrustrating for firms as theywill have had little or no op-portunity to investigate the“fresh”complaint. LeO is quiteflexible here and is preparedto allow the firm to investi-gate the complaint undertheir own complaints proce-dure first, if it chooses. As thecomplaint progresses, LeOwill not look for other areas ofcomplaint – it will only focuson the issue raised by thecomplainant (unless LeO un-cover something of signifi-cance that requires furtherinvestigation).

Finally, Adam gave guidanceon the other new rule change,that LeO will now consider acomplaint of unreasonablerefusal to act. At first glance,this seems totally unreason-able – what happened to theright of a firm to choose whoto represent and why? In myfield of personal injury, therecan be dozens of reasons whymy firm may not want to rep-resent a potential claimantand I did press Adam on this.To his credit, he made it veryclear that the complainantwill have to bring forwardprima facie evidence of thegrounds for unreasonable re-

fusal to act. Further, the testwill be akin to the question“was the lawyers view so un-reasonable such that no otherlawyer would agree with it?”In reality, this rule change isunlikely to affect many, if any. Adam will be coming to meetwith Council members laterthis year and I hope to havemore useful information foryou all then.

Back at Manchester Law Soci-ety Council, big strides arebeing made to encouragemore engagement with localstudent’s intent of a career inlaw. Supporting our aspiringand young lawyers is a keyfeature of my term in officeand we are working hard topackage an offering to stu-dents who are keen to get ahead start where ever theycan. This month we expect tobegin promotions to studentsat the local law colleges forbenefits that will give them achance to mix with the pro-fession, not only at formalevents and conferences butalso social events such as theProfessional’s Dinner. TheCommittee tasked with mak-ing this happen is looking tomember firms that would bewilling to offer a placement tostudent members. Not onlywill this give students the pre-cious experience they needbut will potentially give mem-ber firms the chance to find

talent before anyone else. Ifyou are interested in findingout more, please email yourdetails via the ManchesterLaw Society website contactpage.

It would be remiss of me notto mention the news sur-rounding Cobbetts. I likemany of you were shell-shocked to hear that Cob-betts was in serious troubleand at the time of writing this,it is still early days as to whatcan be saved, in terms of de-partments but also jobs. Man-chester Law Society throughthe right channels has alreadypledged its support whereever it is needed and shall li-aise with the National Law So-ciety and the SRA to minimisethe impact where possible.

Such’s LifeI recently attended an infor-mal meeting of small busi-

ness owners where three pre-selected businesses were putin the “hot seat”. It was a verysimple format where the busi-ness owner in the “hot seat”would share their problem orissue and the collective mindsin the room, would channeltheir own ideas and sugges-tions to help the person find asolution.

One lady really made methink. She had set up her ownnursery business, as shestruggled to find a goodenough nursery in her areafor her own first child. Thatbusiness has now grown sig-nificantly where she has sev-eral nurseries, all whilst stillraising a young family. Leav-ing aside my admiration forwhat this lady had achieved,she told her story.

Well one of the highlights ofthe year for the legal profes-sion will be the ManchesterLegal Awards, to be held onThursday 7th March 2013. Thisextravagant event has soldout year on year and this onewill be no exception. If youhaven’t already booked yourticket, then contact the Man-chester Law Society office on0161 831 7337 today to checkavailability.

It was a great honour to inter-view the shortlists for four ofthe categories on the judgingday back in January. The qual-ity of the written submissionswas backed by the excellenceof those persons attending toadd weight to their claim thatthey (or their department orfirm) should win. Havingshared thoughts with some ofthe other judges, althoughnot the winners, it was clearthat I was not alone here andall on the shortlist should beincredibly proud of thatachievement alone.

In the last few weeks, I hadthe chance to meet AdamSampson of the Legal Om-budsman (LeO). He had beeninvited to speak at a Joint IVmeeting in Bristol. Manches-ter Law Society meets quar-terly with other law societiesfrom Liverpool, Birminghamand Bristol to share informa-tion and ideas to further our continued on page 5

4 Manchester Law Society News

News from Bridge Street

To reserve a place on one of our courses or for further information please call Vicky Ridge on

0161 241 7472 or email

VictoriaRidge@manchesterlawsociety.org.uk

SAVE THE DATE! THE MANCHESTER LAW SOCIETYPERSONAL INJURY CONFERENCE WILL TAKE PLACE ONTUESDAY 21ST MAY 2013!

Full details will be announced shortly, to reserve your place please email VictoriaRidge@manchesterlawsociety.org.uk

ACCOUNTING FOR LAWYERS

The accounting for lawyers update will cover a brief overview of financial statements.The talk will consider their purpose, and how they can be of use in a dispute or investiga-tion.

The talk will also cover basic accounting concepts and address some of the common pit-falls in understanding financial statements as an introduction to accounting matters.

Following the one hour seminar the Deloitte Forensic team would like to invite you tojoin them for a drink at the Oast House.

DATE: Thursday 4th April 2013CPD: 1VENUE: Deloitte LLP, 2 Hardman Street, Manchester, M3 3HFTIME: Registration & refreshments - 5.45pm

Seminar 6.00pm - 7.00pmCOST: Member rate £20.00 + VAT (£24.00)

Non Member rate £40.00 + VAT (£48.00)SPEAKER: This talk will be given by members of the Forensic team at Deloitte LLP

MONEY LAUNDERING REPORTING OFFICERS UPDATE

· An overview of the current statutory and regulatory framework· What is in the pipeline – 4th European Money Laundering Directive· An update on the latest case law· Reporting obligations under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002· The latest Law Society Practice Note· Setting up compliant systems· Training obligations under the Money Laundering Regulations 2007.

DATE: Thursday 16th May 2013 CPD: 3 CPDVENUE: JMW Solicitors LLP, 1 Byrom Place, Manchester, M3 3HGTIME: 1.30pm - Registration & Coffee 2.00pm - 5.00pm – PresentationCOST: Member rate - £60.00 + VAT (£72.00)

Non member rate - £80.00 + VAT (£96.00)SPEAKER: Bill Jones - Managing Partner of JMW Solicitors LLP and also Chief

Executive of ML Solutions 4U Ltd

*COMING SOON

- Life after Legal Aid – Family Law Q&A Session

- Corporate Commercial Conference

- Private Client Update

- Conveyancing for Secretaries

CPD Programme

Manchester Law Society and the College of Law have joined forces to bring a high quality,convenient and cost effective way of enabling Solicitors to acquire CPD hours. The Col-lege of Law Media deliver quality training solutions to firms throughout the UK and havedone so for many years. We understand the ever increasing demands placed upon thelegal profession and tailor our service to enable our clients to maximise the benefits fromtheir training without this hindering the day to day practice.

The core online service consists of 10 channels containing 76 professionally producedprogrammes covering various areas of law such as Dispute Resolution, Personal Injuryand Family Law. These programmes are delivered in a half hour format and in conjunc-tion with the online study area can satisfy up to 2 CPD hours per viewer. All programmesare fully accredited by the SRA, the Bar Standards Board and ILEX. The Personal Injuryprogrammes are APIL accredited.

Our topical and professionally-produced CPD core programmes are written and pre-sented by qualified lawyers, with contributions from leading figures in the field. The pro-grammes are designed to cut through unnecessary background to get to the essentials –what’s new in the area and what does it mean for you and your clients? The emphasis isfirmly on practical application, context and commercial relevance.

The programmes last for around 30 minutes and are broken down into shorter sectionsso it’s easy to fit learning in around other commitments. You can also pause, skip ahead,go back to sections you wish to revisit and re-enter each section at any time. You canview the programmes individually or in groups by connecting an internet-linked com-puter to a data projector or TV screen.

Our online CPD is fully auditable thanks to the College of Law Media Diary function.Linked to your unique user name and password, this automatically records all College ofLaw Media training undertaken, from details of core or performance skills programmeswatched to study notes accessed and test and feedback results. This is useful for futurereference and as evidence of CPD undertaken. There is also an online CPD Diary whereyou can record all other forms of CPD activity in one convenient location.College of Law Media is ideal for training managers, as it provides reporting and analyticsto monitor team CPD and usage of the system.

The benefits of using the system mean that you can earn your CPD at a time convenientfor you and your firm, which means no wasted costs travelling to and from the office andmore importantly leaving you free to earn for the firm. You can access them at anytimeand can be viewed repeatedly.

Support Skills are also available to help deliver training at a basic level for support staffand paralegals and are used to build a thorough understanding of a variety of legal areas.Performance Skills are used to deliver non-legal training for lawyers on areas such asManaging a Team, Giving Employee Appraisals and Negotiation

Manchester Law Society and Collegeof Law Media Online programme

North West Family Walk 2013Delamere Forest, Cheshire - Sunday, 28th April 1.00pmManchester and Liverpool Law Societies have come together to organise a walk inCheshire for members, friends and families of the two societies.

It is a 5 mile circular walk along the forest tracks within Delamere Forest starting and ending atthe Delamere Cafe and Information Centre. This is an excellent opportunity for anyone in-volved in the legal profession to get out of the office with family and friends to come togetherand enjoy some healthy fresh air and gentle exercise in good company.

The walk will take place on Sunday, 28th April 2013 so book the date in your diary now!

We will meet in the picnic area in front of the cafe and toilets for a start at 2 p.m. prompt. Bringyour own picnic lunch or buy a sandwich from the cafe if you would like to have lunch before-hand. The walk is circular and the five miles should take anywhere between 2.5 and 3 hours tocomplete depending on how leisurely a pace you set! The tracks may be muddy but they areall buggyable! At the end of the walk we can meet at the local Pub to celebrate over food anddrinks.

Please indicate if you wish to reserve a place dinner at the time of booking your place on thewalk.The walk itself is easy. There are mainly good paths and tracks.There is no charge for this walk.

When you register you will receive a handy guide on what clothing to have and general adviceon do’s and don’ts.

For enquiries and to book your place please emailVictoriaRidge@manchesterlawsociety.org.uk

5NewsManchester Law Society

Regulatory Affairs Committee Update

There is certainly no“quiet time” in the regula-tion of solicitors at themoment!

From 1 February, the level ofcompensation that theLegal Ombudsman (LeO)can award to dissatisfiedcustomers will rise from£30,000 to £50,000 and “freeinvestigations” are now athing of the past (unless theLeO is satisfied the firm hascomplied with its com-plaints procedure and hasmade no remedy award inrelation to the complaint).

Furthermore, and some-what worryingly, LeO willnow be able to accept com-plaints from prospectivecustomers who could rea-sonably have expected toreceive a service or whowere unreasonably offereda service they did not want.It is likely that in relation tosuch a complaint, the LeOwill only be willing to con-sider those which are dis-criminatory in nature butthis has not been made par-ticularly clear thus far andall COLPs will thereforeneed to risk assess howtheir firms will deal withnew enquiries and whethernotes need to be made as toreasons for not taking on aprospective client just incase one of them complainsto the LeO!!

The time limit for bringing acomplaint will also now in-crease to six years from thedate of the act/omission or(if outside of that time)three years from the datethe complainant should rea-sonably have known therewere grounds for complaint.

Client care letters will needto be revised and the LawSociety has issued a coupleof new Practice notes oncomplaints managementand client care letters towhich you should refer.

On a different issue, the SRAhas now closed it’s consulta-tion on the referral fee ban,with many of the responsesnow being published (and itwould seem, completely ig-nored!) The paper indicatesthat little of what the 49 re-spondents said to its recentconsultation gives the SRAcause to change its in-tended direction with im-plementing the referral feeban although RichardCollins, Executive Directorof Policy & Standards at theSRA has stated that the SRAwill engage in an “interac-tive process” with the pro-fession so that as the SRAencounters and reviews dif-ferent marketing schemesand related issues, it willprovide the profession withinformation on its views andapproach. I am sure we allawait that with interest!

And finally, the SRA is con-sulting on the level of finan-cial penalties it shouldimpose. This will currentlyimpact mainly on ABSs be-cause fines by the SRA fortraditional law firms are lim-ited to £2,000 whereas it haspower to issue fines of up to£250m to an ABS but as theSRA is trying (again) to per-suade the MOJ to give itgreater powers to increasethe fines to traditional lawfirms, this consultation isimportant for all.

Deadline for responsescloses on 19 April so if any-one has any comments,please get in touch.

The next COLP and COFAforum will also be held on26th March 2013 at Weight-mans’ offices, 3 PiccadillyPlace, Manchester. More de-tails can be obtained fromFran Eccles-Bech.

Michelle Garlick, Partner WeightmansChair of Regulatory Affairs Committee

Several months ago, she wasin negotiations to acquire anursery that was in financialdifficulty. The deal fellthrough as due diligence re-vealed some serious con-cerns. However, the nurserywas not able to find anotherbuyer and out of the blue, thelandlord called to advise thatthe nursery was going underthat day (Friday) and asked ifshe wanted to take over thelease on the Monday. That shedid and she was able to pro-vide continuity of care of thechildren immediately.

After a few hours of looking atthe books, it was clear thatthe reason behind the busi-ness failing was that therewas no set structure for fees,no systems for invoicing andcollecting and effectively, thefees generated were signifi-cantly under the cost of care.The immediate decision wasto educate the parents withan explanation that the busi-ness had to increase its fees,by 50%. Needless to say thisdidn’t go down well at all with50% leaving (although 20% ofthose leaving returned veryquickly).

By this point, I was actuallywondering what the issuewas. Here was a lady who hadgone in and turned a businessaround within days…theproblem was that she wasfrightened of her reputation.She felt that by increasing theprices she was seen as the“big bad wolf”. Her reputation

is so important to her busi-ness, as it is for many of uslawyers, that she felt her busi-ness was at risk of seriousharm.

She had forgotten the hardwork that she had done in theseveral years before, with ahuge bank of testimonialsand marketing material. Shehad ignored the fact that shehad turned this businessaround, had lost a small per-centage of customers whilstturning losses into profit al-most immediately. It was clearto everyone in theroom…this was a total non-issue.

Why then am I raising thisstory in Such’s Life? It’s simple- where she was focusingmost was where her energywas going.

She had let this issue con-sume her day and her life. Inturn, it had distracted herfrom all the things she couldand should be focusing on. Itbecame plainly obvious toher that she had wasted toomuch time and energy on anissue that really didn’t matter.She had a strong customerbase with an excellent offer-ing to her market and thatwas where she needed tofocus. In these challengingtimes, do we lawyers andbusiness owners need tothink about where we focus?

Such AminPresident

President’s Column continued...

SavetheDate !Joint IV Local Law Societies Hockey Cup 2013Date: 16th May, 2013Time: 9am- 4.30pmLocation: Cannock Hockey Club, Chase Park, Cannock, Staffordshire, WS11 1RR

Manchester Law Society is proud to present the Joint IV Local Law Societies Hockey Cup2013 in association with WellChild and sponsored by e-know.net and the England HockeyBoard.

The tournament will see four high profile Law Societies – Birmingham, Bristol , Liverpool,and Manchester, come together to compete in a sporting battle to see which team willcome out on top in a series of Rush Hockey matches.

The event aims to raise £10,000 for WellChild which will go towards providing essentialpractical and emotional support for seriously ill children and young people across the UK,to ensure they receive the best possible quality of care.

The event is open to men and women of any age or sporting ability and welcomes eitherteam or individual entrants.

With a guest appearance from one of England hockey’s well known and respectedOlympic athletes, participants are sure of an experience to remember. Entry to the com-petition includes refreshments and lunch, with a BBQ and glass or two of bubbly to toastthe winners. Courtesy of a few well known corporate sponsors, entrants will also get theopportunity to lay their hands on some amazing prizes as part of a charity raffle takingplace on the day.

Please be sure to save this date as we expect this to be a sell out event and would hate foryou to miss out on what promises to be a fantastic day of hockey and fundraising.

Look out for upcoming updates with registration details and information on how you canget involved to follow.

6 Movers & Shakers - send your news to j.baskerville@btconnect.com

BARRY FRIESLANDER MCIArbCertified Mediator Complex business & matrimonial disputes resolved

Barry holds Certified Elite Mediator status, compliant with the UK Ministry of Justice, EU &UK Civil Mediation Council Mediator Database and is accredited by the ADR Group.

P: 08448 777 888M: 07973 394 803E: info@dispute-resolve.co.ukW: www.dispute-resolve.co.uk

The deadline for the April 2013 edition of the Messenger is 14th March

Full service law firm JMWSolicitors LLP hasstrengthened its commer-cial property team withthe appointment of a newpartner.

Thomas Pearson joins JMWas a Partner in the Commer-cial Property team fromDTM Legal LLP in Chesterwhere he was Head of Prop-erty. Thomas specialises inall areas of commercialproperty but has particularexpertise in developmentwithin the care and leisuresectors. Thomas will con-tinue to act for his clientCastlemead Group Limited,who source, design, fundand contract innovative res-idential, primary healthcareand nursing home develop-ments throughout the UK.Thomas has recentlyworked with Castlemead ona 63 bed nursing home de-velopment in Bradford onAvon, Wiltshire and an 88bed care home in Oswestry,Shropshire. He is also cur-rently advising Castlemeadon a 75 bed nursing homein Buxton which is due for

completion in 2014. Castle-mead are planning an ex-tensive programme of newbuild care facilities acrossthe UK with the legal workbeing undertaken byThomas at JMW.

Richard Shackleton, Manag-ing Director of CastlemeadGroup Limited said: “Our portfolio of bespokehomes for both nationalchains and smaller privateoperators is growing all thetime and we are looking for-ward to continuing to workwith Thomas who providesus with expert advice.”

Commenting on Thomas’sappointment Joy Kingsley,Senior Partner at JMW said;“We are delighted to wel-come Thomas to our com-mercial property team atJMW. Thomas brings withhim extensive knowledge ofthe care and leisure sectorsand the JMW team are look-ing forward to working withhis client Castlemead GroupLimited. Thomas’s appoint-ment will add to our alreadyexperienced and developed

commercial property team.”

Thomas’s appointmentcomes on the back of a pe-riod of intense activity forthe JMW commercial prop-erty team. In the weeksleading up to Christmas thedepartment acting for theBrookhouse Group under-took all of the legal workleading to the opening ofthree major food store de-velopments at Lowestoft forMorrisons, at Leigh forSainsburys and at Ystalyferanr Swansea for Asda.

JMW’s commercial property team buildon success with new partner

Thomas Pearson

Davis Blank Furniss Launches CLICK ServiceDavis Blank Furniss – theManchester & Glossopbased law firm haslaunched an innovativenew online appointmentsbooking service calledCLICK that is predomi-nantly aimed at busy andtime poor professionals.

CLICK - www.click-dbf.co.uk- allows both new and exist-ing clients to quickly andeasily book appointmentsonline with Davis Blank Fur-niss’s team of solicitors andlegal experts. They simplychoose the area of law theywant help or advice on, se-lect a date, decide whetherthey want to meet in personor speak on the telephoneand then choose an avail-able time slot. Clients arealso prompted to give asummary of what they wantto discuss and then an auto-mated confirmation note isthen sent out with all thedetails.

The service covers the firm’score private client disci-plines including; Family &Relationships, Wills, Trusts,LPAs & Probate, Property,Employment, Personal In-jury & Clinical Negligence,Care of the Elderly, DisputeResolution and ProfessionalNegligence.

Davis Blank Furniss decidedto launch CLICK in responseto feedback from clientswho stated they often findaccessing legal advice takestoo much time and involvesunnecessary research anddiscussions.

Kate Oldfield, managingpartner, commented; “Everyday we are told by ourclients that their time isbeing ever stretched andthat like every other part oftheir lives, they want tohave hassle free access tofirst class legal advice. Moreoften than not, clients don’t

want protracted conversa-tions before meeting with alawyer so CLICK has beencreated to overcome that.”

Kate concluded; We feelthat CLICK is the next natu-ral step in how our clientswork with us and we’re alsoexcited to further build onour online presence.”

Kate Oldfield

Just Costs Solicitors, thelargest Solicitor’s practicein England specialising incosts, has been granted analternative business struc-ture (ABS) licence by theSolicitors RegulationAuthority (SRA).

In receiving its licence, JustCosts becomes the firstlegal services provider spe-cialising in costs to becomean ABS.

Just Costs has nearly 100staff based at offices in Man-chester, London and Ch-esterfield. The business hasbeen trading since 2006and in that time turnoverhas risen from £1.1 millionin its first year to £5.1 mil-lion in 2012.

To coincide with the firm’sABS approval, solicitor ChrisMurphy and costs lawyerNick McDonnell have beenappointed as directors atJust Costs.

Due to the nature of its busi-ness, Just Costs employs anumber of other nonlawyers in the form of costdraftsmen. As an ABS, JustCosts will now be able toappoint non lawyers as di-rectors of the business.

Managing Director PaulShenton, who is dual quali-fied as a barrister and a so-licitor, said Just Costs was“excited about the opportu-nities that will now open up”. He added that the firmwill use its ABS status to

help it grow as well as re-warding non-lawyer staffmembers.

“This is a milestone for JustCosts. We are ambitious tocontinue our expansion andas an ABS we now have theplatform to do so,” he com-mented. Just Costs has setup a working committee tolook at the business’s futuredirection as an ABS.

Concluded Paul Shenton:“We are an innovative busi-ness, committed to being atthe forefront of change. Asan ABS, we will drive thebusiness forward and ac-tively explore the opportu-nities available to us.”

Just Costs Solicitors grantedABS licence

Sale based law firm SlaterHeelis LLP is starting theNew Year with a re-launchof its Family departmentand the appointment ofthree significant new ad-ditions to the team, takingthe team to nine, which isthe largest in South Man-chester.

These include Kate Raynerwho joins as Partner fromStowe Family Law whereshe was formerly ManagingPartner at the firm’s Hale of-fice. Kate, 44, specialises inhigh net worth cases andbusiness owner clients andis accredited by Resolutionas a specialist in advancedfinancial provision and pri-vate children law. Kate alsorecently trained as a collab-orative lawyer, an area oflaw that Slater Heelis spe-cialises in.

Kate says: “I’ve always hadhuge respect for SlaterHeelis as a firm that attractstop calibre clients across itsprivate and business clientbase. It’s great to be joiningthe team at such an excitingtime and as the firm is ex-panding, developing newdepartments and really con-solidating its place at thetop of the tree for Familylaw in the North West.”

Mark Heptinstall and MikeHamlin are the new jointHeads of the Family depart-ment and Mark says: “Thepast couple of years haveseen a real growth and ex-pansion in our Family de-partment and I’m delightedto be heading up the newteam and to welcome Kate,Helen and Helen to theteam. As the only law firm inSale to offer mediation as asimpler, less painful andcheaper way for couples toseparate, the number ofcases we now handle has in-creased significantly andour collaborative law spe-cialists will make this a realarea of specialism for thefirm moving forward.”

Two Associates are also join-ing the Family Team. HelenMiller was formerly at JamesMaguire & Co and Pannoneand is a dedicated familylaw solicitor, specialising inresolving issues arising fromdivorce and relationshipbreakdown and with ac-creditation from Resolutionfor both Complex Financial& Property Matters, andChildren’s Law. HelenThompson joins SlaterHeelis as an Associate fromGregorys Solicitors in HazelGrove, where she was Headof Family Law. Helen is alsoan Accredited Specialistwith Resolution.

Slater Heelis launches largest family departmentin south Manchester

Kate Rayner (centre) with other new additions to team, HelenMiller and Helen Thompson)

Manchester Law Society 7Movers & Shakers - send your news to j.baskerville@btconnect.com

A great deal has beenwritten about change inthe legal profession basedon the impact of the LegalServices Act 2007 and im-proving client services. Inkeeping with its approachof putting the needs of itsclients first, Chafes Solici-tors LLP is delighted to an-nounce that it has agreedto transfer its Lender Ser-vices department to DWFfrom Friday 1st February.

Jon Roberts, Managing Part-ner, said: “In today’s rapidlychanging and increasinglycompetitive legal market-ing, it’s important that weunderstand the business weare in and what our clientsvalue. Chafes is a well re-spected law firm and in ad-dition to the high qualityservices expected from us,we want to enhance theclient experience we de-liver.

Clients to benefit fromDepartment move

Jon Roberts

In a strategic move, law firm Hill Dickinson has acquired themajority of DLA Piper’s defendant insurance practice in Sh-effield and Manchester. The deal sees the lateral hire of ap-proximately 30 employees, including three new members,all of whom will move into Hill Dickinson’s existing premisesin these two cities. The majority will be based in Sheffield.

The practice, which has a turnover of approximately £2million,has a strong capability and specialism in disease cases. As partof the deal the team’s entire client base, which includes highprofile insurers and corporate clients, will, subject to their agree-ment transfer their defendant insurance matters across to HillDickinson.

The news comes following DLA Piper’s announcement that itis to divest parts of its defendant insurance practice across Sh-effield, Manchester and Birmingham.

On the announcement, managing partner at Hill Dickinson,Peter Jackson, commented: “This is a significant acquisition for

the firm and one that will further enhance our insurance offer-ing. The improvement of our relationship with mainstream in-surers is a priority for our insurance business and this deal willhelp us to meet this objective. We look forward to welcomingthe new team members onboard and to optimising the oppor-tunities they bring with them for the firm.”

Hill Dickinson’s head of insurance, Ruth Lawrence, added: “Ournew team members will bring with them a wealth of expertiseand many combined years of experience that will enable us tobuild our presence in the marketplace, both from an industryand regional point of view. As in line with business objectiveswe will see immediate growth in our insurer client base and willalso ensure that our clients benefit from a comprehensive andspecialist service.”

The new team members will join Hill Dickinson offices in Sh-effield and Manchester on 28th February 2013.l spectrum, fromnon-contentious advisory and transactional work to all forms ofdispute resolution.

Hill Dickinson acquires DLA Piper’s Sheffield andManchester Defendant Insurance Practice

Ruth Lawrence

Peter Jackson “This is an exciting time forChafes and the move willenable us to concentrateour resources and energyon our core markets whichare providing legal servicesto private individuals andsmall to medium sized busi-nesses.”

The April edition of TheMessenger will include fullcoverage of the Manchester LegalAwards...

8 Movers & Shakers - send your news to j.baskerville@btconnect.com

Send your news toj.baskerville@btconnect.com

Turner Parkinson’s dis-pute resolution team isexpecting another suc-cessful year, having re-ported substantial growthin sales, with fee incomeup by 41% in 2012.

Along with corporate andinsolvency, dispute resolu-tion is one of the boutiquebusiness law firm’s threemain practice areas and ac-counts for 26% of overallcompany turnover.

During 2012, the firm’s nineperson team acted on alarge number of complexmulti-million pound casesinvolving some of the NorthWest’s leading QCs and sev-eral of the country’s topchancery Judges, a signifi-cant proportion of whichled to reported decisionsand which included civilfraud actions, shareholderdisputes, finance litigation,intellectual property,breach of contract claims

and contested emergencyinjunction applications withvalues ranging up to £20m.

The team advise a broadrange of clients includinglarge private companies,secondary lenders and fi-nancial institutions, highnet worth individuals andowner managed SMEs.

Ian Fitzpatrick, who leadsTurner Parkinson’s dispute

resolution team, com-mented: “In 2012 the teamwere involved in some ofthe North West’s largestcases and this, combinedwith the strength and expe-rience of the team and thecalibre of our clients, hascontributed to our stronggrowth. We intend to buildon the success of 2012 bycontinuing to provide thevery best, partner-led serv-ice.”

Strong growth for TP’s dispute resolution team

Leading constructionlawyer Barry Goodall hasbeen appointed as a Part-ner by North West law firmBrabners Chaffe Street.

A specialist in constructionand engineering disputeresolution, Barry has 17years’ experience acting forcontractors, sub-contrac-tors, developers, suppliersand companies of all sizesthrough alternative disputeresolution (ADR), adjudica-tion, litigation and arbitra-tion. Barry joins frominternational law firm DACBeachcroft, where he was aPartner.

At Brabners Chaffe StreetBarry will cover the Liver-pool and Manchester of-fices, working with clientson dispute resolution andproviding non-contentiouscontract advice.

As well as being a lawyer,Barry is qualified as a char-tered quantity surveyor andhas presented numerousseminars on all aspects ofconstruction law. He is alsofeatured in The Legal 500.

Mark Brandwood, Manag-ing Partner at BrabnersChaffe Street, said: “Barryhas a wide range of experi-ence in dealing with all as-pects of construction andengineering dispute resolu-

tion and we are delightedthat he has joined BrabnersChaffe Street. The expert-ise that Barry brings com-plements a variety of teamsacross the firm and his im-pressive track record rein-forces our position as aleading regional provider toconstruction industryclients across the NorthWest and beyond.”

Barry commented: “I am de-lighted to join BrabnersChaffe Street. The firm hasan outstanding reputationacross the North West andbeyond and I look forwardto being able to supportand add to the firm’s expert-ise in the construction andengineering sectors.”

Key appointment boosts Brabners Chaffe Street’sconstruction team

Mark Brandwood and Barry Goodall

Top 50 law firm Weight-mans has elected JohnSchorah as its new manag-ing partner and Dan Cuttsas its new senior partner.

John Schorah takes on themanaging partner role fromPatrick Gaul, who has ledthe firm since 2003. Duringthat time, Weightmans hasincreased its fee incomefrom £27.7 million to £77.1million.

Dan Cutts takes up the sen-ior partner mantle from IanEvans, who has held the po-sition since 2000. Both willbegin their new roles on 1May 2013.

As Director of CommercialServices, John Schorahjoined Weightmans in 2003and currently oversees de-livery of the firm’s commer-cial strategy. He previouslyworked as the Head of Cor-porate at a regional law firmand in industry with a UKplc in a senior managementrole, eventually becomingChief Executive.

Dan Cutts joined Weight-mans in 1999. He has been aBoard member at Weight-

mans since 2002 and Direc-tor of Insurance since 2007.As past President of theForum of Insurance Lawyers(FOIL) he has been activelyinvolved in the recent CivilJustice Reforms.

Said Patrick Gaul, who willreturn to a fee earning roleas a partner in the firm’s Pro-fessional Risk team:

“It has been a privilege toact as Weightmans’ manag-ing partner over the last tenyears. I would like to thankeveryone at the firm fortheir support throughout -particularly Ian who I havegreatly enjoyed workingalongside.

“I would also like to wishJohn and Dan every successmoving forward. Theybring a breadth of experi-ence and knowledge totheir respective roles atwhat is a very exciting timefor the firm.”

Ian Evans, who will be retir-ing from the firm when histerm as senior partner com-pletes, said:“I am proud tohave been at Weightmansfor my whole career. I

joined as an articled clerk in1973 when the firm had nomore than forty people andone office in Liverpool.Today, we are a major UKlaw firm with over 1000people and offices through-out the country. It’s been agreat adventure.”

Commenting on his ap-pointment as managingpartner, John Schorah said:

“On behalf of everyone atWeightmans, I would like tothank Patrick and Ian fortheir outstanding leader-ship of the firm. It is a hugehonour to be appointedmanaging partner of thisfirm. Weightmans is now inan exceptionally strong po-sition as one of the UK’s top50 law firms.”

Added Dan Cutts:“As seniorpartner, I am looking for-ward to working with Johnand all of the Weightmansteam to help build and de-velop our business. We willwork hard to be worthy suc-cessors to Patrick and Ian aswe seek to strengthenWeightmans’ position asone of the UK’s leading na-tional law firms.”

Weightmans appoints new Managingand Senior Partner

Dan Cutts and John Schorah

Flexibility in the workplace continued from front cover

The deadline for the April 2013 edition of the Messenger is 14th March

employers who potentiallyare unable to accommodaterequests or mishandle them.

Any new system must also beeasy to administer and under-stand. Employment legisla-tion has undergone multiplechanges in the last 6 to 12months, many businesses are

already struggling to keeppace with it all.

For many working parents theproblem is not the early yearsbut later on when there is arequirement to take up child-care. The cost of childcare isoften prohibitive meaningone parent (whether that is

mum or dad) has to remain athome to care for the children.

That is nothing to do with theflexibility or not which can beafforded to them by the em-ployer – it’s a question ofpure economics.

Services for Solicitors

9the Messenger Local News

10 the MessengerMovers & Shakers - send your news to j.baskerville@btconnect.com

The corporate team atStockport law firm SASDaniels’ has completeddeals totalling more than£100 million in the lastyear, despite the challeng-ing economic environ-ment.

The corporate team, whichis led by partner Jeremy Or-rell and commercial teamled by Kaye Whitby,clocked-up the figure across26 deals. It marks a rise ofsome £70 million from lastyear’s total deals value forthe firm.

Significant work for theteam in 2012 included thesale of Macclesfield IT assetmanagement firm Mattellito global IT solutions distri-bution leader Avnet Tech-nology Solutions – part ofthe Fortune 500-listedAvnet Inc organisation; aswell as advising North Westproperty surveyor DixonWebb on its acquisition bythe UK's largest independ-ent commercial property

consultant GVA.

The firm, which offers serv-ices advising corporates,SMEs and owner-managersacross a full range of sec-tors, have seen a particularincrease in activity in theenvironmental and recy-cling sectors, most recentlyhelping North Wales basedenergy reduction businessSenseLogix on securing a£1million investment pack-age.

Commenting on the figures,Jeremy Orrell from SASDaniels said: “This figurerepresents a really solidpipeline of work for us overthe last 12 months. Despitethe continuing economicuncertainty, confidence isbecoming more wide-spread and businesses arethinking more about posi-tioning themselves forgrowth.”

The news follows the an-nouncement that SASDaniels, which also has of-

fices in Chester, Congletonand Macclesfield beat itshighest ever fee incomerecord three times last yearafter strong growth acrossall practice areas.

The performance of thefirm, which now has 25 part-ners and 65 lawyers, meansit is on track to post morethan £6.5 million turnover inthe year to April 2013 –more than a 10% increaseon the £5.9 million turnoverposted in April 2012.

Chief Executive of SASDaniels, Nigel Haddon, said:“Our corporate team hashad a superb year and iscontinuing to buck thedownward trend on dealsactivity. The firm as a wholeboasts a strong client baseand, with the growth planfor the firm already bearingfruit, we are on track tostrengthen and grow evenfurther over the comingyear.”

Cheshire firm completes £100 millionof deals in 2012

The Sports Law team atNorth West firm BrabnersChaffe Street have experi-enced a busy Januarytransfer window advisingon a number of high pro-file domestic and interna-tional football transfers.

The firm advised MarioBalotelli on the terminationof his contract at Manches-ter City in order for him tocomplete his widely publi-cised transfer to AC Milan.Another high profile dealsaw the team advise Man-chester United on its acqui-sition of Wilfried Zaha andhis loan back to CrystalPalace.

The team also acted forLiverpool FC in securing awork permit for Brazilianmidfielder PhilippeCoutinho to enable him tomove to Anfield from InterMilan. Other work permitactivity included securingthe necessary FA approvalsfor Wigan Athletic to signHonduran internationalRoger Espinoza from Sport-ing Kansas City and for HullCity to sign Egyptian inter-nationals Gedo and AhmedFathi from the Al Ahly Clubin Cairo.

New York based MajorLeague Soccer again calledupon the team’s services toadvise on the transfer ofBrek Shea from FC Dallas toStoke City and the loan ofKei Kamara from Sporting

Kansas City to Norwich City.

Other international dealsworked upon included Tot-tenham Hotspur’s signingof German internationalLewis Holtby from Schalke04, Newcastle United’s ac-quisition of Moussa Sissokofrom Toulouse FC, the trans-fer of Norwegian VegardForren from Molde FK toSouthampton and LoïcRémy’s move to QPR fromMarseille.

The firm also advised anumber of players who ex-tended their contracts withtheir clubs including Eng-land international TheoWalcott who renewedterms with Arsenal, RyanShawcross who committedhis future to Stoke City andEngland U19 goalkeeperConnor Ripley who ex-tended his contract withMiddlesbrough.

Off the pitch, the firm alsorecently advised on a num-ber of managerial moves in-cluding Bolton Wanderers’appointment of DougieFreedman, BlackburnRovers’ appointment ofMichael Appleton andSouthampton’s appoint-ment of Argentinian Mauri-cio Pochettino.

Matthew Bennett, a Partnerin the firm’s Sports depart-ment, commented: “TheJanuary transfer windowprovides an opportunity for

clubs to make improve-ments to their squads mid-way through the season.As with previous Januarywindows, we worked on anumber of loans as well assome of the major transfersincluding a number of in-ternational deals in whichwe are particularly experi-enced.”

The Brabners Chaffe Streetteam included: MatthewBennett, Lydia Edgar, CarolCouse, Stuart Baird, ChrisAnderson, Matt Barnes, Stu-art Ripley, Andrew Gartside,David Bentham and NicolaSoden.

Brabners Chaffe Street advise onMario Balotelli transfer

Matthew Bennett

Clough & Willis – one theNorth West’s leading mid-sized legal firms – haslaunched a brand new serv-ice to help recently be-reaved clients to start todeal with their loved ones’affairs. Focussing aroundthe practical issues thatmost people will not havehad to deal with before, theservice will offer a free 20minute meeting, by ap-pointment, where clientscan come as a first point ofcontact when someone hasdied.

The Private Client depart-ment will provide guidanceand advice on what to con-sider when a loved one dies,including information onhow to register the death,making funeral arrange-ments, and who should benotified. The team can alsooffer support and assistancewith the probate process -depending on whether ornot there is a valid Will - andadministering the deceased’sestate.

Helen Webster, head of the

Private Client departmentcommented: “Wheneversomeone dies, the grievingfriends and family left behindoften don’t know where tostart in this difficult, unfamil-iar and daunting situation –especially when it is unex-pected. The aim of this new

and dedicated service is toprovide support as well aspractical help with oftencomplex affairs. We also hopeour expertise, knowledgeand experience will go someway to relieving the burdenand pressure for our clientsduring a time of grief.”

Clough & Willis launches Bereavement Service

Helen Webster

International law firm, HillDickinson LLP, has an-nounced it is to open an of-fice in Monte Carlo, HillDickinson Monaco SAM.

The new office, which is lo-cated at Palais Saint Jameson Avenue Princesse Alice, isscheduled to open for busi-ness in March 2013. It will pri-marily service the firm’syacht team clients, many ofwhom are based in, or haveclose connections with,Monaco, but it will also bedeveloping its shipping busi-ness in the region.

David Reardon has been ap-pointed as resident partnerand he will be supported bya team of three, with addi-tional recruitment antici-pated in the first six months.On the new office, Peter Jack-

son, Managing Partner, HillDickinson, commented: “Ouryacht team is widely re-garded as the leader in themarine and superyacht mar-ket and, as so much of itswork is derived from the Prin-cipality, it makes sense for itto establish a base there toprovide an even better serv-ice to its clients and to en-hance the firm’s profile in thisvery important area of ourbusiness.”

Hill Dickinson’s yacht teamrepresents all sectors of theindustry. As well as acting forkey parties in the yacht insur-ance market, members of theteam also routinely adviseowners, managers, brokers,designers and builders in re-lation to sale and purchaseissues, build contracts and fi-nancing for some of the

Hill Dickinson acquires new Monaco office toservice superyacht client base

David Reardonworld’s biggest yachts.

The new Monaco office willjoin Hill Dickinson offices inLiverpool, Manchester, Lon-don, Chester, Sheffield, Pi-raeus and Singapore.

11the Messenger News

A young adult who re-ceived a police caution asan 11-year-old child afterbeing accused of a steal-ing two bicycles has wontheir fight for justice, fol-lowing a Court of Appealruling.

The young adult, knownonly as T, took their case tothe Court of Appeal after anunsuccessful attempt tohave the caution removedfrom a criminal record cer-tificate at the High Court inFebruary 2012.

The case considered thebasis on which the continu-ous disclosure of the cau-tion was disproportionateand incompatible with theright to privacy and familylife. The case also consid-ered whether the exemp-tions to the Rehabilitationof Offenders Act in certaintypes of employment werecompatible with the Rightto Privacy.

The issue initially arosewhen the adult applied for aposition which required anenhanced Criminal RecordsBureau check to be carriedout. The warning, despitebeing ‘spent’was still visibleon the records.

The Judgment was origi-nally due to be provided on21 December 2012, but in asomewhat irregular step,was postponed because ofthe Governments concernsabout the effect on theCriminal Records Certificateregime. A further hearingtook place on 25 January2013 and Judgment finallygiven on 29 January 2013.

The Court of Appeal havedisagreed with the HighCourt Judgment andgranted a declaration thatthe 1997 Police Act and Re-habilitation of Offenders Act1974 Exemption Orderbreaches article 8 of theEuropean Convention onHuman Rights (The right toprivacy and Family Life).

The declaration will nowlead to an urgent need tochange the law. There willhowever be a stay on the ef-fect of the Judgment toallow the Secretary of Stateto appeal.

The young adult’s solicitor,Mike Pemberton, a partnerand head of the Civil Liber-ties Unit at StephensonsSolicitors LLP, said: “Thewarning which was issuedwhen my client was 11 years

old was for an alleged minoroffence and was acceptedin the presence of a parent,without taking into accounthow this may affect futureemployment.

“In this case, the continuedreference to the warninghas affected their ability togain employment in spe-cific roles. This is despitethem having no furthercontact with the Police andthe Judge in the High Courtcase commenting that theirbehaviour since childhoodhas been exemplary.

“It defies common sensethat a minor caution at theage of 11 should have to bedisclosed on every applica-tion for a job of certaintypes in the future. Further-more, my client undergoesthe rigmarole of having toexplain the matter againand again.

“I welcome the judgment ofthe Court which reflectsthat human rights do equalcommon sense.”

Hugh Southey QC of TooksChambers and Nick Arm-strong of Matrix Chamberswere instructed by MikePemberton.

Court of Appeal win for young adultwith hampered employment prospects

Hill Dickinson continues to ‘Strike a Balance’ withCity in the Community sponsorshipHill Dickinson’s Manches-ter office present a chequefor £25,000 to ManchesterCity Football Club (MCFC)as the firm sponsors theClub’s ‘Strike a Balance’programme for the sec-ond year running.

Hill Dickinson’s sponsorshipover the last year has en-abled the City in the Com-munity (CITC) team toeducate over 5,000 youngpeople across Manchesteron how to lead healthierlifestyles and combine exer-cise and fun through foot-ball-based activities.

CITC’s award winning healthprogramme ‘Strike aBalance’ is a five week pro-gramme where a member

of the CITC health team vis-its the Year five children inschools across Manchesterto provide them with a onehour educational classroomsession followed by onehour of football-based ac-tivities.

The programme makes useof interactive props, videosand booklets, which includeinspiration from the Man-chester City players whopass their knowledge ontothe young people. Eachweek they focus on a differ-ent topic area including;how to eat a balanced diet,what influences our diet,benefits of physical activity,a practical healthy food ses-sion, and a recap session.

Each child has a folder withfive booklets to completeand an apron to take homewith them on completion ofthe course.

On the sponsorship, MikeBlakey, partner in Hill Dick-inson’s Manchester office,who presented the chequefor £25,000 to CITC’s healthand activity manager, LisaKimpton, said: “City in theCommunity’s Strike aBalance programme is anexcellent initiative and hasproved to be a great suc-cess. We hope our furthercontributions can help CITCto reach more children inthe region and ensure thatManchester’s young peoplehave the tools they need tolead healthier lifestyles.”

Lisa Kimpton, MCFC receiving cheque from Mike Blakey, Ian Gillis and Ian Riggs fromHill Dickinson

Manchester law firm Rus-sell Jones & Walker hastoday announced that ithas completed its transi-tion to the Slater & Gor-don brand namefollowing last year’s head-line grabbing merger withSlater & Gordon in Aus-tralia - the country’slargest consumer firmand the first in the worldto be publicly listed.

The firm has undergone acomplete brand review andtoday unveiled its new web-sitewww.slatergordon.co.uk,marking the firm’s commit-ment to becoming a marketleader in Manchester asSlater & Gordon LLP.

The move comes at a criticaltime of change in the UKlegal industry after theLegal Services Act openedthe market to outside in-vestment and ahead of im-

pending changes to thepersonal injury sector.

Nick Holroyd, Senior Princi-pal lawyer at Slater & Gor-don Manchester, said therebrand marks an excitingtime for the firm and its fu-ture into a new landscape.

He said: “We are embracingthis enormous opportunitywhich underpins ourgrowth plan and helps uswork to our aim of becom-ing the largest and mosttrusted provider of personallegal services in the area.

“One thing that will notchange, though, is our com-mitment to making accessto justice available and af-fordable to all. This is whatputs us ahead of our com-petition, attracts people towork with us and makes ourfirm unique.

“We will continue to deliver

first class legal services butfrom here on in, we will beknown as Slater & Gordon.”

The firm has 10 officesacross the UK, with 180 staffin Manchester - the head-quarters for its family lawteam which operates a freeFamily Legal Advice Clinic inOpenshaw and houses dis-creet meeting rooms inBramhall.

It is also home to Slater &Gordon’s call centre, whichhandles 100,000 telephonelegal queries a year.

The rebrand from RussellJones & Walker to Slater &Gordon is in effect from Fe-bruary 11 2013.

Local law firm unveilsnew identity

SLEEPLESS NIGHTS?

CALL NOW FOR HELP020 787 32244 (WEEKDAYS) OR

07733 434648 (WEEKENDS) www.thecumbriapractice.co.uk

Email: cumbriapractice@aol.com

THE CUMBRIA PRACTICESOLUTIONS

FOCUSED HYPNOTHERAPY

CONSULTATIONS IN THE CITYCENTRE OR AT HOME

12 the MessengerFeature

DNA Paternity Test £290+ VAT

Call Alpha Biolabs on 0845 50 50 001

We've been working towards1st April and implementationof the raft of Jackson relatedreforms for a couple of yearsnow, since we took the deci-sion to create the Affinity divi-sion at Pannone. PannoneAffinity is a ring fenced provi-sion within Pannone whichsolely focuses on delivering,typically on a white labelledbasis, the full range of processdriven legal services to affin-ity organisations, such as in-surers, banks and otherintermediaries.

Obviously we are as disap-pointed as everyone else inthe personal injury arena thatthere are various aspects ofthe changes which haven'tyet been finalised, but it'sclear that whatever timescaleis finally imposed or agreed,there is little expectation thatthey will not happen.

For our PI teams, particularlythe fast track teams dealingwith the kind of cases whichwill be most affected by thechanges, there has been a dif-ficult but necessary process ofrestructuring to make surethat we are ready for the in-evitable downward pressureon profitability with the newfixed costs and portal costs.There has been a relentlessfocus on customer service tomake sure that the processeswe have in place to carry outthe work we do are as robustas possible. While there isbound to be upheaval afterApril, we have seen this as anopportunity to look veryclosely at the way we operateand to make some significantchanges and allow them thetime to bed in.

Talking HeadsBoth LASPO and the Jackson Reforms come into effect on 1st April, we asked a number of practitioners “What stepshas your firm made to prepare for the introduction of LASPO and the Jackson Reforms which come into effect on 1stApril 2013, and what are your concerns?”

The question of the motivesbehind the changes has beendebated for some time butthe simple fact is that they arecoming. As my firm spe-cialises only in personal injury,it was important that Ianalysed the detail of theJackson reforms and LASPOearly. Undoubtedly, any firmthat has ignored or done verylittle to prepare for thesechanges will seriously strug-gle to survive and may evengo out of business altogether.

There are two main issues toconsider (1) the impact of thereferral fee ban and (2) the im-pact of the proposed fixedcosts extension.

Dealing with the referral feeban, for almost 2 years now, Ihave been working on vari-ous marketing strategies togenerate more of our ownwork. To date, the firm gener-ates on average 25% of newand acceptable enquirieswhich is huge progress giventhat the business is just over 3years old. That work is contin-uing with new ideas beingtested and implemented on aweekly basis and ranges from

My concerns are I’m surethose shared by everyone in-volved, that is that the re-forms have been poorlyimplemented and that therewill be unintended conse-quences. The late inclusionof the referral fee ban inLASPO is an example of that.The way the marketplace ap-pears to be evolving, a lot willdepend on how the SRA goabout policing and enforce-ment of the ban but thewording of the ban has madetheir job much more difficultthan it needed to be.

Michael HardacrePartner - PI - Pannone AffinityPannone LLP

online to offline activities.

The argument has been putforward that as the referral feeban will remove the cost of re-ferral fees being paid, thosefees should be removed fromthe recoverable costs in per-sonal injury litigation. This isquite frankly a totally mis-placed concept. A referral feeis just a marketing fee in an-other guise. Any firm, regard-less of the type of work itconducts will have to engagein some marketing activity in-volving at times, significantcost, to generate work. Thedays of waiting for clients towalk off the street as a solesource of work are gone. It istherefore totally illogical tosay that recoverable costsshould be reduced simply be-cause of a referral fee ban. The Government and the rel-evant bodies along with inter-ested parties need to conductdetailed research to ascertainwhat the appropriate level ofrecoverable costs should beand to rush in changes tosoon will lead to a reductionin access to justice for injuredclaimants, industry-wide re-dundancies and a drain onSRA resources where special-ist personal injury firms goout of business.

Sucheet AminAequitas Legal

The aim of Part 2 of LASPOwas to enact in part the Jack-son Reforms and includedwithin LASPO are clauses thatachieve the following; defen-dants not being liable for suc-cess fees in CFAs, theintroduction of DamagedBased Agreements (DBA), de-

fendants not being liable forafter the event insurance pre-miums, additional damagesfor beating a claimant’s Part36 offer and a banning of re-ferral fees in personal injurymatters.

The Jackson Reforms, in-cluded far more than theclauses included in LASPO soother aspects are being dealtwith in various ways. 10% ongeneral damages has beenachieved by the Court of Ap-peal ruling in Simmons v Cas-tle, the rules surroundingCFAs and DBAs are beingdealt with by statutory instru-ment, qualified one way costshifting was reviewed by theCivil Justice Council, the pro-tocols were debated by theCivil Procedure Rules Com-mittee, costs are currentlybeing dealt with by the Min-istry of Justice, the IT platformis being built by Portal Co.

So it is clear that lots of bodiesare all working to try andachieve the 1st April deadlinebut the only certainty is thatthe LASPO provisions will golive on that date.

So what steps has Bott & Comade in readiness? Well, wehave successfully achievedABS status, which shouldallow us more flexibility andwe have spent a hugeamount of time and energyon making sure that we areLASPO compliant from Aprilonwards.

What are my concerns? Theyare two fold. One that the dif-ferent aspects of Jacksoncome in piecemeal, as LordJustice Jackson consistentlysaid his reforms work as apackage that interlock. Se-condly, costs. What other in-dustry is facing a potential60% drop in fees and with lessthan 2 months to go, no ac-tual figures to work on? Weneed clarity and if claritymeans a delay in implementa-tion then clarity should pre-vail.

David BottSenior PartnerBott & Co

Before the Government madeits decision to go ahead withchanges to legal aid we atStephensons Solicitors LLPsupported the Sound Off ForJustice campaign and sawfirst hand the concerns thegeneral public has about theupcoming changes.

The provision of legal aid cur-rently makes specialistlawyers available to hundredsof thousands of ordinary peo-ple, including some of themost vulnerable in society.

When this expert legal adviceand representation is notavailable it is these ordinarypeople who will suffer. Theadults, whose family disputeswill run on longer than neces-sary and, even more impor-tantly, the children, who willsuffer the most when familydisputes continue to fester. We are most concerned for

the children who will grow upin an atmosphere of unre-solved conflict.

The financial and emotionalcost to children who will suf-fer because there is no serviceavailable to quickly and sim-ply resolve their family dis-putes will far outstrip therelatively small savings theGovernment will make byaxing what up to now wasconsidered an essential pub-lic service - legal aid in familycases.

As the reforms will be takingeffect shortly we have imple-mented a range of changes inthe way we work to ensurewe remain committed to pro-viding legal aid when otherfirms are walking away.

For those who will no longerqualify for legal aid, we haveintroduced new fixed feeservices, which ensure ourclients know how much theywill need to spend with nonasty surprises at the end oftheir cases.

We also provide a flexibleservice enabling clients to‘pay as you go’ so they onlypay for the legal advice andrepresentation they need.

With regard to the Jackson re-forms we are concerned thatinjured people will now losesome of their damages. TheGovernment seems intent oncutting the costs available tosolicitors for various types ofpersonal injury litigation sothat in order to run a viablepractice there is no optionbut to take up to 25% ofclients’ damages. We joined anumber of campaigns to re-sist some of those proposals,including making submis-sions to the Ministry of Jus-tice, but it appears theinsurance industry’s voice hasprobably succeeded.

We’re also concerned aboutthe impact of the referral feesban. We fear that some maycome up with inventiveschemes to circumvent theban, which would prevent alevel playing field for those of

us who do intend to abide bythe rules.

One big concern is how lateeverything has been left.April’s looming and we fearthat many of the Governmentagencies are not ready, sowhat chance does the profes-sion have?

Mike DevlinManaging Partner of Familyand Children LawStephensons LLP

16 the MessengerNews

Employees have the right(under Article 9 of theEuropean Convention onHuman Rights) to free-dom of religion and, aspart of this, are free to ex-ercise their religious be-liefs within the workplace.However, in some situa-tions it is possible for anemployer to impose re-strictions on the right toexercise those beliefs, forexample to protect publichealth or the rights andfreedoms of other people.

In this case, Mrs Eweida, aCatholic, sought to wear asilver cross to work but wasrefused by her employer onthe basis it breached theiruniform policy. Mrs Eweidafelt the decision discrimi-nated against her on thegrounds of her religious be-liefs and therefore issuedproceedings in the tribunal.

The case had been makingits way through the courtsfor some time and, follow-ing a number of unsuccess-ful hearings in the UK, MrsEweida took her fight to theECJ. The ECJ confirmed thather employer’s decision torefuse her request to wear across was discriminatoryand could not be justified.

The facts

Mrs Eweida worked as acheck-in assistant for BritishAirways (BA). She chose towear a plain silver cross towork which would be visi-ble over her uniform.

BA refused however on thebasis it would contravene itsuniform policy which pro-hibited non-uniform itemsto be visible, except for cer-tain religious items (e.g.skull cap, turban). As a re-sult, Mrs Eweida was senthome and did not returnuntil five months later,when BA amended its uni-form policy to allow her todisplay her cross.

Mrs Eweida felt the decisionnot to allow her to remain inwork whilst wearing hercross was discriminatory onthe grounds of her religiousbeliefs and therefore issuedproceedings in the tribunal.

The tribunal rejected herclaim. It believed that herdecision to wear a cross wasnot a religious requirementbut a personal decision andtherefore BA’s uniform pol-

icy was not discriminatoryas it did not disadvantageChristians. Mrs Eweida ap-pealed to the EmploymentAppeal Tribunal and Courtof Appeal but was unsuc-cessful and therefore madean application to the ECJ.

In considering Mrs Eweida’scase the ECJ considered thefollowing three UK cases:

Chaplin v UK - Ms Chaplinwas a nurse who sought towear a crucifix on a necklaceto work. Her employer re-fused to allow her to wearthe crucifix however as itbreached its uniform policyand presented a potentialrisk to the health and safetyof staff and patients on theward.Ladele v UK - Ms Ladeleworked as a registrar whoseemployer performed civilpartnership ceremonies. MsLadele refused to performthe ceremonies however onthe basis of her Christian be-liefs and as a result was dis-missed by her employer.McFarlane v UK - Mr McFar-lane worked as a Counsellorfor Relate and was dis-missed following his refusalto provide sexual coun-selling services to same sexcouples as it offended hisChristian beliefs.

ECJ’s decision

The ECJ confirmed that BA’sdecision not to allow MrsEwedia to attend workwhilst wearing her cross didinterfere with her right toexercise her religious be-liefs.

Having done so, it went onto consider whether the UKcourts had struck a fair bal-ance between her rightsand those of others; it con-cluded they had not. Thecourt was satisfied that BA’suniform policy and desire toachieve brand uniformitywas a legitimate aim but feltthe UK courts had attachedtoo much weight to it. Inparticular, there was no evi-dence that wearing of au-thorised religious clothing,like skull caps or turbans,damaged BA’s corporateimage and, the fact it subse-quently amended its uni-form code to allow for thevisible wearing of religioussymbolic jewellery follow-ing Mrs Eweida’s complaint,demonstrated that the ear-lier prohibition was not ofcrucial importance.

Interestingly the three othercases were all dismissed bythe ECJ. In relation to MsChaplin, the court consid-ered that her employer’sreasons for asking her to re-move her cross were moreimportant than her desire towear it and therefore therehad been no breach of herright to freedom of religion.With regard to Ms Ladeleand Mr McFarlane, the courtrejected their claims on thebasis that both employershad been seeking to pro-vide a service free from dis-crimination which justifiedthe restrictions imposed ontheir freedom to exercisetheir religious beliefs.

What does it mean for em-ployers?

The ECJ’s decision has un-derlined the importance offreedom of religion withinthe workplace and clarifiesthat concerns over brandimage or identity will not,alone, overrule an individ-ual’s right to express thosereligious beliefs.

The court’s decision on MsChaplin, Ms Ladele and MrMcFarlane’s claims howeverdemonstrates that it is stillpossible to impose restric-tions on this right where itconflicts with the rights ofothers.

The decision also serves as auseful reminder of the im-portance of having a care-fully drafted dress codewhich strikes a balance be-tween corporate consis-tency, the needs ofindividuals and the accom-modation of diversity. Anyrequests to depart from adress code for religious rea-sons need to be consideredcarefully and employersshould meet with employ-ees to discuss their requests.

Religious discriminationcase successLast month, the news agenda was dominated by the decision of the European Court of Jus-tice (ECJ) in the British case of ‘Eweida and others v UK’. The case dealt with the difficult issueof employees’ freedom to display their religious beliefs in the workplace and has importantimplications for employers. Russell Brown, partner and head of the employment team atGlaisyers Solicitors LLP summarises the case...

18 the MessengerPI

Introduction

Over the last year a simple and very powerfully argued proposition has been put forward – illus-trated in the box to the right – that if referral fees are banned, the fees paid to solicitors in respectof fixed fee personal injury cases can be substantially reduced resulting in savings for consumersand taxpayers1. Indeed, in November 2012, the Ministry of Justice issued proposals to reduce thesefixed fees in order to reflect the forthcoming ban on referral fees.

There is an underlying assumption that with the ban on referral fees this expenditure will no longerbe required and that fees can be reduced without any further consequences.

It is also apparent that the generic term “referral fee” has been used to describe a range of very dif-ferent payments. These include the sale of the personal details of accident victims by insurancecompanies, as highlighted by Jack Straw, to marketing expenditure that is universally accepted asnormal in the course of any business. The use of this generic term has arguably complicated thepicture, and made it more difficult to understand the actual issues involved.

This short paper seeks to examine this underlying assumption and the potential impact of the pro-posed change on both the victims of accidents, and on the people who seek to represent them. Wewere asked to prepare it by APIL in mid December following the Ministry of Justice consultationlaunched on 19th November. There is very limited published data on the sector so we have insteadsought to understand the present position by speaking to a selection of firms of solicitors who cur-rently undertake this work and create a small number of case studies.

Marketing, acquisition cost and referral fees

As indicated above, some care needs to be taken when considering marketing in the context of per-sonal injury solicitors because the generic term “referral fees”has, over the last year, been used verywidely.

All businesses undertake marketing activities in order to acquire new business and in all sectors thenature of that marketing has changed radically in recent years, especially due to the internet.

Twenty years ago, most firms of solicitors did very little marketing with most of their work comingfrom existing clients or client recommendation. For some areas of work, such as private client orfamily, this continues to be the case, however other areas such as conveyancing and personal injury(PI) have seen radical change in the marketing techniques used to obtain new clients.

In the same way that marketing has changed for lawyers, the insurance sector has also seen hugechange, from work being generated via door-to-door salesmen or customers calling into localbranches, to being generated mainly from the internet. For example, until relatively recently, End-sleigh Insurance2 generated most of its work through a local branch network but in 2009 closed 119of its branches and more than 80% of its enquiries now emanate from the internet.

Personal injury solicitors still receive some work from existing clients, or passing trade, however formost this work source is minimal. Most personal injury business today comes through televisionadvertising, web site optimisation, pay per click or direct marketing. Many firms of solicitors lack in-depth experience of these forms of advertising and an alternative has been to buy leads from a thirdparty – either a marketing consortium or claims management company – who undertake the mar-keting and sell the subsequent leads generated in return for a fee. In addition, some insurance com-panies have sold leads to personal injury solicitors.

For many firms these fees are simply another form of marketing, in much the same way as todaymost (but not all) insurance companies buy work from price comparison websites. They are sim-ply different ways of generating work.

The “cost of acquisition”of new business and the length of time for a new customer to become prof-itable, has become a huge issue in many sectors, not least the insurance sector, and in particular inrecent years due to the growing prominence of price comparison websites.

Case StudiesPersonal injury solicitors now operate in a very different world than just a few years ago. They em-ploy a diverse and complex marketing mix and as with any business sector, different organisationschoose to use different methods to capture clients. This mix of different marketing methods is il-lustrated by these case studies. They illustrate that:

l Not all firms doing PI work buy work in;l One size does not fit all, with the cost of acquisition differing between:

l firms and marketing approach;l between direct and indirect marketing.

We have included some figures kindly supplied by the case study firms, however we must stress thatthese figures and calculations are pitched at a very macro level. A more detailed analysis beyondthe scope of this paper would be needed to differentiate between the portal/fast track part of themarket (cases with compensation awards between £1,000 and £25,000) and multi-track (cases withcompensation awards over £25,000). These case studies are intended to simply provide an overview.

Case study summaryThe case studies highlight a number of points:

l The one firm selected that undertook no marketing is likely to close its personal injury depart-ment next year because work levels are so low;

l The firms that were buying work in (at least in this sample) were smaller practices that lacked in-house marketing expertise;

l Some of the larger firms had highly sophisticated marketing;

l These larger firms are niche PI firms – they are not “general practices”. They are specialist PI firmswith a strong understanding of the sector and how to generate business;l The average acquisition cost of a client was approximately £700, with a range from £200 to £900;

l All of these firms (except one) have to rely on marketing to generate their business, and that mar-keting is expensive. If the fixed fees were reduced in the way that is being proposed this market-ing would still be required however the firms would not generate sufficient profit to enable the workto be viable. Instead of earning a fee of £1,200 they would instead, under the MOJ proposal, be paid£500, out of which they would have to pay the marketing cost of winning the client, currently £700,together with the cost of actually doing the work. We understand these types of case typically take

10 hours work, so each case undertaken would lose the firm money.

Case study one – 2 people – no marketing

Firm one operates in a traditional way – it does not buy work in and does very little marketing. It ispart of a general practice in a city centre and relies on referrals from other departments and pass-ing trade. One person is employed in its personal injury department, an experienced solicitor in herlate 50’s who, together with her secretary, generates fees of approximately 395,000, of which ap-proximately half is in respect of personal injury. The balance relates to other civil litigation. The di-rect salary costs of the department are approximately £90,000 and once the department is allocatedits share of the firm’s overheads the department is making a loss.

With the proposed increase in the small claims limit to £5,000 for personal injury cases it is expectedthat much of the personal injury work will go and it is likely the fee earner will be made redundant.The firm, which acts exclusively for people seeking compensation for accidents, will cease provid-ing this service.

Case study two – 8 people - £305,000 marketing spend

Firm two is also a general practice and has just 8 people in its PI department generating fees of ap-proximately £1m. They spend approximately £5,000 on marketing but 80% of their work is acquiredthrough a national solicitors collective marketing scheme with whom with which they spend justover £300,000 a year. The average case acquisition cost is in the range £550-£750.

They have limited in-house marketing expertise but have recently launched a separate PI websitealthough this has not generated any work to date. They have also employed a marketing personto assist with focusing the marketing budget and preparing for the many changes that they face.

The ban on paying referral fees would have a significant effect upon their future marketing com-mitments, and in the short term their case intake is likely to reduce. However this would be ame-liorated by the recruitment of an in house marketing person together with some focused marketingactivity.

Case study three – 15 people - £420,000 marketing spend

Firm three has 15 people in its PI department and generates fees of approximately £1.4m. Theyspent approximately £410,000 acquiring work from a marketing network in their last financial year.The acquisition cost per case is approximately £535.

This firm has also launched a dedicated PI website which is in its early days and has yet to generatevery much work – so far approximately 10 leads.

Case study four – 50 people - £1.6m marketing spend

Firm four employs 50 people and is expected to produce fees of just under £4m in the current yearto 29/2/2013.

The firm buys some work from other organisations (£200,000) but spends a further £1.4m on its ownmarketing. The firm’s average cost of opening a case is £850 including all media and other runningcosts. The firm’s marketing approach is based around:

l Direct response television advertising;l Targeting of most effective times and channels;l Optimised website with lead capture and live chat option;l Pay per click being used to support both TV and search engine optimisation.

Case study five – 70 people - £900,000 marketing spend

Firm five has 70 people and a turnover of just under £7m. In the year to 30th June 2012 it spent:

l £500,000 on buying in work – this generated 2,496 cases – an average cost per case bought of £200;

l £400,000 on direct marketing. This included significant expenditure on raising general brand awareness that did not relate directly to the level of incoming work. A more up to date and relevant figure, which corresponds more directly to the number of cases received, is estimated at £900 per converted case.

The firm provided an analysis of its 2011/12 marketing expenditure:

Pay per click £136,0002 x concentrated brand campaigns (micro-site & transvision screens) £140,000Other brand building £24,000Display ads £83,000

Personal Injury marketing and ‘referral fees’Staff in the firm or PI department 2 Direct marketing 0PI fees £96,000 Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties 0PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 6% Average acquisition cost n/a

Staff in the firm or PI department 8 Direct marketing £5,000PI fees £1m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties £300,000PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 30% Average acquisition cost range £550 - 750

Staff in the firm or PI department 15 Direct marketing £10,000PI fees £1.4m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties £410,000PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 23% Average acquisition cost £535

Staff in the firm or PI department 50 Direct marketing £1.4mPI fees £3.8m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties £200,000PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 100% Average acquisition cost £850

Staff in the firm or PI department 70 Direct marketing £400,000PI fees £7m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties £500,000PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 100% Average acquisition cost £900

19the Messenger News

The firm’s online marketing activity can be broken down into:

Pay Per Click – Sponsored search engine listings based on real-time bidding for various keywords.Can generally control spend however requires a great deal of daily management to work efficientlydue to very high level of competition and cost. Primary source of online work generation. Search Engine Optimisation – Strategy is to appear on the first page of organic search results via thecreation of quality online content. A long term project requiring intensive onsite/offsite activity andtangible results may not be seen for several months after work. Secondary source of online workgeneration.Display – Offsite banner adverts using a variety of wide targeting methods (location, demographic,activity). Requires a high number of views to drive brand awareness and capture interest of po-tential clients. Tertiary and supporting source of online work generation.

Each of the above broad marketing areas also has major subcomponents. For example, PPC cam-paigns on Google perform differently to those on Bing; SEO involves web design, page accessibil-ity, social networking; on Display different networks require different formats and styles of ads etc.

Case study six – 100 people - £1.5m marketing spend

Firm six employs just over 100 people and had fees in the year to 31st August 2012, of just over £5m.It is a niche PI firm and all its work is for claimants. It spent £1.5m on marketing and generated 2,790cases – an average acquisition cost of £550 a case.

The firm itself made some useful observations about these figures:

“In understanding the average case acquisition cost it is important to realise that this relates to‘signed up clients’ or ‘retained cases’ after we’ve been through a process of looking at leads, decid-ing which ones we want, telling the clients that and then getting them to retain us. After that point,we do not win 39-40% of our cases, it’s what I suppose in the business world you would call ‘churn’.That’s why there is a difference in case acquisition fee from £550.00 to acquire a signed up case, to£1,000 being the cost of the ones that you acquire and win on average. That doesn’t mean that wewould lose that many at trial although that certain happens particularly on public liability cases, butafter appropriate investigation, often after a disclosure application or getting disclosure at the endof a protocol period or getting medical records and looking over them or investigate it with wit-nesses, we realise we can no longer win and tell the client we can’t continue further on a CFA. Onthose cases, we clearly write off an enormous amount of Work in Progress or costs and sometimesabsorb small disbursements or if it’s bigger disbursements, claim from an after the event insurer.

This doesn’t mean we’re bad at picking cases, it means that it is not clear in about a third of the per-sonal injury cases that you look at, whether you’re going to win or lost at the outset. In very roughterms, one third you know you’re going to win, one third you know you’re not going to winbut for a vast swathe of the injured public, the third in the middle you need to investigatewhich costs money and effort and that was the basis of the whole ‘no win no fee’ system withsuccess fees recovered from the other side post Access to Justice Act 1999 replacing Legal Aid.

The other obvious point to make is that the real problem with the proposed Table B fees or what-ever proposed fixed-type costs you have once PL, EL and OL’s have fallen out of any portal, is thatonce you fix the costs, there is absolutely no incentive driving insurers to behave reasonablyand deal pragmatically, efficiently and quickly with cases. There is, of course, a direct obviousfinancial incentive for insurers and other defendants to seek to frustrate and delay and string outin order that claimants run out of available budget and therefore can’t pursue their claims as ably,if at all. Every claimant insurer knows that is precisely what they will do.”

Case study seven – 200 people - £900k marketing spend

Firm seven employs just over 200 people and has an annual turnover of approximately £15m. Theyundertake all of their own marketing and do not buy work in, instead spending, in the year to 31st

March 2012, just over £900,000 on marketing. The firm only undertakes personal injury and its actsexclusively for claimants. Their advertising for last year and this year to date is summarised below:

The marketing is primarily advertising on radio and television, signage, and internet based adver-tising. The firm also employ sales staff that are primarily dealing with insurance brokers, insuranceintermediates, fleets, dealerships/repairers.

Case study eight – 300 people - £3.2m marketing spend

Firm eight employs approximately 300 people and has a turnover of £23m. In the year to April 2012they spent £3.2m on marketing and £100,000 on buying in work. One third of the marketing spendwas allocated to printed press and directories, one third to TV and Internet, and one third to prac-tice development.

The marketing spend generated 3,600 cases giving an average acquisition cost of £888.

Other sectorsAs indicated already, all organisations undertake marketing activity and have a cost associated withthe acquisition of a new client.Considered in isolation, the costs indicated by the eight firms to acquire a new case may appearhigh, however interestingly other sectors experience similar high new business acquisition costs.The key is often the relationship between that cost and the income it generates and how long ittakes to move into profit. For example:

Research in the US suggests the cost of a new cell phone customer is $350, comprising commis-sions, phone subsidies and marketing. A customer paying $59.99 a month becomes profitable aftermonth 8 and a $39.99 a month customer after month 11 (www.myrateplan.com);A regional UK accountancy practice estimate their marketing budget at £68,000, being £18,000 ona limited amount of advertising, their seminar programme, and a client newsletter, and a further£50,000 on sponsorship, a total of £68,000. Each year they might acquire 15 new clients, so the av-erage acquisition cost per client is £4,500. Average fees for these new clients are £13,000, so the ac-quisition cost represents just over 33% of the first year’s fees. The £18,000 direct marketing

Staff in the firm or PI department 100 Direct marketing £1.5mPI fees £5m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties 0PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 100% Average acquisition cost £550

Staff in the firm or PI department 200 Direct marketing £900,000PI fees £15m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties 0PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 100% Average acquisition cost £729

expenditure represents 1% of their fees3.

The insurance sectorThere are very close parallels between personal injury and the insurance sector in terms of workprocesses – both have become highly commoditised with extensive use of technology and bothuse very similar and sophisticated marketing methods.

Research published in 20114 indicated the relatively high acquisition costs insurers had to pay formotor insurance customers:

The mean premium per customer was £294 for those acquired through traditional media and £381from those recruited via price comparison sites. The latter are higher because price comparison sitesattract customers whose premiums are typically higher than the general insurance market – theyare often younger with higher risk profiles.

The mean premium income per customer (the profit earned) was £44 and £38 respectively – lowmargins which would only be helped if the volume of claims was substantially reduced through ac-tion by Government to make personal injury unviable. It is predicted that the growth of compari-son web sites will serve to further erode insurance company profitability and threaten their currentbusiness model. Not only are premiums lower through these sites (in order to attract the business)but customer retention rates are significantly reduced – 34% compared to 69% through traditionalchannels.

It appears from this analysis that an insurance company might be paying as much as 51% of the pre-mium in acquisition costs, and with an overall average of 27%.

It is important to put the discussions surrounding referral fees in the wider context of these chal-lenges facing the insurance industry. In particular, the 2011 research paper examined the implica-tions of this changed market, especially in terms of acquisition costs and retention rates for theinsurance company economic model. It did this via a hypothetical profitability model, as set outbelow:

The research indicates the lower profitability of business generated via comparison websites, andin particular the issue of falling retention rates and insurance company brand loyalty. It raises seri-ous questions about the ability of insurers to maintain their current economic model in the face ofthis challenge to their markets. It may well be tempting for some of these companies, no longerallowed to sell the details of their policy holders involved in accidents, instead simply to transfer theleads, for no referral fee, to an in house legal provider. This in-house service would deal with theclaim, in a way which might appear to be much the same as personal injury solicitors do today, al-beit probably un-regulated. The key advantage the insurance industry would have is that their ac-quisition cost would be zero.

Conclusion and summaryA number of important points emerge from this paper:

The term “referral fee” has been applied very widely to embrace both the controversial practices ofcertain insurance companies and claims management companies, which are to be banned, but alsomarketing expenditure which is universally accepted as normal in the course of any business, whichwill not be banned. The use of this generic term has arguably complicated the picture, and madeit more difficult to understand the actual issues involved;

The very broad headline assertion that fixed fees can be cut by the amount saved with the referralfee ban is difficult to support because firms will still need to promote themselves;

Such marketing activity is quite normal and occurs in all sectors, not least insurance. All businessesundertake marketing and there is a cost in acquiring all new customers, and in many cases it is sub-stantial;

Depending on their marketing expertise and ability, firms either undertake their marketing them-selves or sub-contract to a third party – a marketing collective or claims management company –which generates the customers on their behalf. It is all marketing – the only difference is that oneis done in-house, the other is provided as a service by a third party;

When the referral fee ban is introduced in 2013 firms will still need to engage in marketing to winnew business;

Unless firms are able to cross-subsidise they will no longer be able to do this work profitably and,as in the case of case study one, will have to run down their departments. It might be possible tocharge clients an amount in addition to their “recoverable” fee however clients may be unwilling topay this. The result will be that victims of accidents will not be represented and many firms will beforced to close.

The equation becomes £500 - £700 = a loss of £200 and that is beforecalculating the actual cost of doing 10 hours work…

Andrew Otterburn1 Association of British Insurers – Tackling the Compensation Culture – September 20112 http://www.moneywise.co.uk/news/2008-07-04/endsleigh-poised-to-close-branch-network3 confidential research as part of this project4 Robertshaw, Gary, An examination of the profitability of customers acquired through price comparison sites: implications for the UK Insurance Industry.Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice. Much of the analysis was based on unpublished data in respect of a FTSE 100 insurance company.

12 months to 31 March 2012 8 months to Nov 2012Marketing spend £929,768 £438,877Number of cases generated 1,164 602Average cost per case £799 £729

Staff in the firm or PI department 300 Direct marketing £3.2mPI fees £23m Indirect marketing -

work bought from 3rd parties £100,000PI fees as a % of the firm’s fees 100% Average acquisition cost £888

Channel Acquisition cost per customerInternet banners £151.55Cold list direct mail £130.51Television £125.24Directories £103.82Sponsored online searches £88.13Price comparison sites £39.29Recommendation and word of mouth £11.82

Overall average £78.48

Hypothetical profitability modelPrice comparison site Traditional channels

Total customers acquired 1,000 1,000Acquisition cost per customer £40 £80

Total acquisition cost £40,000 £80,000Mean premium per customer £381 £294Mean premium income per customer £38 £44Total premium income £38,000 £44,000Retention rate 34% 69%Cumulative profit/loss (year 1) (£2,000) (£36,000)Cumulative profit/loss (year 2) £10,920 (£5,640)Cumulative profit/loss (year 3) £15,313 £15,308Cumulative profit/loss (year 4) £16,807 £29,762Cumulative profit/loss (year 5) £17,315 £39,736

21the Messenger News

In the last 16 months JAMBusiness Media have de-veloped and refined avery cost effectivemethod to help ClaimantsReach Solicitors to havetheir claims assessedwithout the involvementof a CMC, referrer or mid-dleman.

The system has helped In-crease Volume, ReduceCase Acquisition Costs andLessen the reliance upon3rd party referrer’s orCMC’s.. As we enter a veryuncertain period in terms ofhow claimants are reachedand how work is procured,it could be argued that theself-generation of leadsthrough established mediaplatforms such as the Press,TV and the Internet may bethe only acceptable wayforward?

As Firms begin to be moreaggressive and urgent intheir search for Cost Effec-tive marketing they willface many difficulties dueto competition in the mar-ket place from long estab-lished brand names &

in-effective marketingmethods. There is no doubtthere are many doors thatare closing due to the im-pending referral fee ban,however there are somedoors that will remain openif you buy into the theorythat marketing through es-tablished media is a compli-ant way forward if, you canovercome the issue compe-tition in the market place?

Our solution, we feel, has aplace in the market and isbacked up by an excellentprevious and current results

portfolio. We are currentlyoffering a free introductionto how our system worksand on review, how thiscould tailor into your busi-ness without any complex-ity.

Please visit our websitewww.jambusinessmedia.com to book your free presen-tation.

You won’t be disappointed.

How would you find a solicitor if you neededone? For most, it’s second nature to simplyGoogle what they’re looking for, whether it’sa hairdresser or a personal injury solicitor. Tostand a chance of capturing these potentialleads, you will need to ensure search engineslike your website.

One simple way to win brownie points isthrough your content. The words on the pageare one of the main indicators Google uses todecide the subject of your site, and thereforewhere it should appear in search results for anygiven keyword. Of course, the quality andwarmth of your content could also be a decid-ing factor for those thinking of submitting anenquiry or picking up the phone, so it deservesplenty of care and attention.

Tips for search-friendly contentThe type of content search engines love is in-formative, useful, and unique – duplicated con-tent is regarded as spam. As a general rule ofthumb, you should aim to have at least 250-300words per page, with your keyword (and closevariations of it) appearing once or twice perhundred words – but never so frequently that itbecomes repetitive or nonsensical.

If you cover multiple areas of law or offer severalservices, consider having a page dedicated to

each one. For example, although a keywordsuch as ‘employment law solicitors’ would ap-pear throughout the site, you may then have in-dividual pages for tribunals, contracts, unfairdismissal and redundancy – this is easier forGoogle to understand, and also helps yourusers find what they’re looking for.

One commonly overlooked aspect of content isthe metadata. This sits within the code to givesearch engines a title and description for eachpage. Furthermore, it is used to generate thetwo or three lines of information that appearwithin search results, and is therefore yourchance to outshine your competition.

Play to your strengthsFinally, if your site has a news or blog section,use it. Search engines love a fresh, up-to-datesite, while users will be reassured by your ex-pertise, authority and passion.

Finding the time and resources to create search-friendly, high quality content may be a chal-lenge, but it’s well worth the investment;websites are increasingly becoming the publicface and ‘shop window’of firms, so make it a pri-ority. Of course, if it’s an area you feel stronglyabout and are immersed in every day, you mayfind the words come naturally.

Online marketing masterclass: writing for Google Searching for cost

effective marketing ?

FormedeconForensic Audio/Images

At Formedecon we now offer

a range of Photographic Services

including:

CCTV image Capture and Enhancement

Personal Injuries

Scene Photography

Criminal Damage

Line of Sight

Our photographic section is led by Howard Little who has worked for the armed forces, the Police and Regional Councilsand has almost 30 years photographic experience. Including:

forensic, post mortem, murder scenes, RTA’s, commercial and in-dustrial photography. Contact Howard Little for expert advice on

your photographic requirements.

Tel: 01388 811003 Fax: 01388 811918DX 60185

Why not visit our website at www.formedecon.com

Contact: Joanna Swash: 0845 123 3700 or joanna.swash@moneypenny.co.uk

Contact: Ste Pritchard: 08000 740 247 or ste@matrix247.com

Switchboard Support

division – www.smartlegal.it

Contact: Nigel Wright: 0845 872 4400 or info@smartlegal.it

Managed IT Services

Contact: Jenny Natusch: 01524 220000 or info@etsos.co.uk

Contact: Bill Jones or Sarah Scott: 0161 828 1937 or info@mlsolutions.co.uk

AML Training

MORE ADDED VALUEFOR MEMBERS OF THE MANCHESTER LAW SOCIETY

Contact: Ste Pritchard08000 740 247 or ste@matrix247.com

Contact: Nigel Wright0845 872 4400 or info@smartlegal.it smartlegal.it.

Search Aggregator

MANAGED IT SERVICES

Mobile devices: Who’s got access to your data?

Peace of Mind:

Cloud computing - Getting it right.

Making the move:

www.smartlegal.it.

MLS ADVANTAGE

TELECOMS : CONNECTIVITY : MOBILES

Telecoms : Connectivity : Mobiles

Ste Pritchard:Group Managing Director.

matrix247.com/law

MLS ADVANTAGE

Nigel Wright:Director.

23the Messenger News

In December two partnersfrom Manchester BusinessLaw Firm Turner Parkin-son LLP explored the USstate of Arizona using Har-ley Davidson motorcycles.Nick Davenport andRichard Parkinson cov-ered over 1,800 miles in aweek, leaving few cornersof Arizona untouched.

Starting in the state capitalof Phoenix, where the Har-ley Davidson Road Kingswere hired, they travelledinto the deep south of Ari-zona through the SonoranDesert to the MexicanBorder. After an overnightstop in Tucson, they trav-elled onward to Tombstone,scene of the famous “Gun-fight at the OK Corral”. A visitto the famous Tombstonebar, Big Nose Kate’s, wherethe Earps once drank, re-sulted in much whiskey anda good night’s sleep. The fol-lowing day involved a ridealong the Mexican border,passing the site of the finalsurrender of the Apache In-dian tribe at the end on thenineteenth century.

The route then took themup into the White Moun-tains (the main Apache In-dian reservation) via thespectacular Salt RiverCanyon, which is alsoknown as the Little GrandCanyon, and after travellingclose to the New Mexicoborder in the extreme eastof Arizona, they travellednorthwards to Flagstaff. Enroute they passed the Petri-

Arizona by Harley Davidsonfied Forest and MeteorCrater, before dropping intothe Oak River Canyon,which winds down fromFlagstaff to the red rocks ofSedona (spectacular as thesun sets).

The final night was spent inthe historic mining town ofJerome, which is perchedhigh on the side of a moun-tain west of Sedona. Return-

ing to Phoenix the followingday there was just time toride the historic Apache Trailwhich winds its way out ofPhoenix along the Salt River,before reluctantly returningthe Harleys and catchingthe flight back to Heathrow.

The next trip is beingplanned.....

2012 was a difficult yearfor anyone connectedwith large charities. TheJimmy Savile furore musthave shaken many charityCEOs to the core. Howcould someone like Savile,with all his presence andthe good that he ap-peared to be doing, be somorally corrupt? It is dis-turbing to think that heappeared to have latchedon to charity work as away of getting close tovulnerable youngsters.

Ralli, support various chari-ties including; BASIC, Fran-cis House, The Charles HalleFoundation and of course,Factor 50, which is the pa-tient support group that GillNuttall started back in 2007.Factor 50 has three Ambas-sadors, all chosen extremelycarefully. David Healy MBE,Andy Flower OBE (England’sdirector of cricket, himself a

melanoma sufferer) and TimLovejoy (his Grandpa diedof melanoma) – those Am-bassadors were selectedvery carefully indeed andthey are truly connectedwith us. They each have agenuine affection for thework that that Ralli and Fac-tor 50 do and so far, therehave been no issues withany of them.

Last year Ralli continuedtheir charitable efforts as afirm, and raised severalthousands of pounds forvarious causes, all close totheir hearts. They did sport-ing events, corporateevents, collections, soldChristmas cards, wristbands, the daughter of onemelanoma patient soldsome of her artwork, raisingalmost £5,000. All told, de-spite the economic climate,2012 was a very good yearand Ralli is very proud to be

associated with some finecharities.

Looking forward to 2013,Ralli is looking to continuewith the work that they doand on 18 May 2013 will behosting the 3rd “His andHers” Charity ball. This willbe at The Point, LCCC, OldTrafford, Manchester andbookings are now beingtaken. In previous years,they have provided somegreat entertainment at theRalli Factor 50 Balls, and thisyear will be no different.

The event is sponsored byRalli and various othersponsorship opportuni-ties are available. ContactGill Nuttall for details on0161 615 0730gillian.nuttall@ralli.co.uk

Factor 50Charity Update

Management MattersThis column is now into its fifth year and feedback is still good. We would still like to receive observations and ideas for futureissues. Please mail Bill Kirby at billkirby@professionalchoiceconsultancy.com or the publisher Julia Baskerville atj.baskerville@btconnect.com

24 the MessengerFeature

Bill Kirby is a director of Professional Choice Consultancy offering advice tofirms from business strategy, planning business development and all things ITincluding effective use and outsourcing continuity and DR. He can be con-tacted at billkirby@professionalchoiceconsultancy.com

Lost Opportunities...................

One of my big concerns is how well firms are respondingto inbound enquiries - a bit like trying to check on the re-ality of IT sustainability. Some firms have excellent re-sponse, with staff fully briefed on how to react to aninbound enquiry. Many others are not and face the risk oflosing business and adversely affecting client experience.There needs to be a clear definition within the firm of thebusiness process on receipt of an inbound enquiry; who isto respond, how quickly are they top respond, and howthe contact is recorded into a database along with busi-ness source and success rate.

Many of us are well aware of the great service offered byMLS Advantage member – Moneypenny – re endorsed bythe Law Society and now providing invaluable telephoneanswering to 700 law firms of all shapes and size.

At the end of 2012 the managing partner of one of theirclients showed me his monthly report and out of 2,100calls received in the month, 416 were classified as new en-quiries. These were logged with narrative by call and de-partment – a massive 20% that were stimulated throughweb sites, advertising or reputation and referral.

These figures got my mind working in terms of the scorein other firms. My research has told me that there are stun-ning figures for new enquiries of between 5% and 36%.This indicates that the client experience is good in termsof the telephone being answered both during and outsideof the working day.

Whatever method of response best suits your organisationobviously depends on your firm, but having invested inthe marketing of your business we should be capitalisingon the response. Failure to respond effectively will playhavoc with the client or prospects enquiry.

As to the original firm, they have designated three dedi-cated new business staff, have reviewed the marketingmodule of their PMS system and are managing all con-tacts – December - 315 enquiries, January – 504 enquiries.

Mystery Shopper

Another one of the MLS Advantage vendors – Matrix 247 -has commissioned a mystery shopper research exercise.There will be more on the results next month, but as ataster they reviewed the following across multiple work-types with multiple firms:

How quickly the call was answered; The welcome at the first point of contact; The response to the enquiry; The perceived level of knowledge of the person who theenquiry was passed to; andThe overall experience.

There is an additional issue. From the surveyed groupSteve Pritchard MD of Matrix 247 quotes “The web searchof the 50 legal firms’ websites selected for the purpose of thisexercise found that there were only three law firms whowere SRA compliant......ONLY 6%”

More Research – Sound Advice

When this edition of the Messenger is published I will bepresenting at the Legal IT show on how to “buy the cloud”.

I have spoken to users of hosted IT including Lees Solici-tors LLP, headquartered in Birkenhead and Howells Solici-tors LLP headquartered in Sheffield both of whom arequite clear on why they made the move.Ensuring continuity of IT operation – business continuityand disaster recovery (DR)Easing difficulties in the management of a diverse inhouse IT teamNo capital expenditure – aid to cash flow, predictablecosts and pay as you goAgility and flexibilityReliable remote working capability

The vendors such as e-know.net, DPS and MLS Advantagemember Converge IT confirm these driving forces and addto the equation

The ability of a firm to dedicate more time to added valueuse of ITData security provisions with ISO 27001 and secure datacentres.

Chris Moss, Partner at JMW with specialist experience rep-resenting other firms of solicitors in contractual negotia-tions for hosted IT and telecomms services, has muchvaluable advice. I asked him to provide his Top 10 issues incontracting for such services.

The Top 10 issues faced in contractual and commercialcommitments

Bundling – implementing a full IT solution is a complex proj-ect involving everything from the cabling running throughthe ground to the protocols around how your ‘kit’ functionsand interfaces with other systems. Usually, you will have awhole range of different IT based solutions being contractedfor at once, in different contracts with different providers.Getting each right is key; getting them to work together isalso key and presents another level of complexity, both oper-ationally and legally.

Dovetailing – getting different contracts with differentproviders to match, and to match up to the spec, without

holes or gaps.

Ensuring that problems if they arise are dealt with in the rightway (for example, often you don’t want a monetary remedy,you want the problem fixed; or you don’t want the supplier ofone key bit of the system to be able to switch it off if they havea problem elsewhere because it will crash the rest of your sys-tem).

Consistency of treatment – often the contract terms of thetelecoms provider will differ from those of the servicesprovider in detail, to an extent that can matter – you can forexample find that in one contract the fix specified in a partic-ular event is inconsistent with that provided by another con-tract, and the two will turn into a problem unless picked up inthe drafting of the agreements.

Understand clearly what you expect to get out of the agree-ments. Unfocussed priorities can lead to poor delivery.Understand that you have to pay for the functionality youbuy. Getting the pricing right for the delivery is key.Consider disaster recovery carefully – the cloud offers uniqueopportunities to protect your business; take the opportuni-ties, do not be blind to them.

Consider your insurance position. Often contractors will onlysupply services of this type on terms that ‘consequential’ eco-nomic loss or loss of business is picked up by the customer’sinsurer (this affects the contract price even if the supplier iswilling to negotiate even limited business interruption re-course, which is not at all standard).

Consider the future – does the specification you have worknow? Is just replicating what you have sufficient? Where willthe market be in 5 years’ time? Will you need to move in thattime to another system or run your files using another pack-age which will require enhanced functionality? Will yourbusiness grow in that time? Will it be at the same location?Will you have more ‘home workers’ and can the solution ac-commodate that? You can build this in and build it in to rampup over the life of the contract at the right times.

Timing of negotiations – they always take longer than youthink! So (1) allow that bit more time and (2) don’t allowyourself to be rushed into making commitments that arewrong for you on the basis that you may change them later.Often you can, but it’s usually never as easy to do that as youthink.

Chris has a major point with ensuring that multiple ven-dors collaborate and co-operate. As with most commercialpractices this relationship can vary by vendor. EveryPMS/CMS system now has a hosted offering and it meansthat the different vendors need to get on for the clientsbenefit. The best time to sort this is pre contract. DPS forsome years has offered both the PMS/CMS and hostingoption. Most of the other vendors partner with experi-enced hosting businesses, for example SOS with its VirtualPractice and Connect products.

25NewsManchester Law Society

MYSG NewsThe MYSG has over 1,000 mem-bers and we invite qualified so-licitors up to 10 years PQE(excluding Partners) from inand around Manchester to joinour group. We arrange socialevents for solicitors, networkingevents with other professionalgroups in Manchester includingbankers, accountants and sur-veyors, educational and CPDseminars, and other eventswhich we think will be of interestto our members. Membership isfree and the costs of our eventsare met by sponsors. If youwould like to join the MYSG andyou do not currently receive ouremails, please email us atinfo@mysg.org.uk, or contact usthrough our website,www.mysg.org.uk or via ourFacebook page, "ManchesterLawyers".

The Manchester YoungSolicitors Group have re-cently had a committeemeeting to discuss the cal-endar of events for 2013and we are extremelypleased with the plans wehave made - even if we dosay so ourselves! The firstevent which started theevents calendar off in stylewas the cup cake decorat-ing class which was a thor-oughly enjoyable event andkindly sponsored by AnakinSeal. We expect everyone atthe event to be wowingMary Berry with their cakedecorating skills soon!

We have a new event at a newvenue planned which wehope will be something dif-ferent for 2013. The MYSG,along with RICS are organis-ing a bowling event at the allstar bowling ally. We wouldencourage all of our membersto dig out their two tone bluesuede bowling shoes and get

practising for what will un-doubtedly be a really funevent! The details of the eventwill be appearing on the web-site shortly and of course, willbe on our facebook page too.

St Johns Buildings have kindlyagreed to continue their sup-port of the Manchester youngSolicitors Group and we havearranged some great eventswith them. We are reallygrateful for their support ofthe MYSG and their invalu-able input in to our educationprogramme, which reallydoes benefit you as our mem-bers.

Finally, if anyone would like tojoin the MYSG committeethen please do email thecommittee via the website.The committee is extremelyrewarding and you will reallymake a difference to theyoung solicitors of Manches-ter - as well as having a lot offun!

The Chair of the Manches-ter Trainee Solicitors Group(MTSG), Charlotte Brinsleyof Slater & GordonLawyers, has put in placeanother impressive initia-tive that will encouragecloser working relation-ships between solicitorsand barristers at the juniorlevel. Effective networkingat the grass roots can instilan appreciation of whatboth sides of the profes-sion can offer in the pro-motion of services toclients.

The pupils in Manchesterfrom a number of Chambers,including Lincoln House, StJames Chambers, Kenwor-thy’s Chambers and DeansCourt, have been invited intothe membership of theMTSG and they will be takingpart in the various network-ing and educational events

the MTSG hosts throughoutthe year. The MTSG commit-tee have also voted a Man-chester pupil onto theircommittee to representchambers views, congratula-tions to Emily Price (pictured)who is keen to ensure a greatpartnership between thejunior bar and junior lawyers.

Matt Gibbons, Senior Clerk ofDeans Court Chambers said:“We recognise the impor-tance of the MTSG and arecommitted to assisting thosewho are relatively new to theprofession. Some membersof the Bar may view this as-sistance similar to turkeysvoting for Christmas. Thiswould be a short term andnarrow view. The Bar shouldprovide the highest qualityof advocacy services andseek to ‘add value’. This couldbe in terms of maximisingthe results for clients or

being commercially attrac-tive especially at the juniorend.”

The MTSG and Deans Courtfeel that a team approachneeds to be adopted andcommercial ventures can bestructured to play to eachother’s strengths for the ben-efit of mutual clients. It isvery important that juniormembers of the Bar taketime to understand the clientdynamic and the time and ef-fort made by solicitors togenerate business that leadsto work landing in a barris-ter’s tray.

The MTSG are delighted tobe now working closely withmembers of the bar and feelthat this will be of great ben-efit to their members in help-ing to develop business inthis highly competitive andchanging market.

Trainee solicitors and youngbarristers work together

26 the MessengerFeature

Everywhere you turn theprefix “cyber” has re-placed the letter ”e” todescribe everythingfrom culture to bullying.We find ourselves drink-ing coffee whilst sittingin cybercafés, surfing incyberspace and cyberdating with our onlinefriends!! But in the busi-ness environment, weare increasingly comingacross terms like “cyberrisks”, “cyber terrorism”and “hacktivists”.

But what does it mean andhow does it relate to yourpractice? When you thinkof cyber risks don’t thinkit’s about supercomputersor something that doesn’taffect you. Know thatmuch of it comes down todata security breachesand subsequent loss ofdata. The threat posed bycyber risks is now as tangi-ble as physical threats to afirm’s assets and is facedby any business dealingwith electronic datawhether that’s online, heldon servers, computers oron mobile devices.

In June 2011 George Os-borne told an interna-

tional conference that Bri-tish government comput-ers were experiencing20,000 hostile email at-tacks every month. By De-cember of last year,Cabinet Office ministerFrancis Maude reportedthat attacks on govern-ment departments hadcontinued to increase dra-matically.

High profile cyber attackson companies like Nin-tendo, Sony and Citigroupmake global news andmany smaller firms thinkthat they are immunefrom hackers or will beoverlooked in favour ofbigger targets. However,small and medium sizedbusinesses are more vul-nerable to cyber attacks.As larger organisationscontinue to implement ef-ficient security systems,criminals have looked forand identified UK smallbusinesses as softer andeasier targets.

The 2012 PwC InformationSecurity Breaches Surveyfound that 76% of smallbusinesses had a cyber-se-curity breach in the pastyear. With the cost of a se-

curity breach estimatedbetween £100,000 -£250,000 for large busi-nesses and £15,000 -£30,000 for smaller ones,these are losses which UKbusinesses simply cannotignore.

The question many lawfirms ask is whether or notthey are really targets forsuch attacks. I’ll answerthat with a real claims ex-ample from the US. It re-lates to a 55 employee lawfirm with an annual fee in-come of $20million (circa£13m).

Hackers gained access tothe firm’s network andclaimed to have access tosensitive client informa-tion, including a publiccompany’s acquisition tar-get, another public com-pany’s prospective patenttechnology, the draftprospectus of a venturecapital client and a signifi-cant number of class ac-tion lists containingclaimants’personally iden-tifiable information. Aforensic technician deter-mined that there was abug in the network. Thefirm received a call from

the intruder seeking$10million not to placethe stolen information onto the internet.

The law firm incurred $2mfor the forensic investiga-tion, extortion-related ne-gotiations, a ransompayment, notifications,credit and identity moni-toring, restoration servicesand independent lawyers’fees. It also sustainedmore than $600,000 in lostbusiness income and ex-penses associated withthe system shutdown.

As solicitors you hold dataon clients, whether that’sconfidential medical infor-mation, bank details, dataon mergers and acquisi-tions, litigation strategy orinformation on intellectualproperty. And the badnews is that it’s all consid-ered very attractive tocriminals or hackers whoseek out sensitive informa-tion that they can sell orexploit for financial orcompetitive gain.As lawyers you have a reg-ulatory obligation to com-ply with, and the SRACode of Conduct ad-dresses the importance of

data security for law firms.Outcome 7.5 states that“you comply with legisla-tion applicable to yourbusiness, including anti-money laundering anddata protection legisla-tion.” Indeed data againgets a strong endorse-ment in Indicative Behav-iour 7.3.

But what could it reallymean to your firm? Look-ing at this objectivelythere are a number ofareas where a data breachcould adversely affect apractice. You could be ex-posed to regulatory fines;damages and litigationcosts associated with de-fending claims from 3rd

parties; the costs of recon-figuring your network, re-establishing security andrestoring data; implemen-tation of disaster recoveryplan costs, lost billabletime and notificationscosts. There is then theunquantifiable reputa-tional damage that couldensue, which could ulti-mately cost the firm morethan the financial damagesuffered by the originalbreach.

Don’t expect to fall backon your Professional In-demnity cover either. It’sunlikely that coverage re-quired in the event of adata breach will be pro-vided by standard Profes-sional Indemnity,Directors’ & Officers’ orCommercial Liability poli-cies and it’s also possibleyou won’t be compliantwith your regulatory obli-

gations.

The stakes are high whenit comes to data securityand privacy in the legalsector. Coming to gripswith the risks associatedwith evolving technologysolutions can be daunting.To ensure adequate pro-tection, firms shouldspeak with a knowledge-able broker about thebenefits of specialist insur-ance coverage to mitigatethe growing exposures as-sociated with holding sen-sitive client information.

Stuart Dugdill, Director of ProfessionalLiabilitiesMFL ProfessionalContact Stuart to discussthe issues around cyberliabilities and cyber risks:T: 0161 237 2532E: stuartd@m-f-l.co.uk

WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH YOU

Cyber Risksby Stuart Dugdill, Director of Professional Liabilities, MFL Professional

27LifestyleManchester Law Society

Partners Salons are also situated in Poynton and Knutsford

www.partnerssalons.co.uk

£20 blow dry bar available everyday with any available stylist

please call 0161 425 5206 to book

0161 425 5206We are located on the 2nd Floor, House of Fraser,

Deansgate, Manchester M3 2QG

Not everyone can train five times per week for 2 hours.Some of us work long stressful hours and when we gethome all we have energy for is watching TV with fastfood. Others play harder than they work and wouldrather invest their energy partying .So what do these twogroups have in common – GUILT! Whether it be sitting inthe office all day or clubbing all night, something deepdown in us is not happy ignoring the well-documentedbenefits of exercise. This article is going to deal with oneof the many things that can put us off listening to ourconsciences – the huge chasm between where we areand the chiselled bodies we see in magazines and on T.V.

Common attitudes are: 1 “ I’m so far from being a Gla-diator I might as well not bother” or: 2 “If I can’t train for10 hours a week and have wash-board abs I’ll notbother.” Let’s get real! If you’re out working or playingmost of the time and are being hard on yourself for notfitting in some exercise every day try this test: Fill yourbath with two inches of water and try to stand on thewater’s surface. If you can you’re right - you should be aGreek God. If, however, you touch porcelain how aboutwe settle for a level of fitness which our time and genet-ics allows us. Attitude 1 is looking at the gap between it-self and the lithe, muscular people it thinks will frequentour local gyms. If this sounds familiar I suggest you lookin a few gyms in town - they are not filled with the Cali-fornia beach-babe type (much to my disappointment!).They are mainly people who have overcome their hang-ups and are trying to get fit. Yes, it is true you will neveradorn the cover of a fitness magazine but this is no ex-cuse not to bother. If you want to live a long, healthy lifefind something you enjoy and exercise. Set realistic goalsand raise the intensity when things become easy. Thisbrings us on to the “all-or nothing” attitude 2.

Fitness for Hedonists

Spa in the City

Partners Salon is situated on the second floor of House ofFraser, this hidden gem offers everything from hair, nails,waxing and a huge array of beauty treatments, thismonth we are focusing on Germaine de Capuccini the topEuropean skin care house whose premium products arefound in the most exclusive Salons and Spas across theworld.

If you are looking for pure indulgence and total relax-ation, we can provide you with a haven where you willfind the most incredible unique sensations, where thebody,mind & spirit converge to feel an unforgettable anddeeply pleasurable experience.

We also retail all Germaine Facial Products and of coursepefect for presents their devine bath oil and Candles,prices from £28 upwards

For further information or to make your bookingplease call Partners on 0161 425 5206

Partners Hair Salons are also situated in Knutsford01565 651819 and Poynton 01625 873112

Partners are offering a 25% discount to readers of the Messenger. Please quote the reference“Manchester Law Society” when making a booking.

Even busy people are better off doing something.

The release exercise offers is vital for people with stress-ful jobs. Remember that Gladiators get paid for trainingand having their pictures taken. They can spend the restof the day relaxing and counting their money. They onlyget stressed fighting over Ulrika. We have less time butthis is O.K. To increase fitness there is no difference train-ing two or five times a week as long as the intensity ishigh. This means just two thirty minute sessions on car-dio machines a week will suffice with a cool-down andstretch. Start off at a low intensity and gradually build upuntil you’re giving it all you can. The buzz is brilliant bothmentally and physically. If this is enjoyable add fifteenminutes and do a quick total body circuit on the weights.

Weight-loss is a tougher cookie. You need to burnabout 250 calories extra six days a week while eating250 calories less every day - or half a Big Mac. Thiswould shed nearly a pound of fat per week. You need-n’t even visit the gym. A 70 kg person will burn theirquota with a 20 minutes walk to work and back. Swim-ming for 20 minutes or cycling for 35 also puts you inthe zone.

Come on – you’re worth it!

For all your fitness needs please call Probalance0161 833 4777 www.pro-balance.co.ukSpecial offer for all Law Society members

Fran breaks though for theBooby Birds BreastcancerCharity

Readers of the Messenger will know that Fran Ec-cles-Bech has spent the past year as a “Booby Bird”raising much needed funds for BreakthroughBreast Cancer. Her target to raise was £20k and in-cluded a tandem ski dive. Fran has now smashedher target by raising £22,401! Fran would like tothank everyone who has donated to and sup-ported her cause.

28 the MessengerLifestyle

Monthly Competition

To win a 3 course meal and a bottle of house wine for 2 in Opus One(Radisson Edwardian Hotel) answer the following question

Q: What award has Opus One won?

and send to FranEccles-Bech@manchesterlawsociety.org.uk no later than 14th March 2013.

The winner of the Essensuals competition was Jackie Wallace, P.A. to Mike Devlin, Stephensons Solicitors

From the day it opened, Opus One hasbeen one of Manchester's liveliest andpopular restaurants. Opus One serves in-novative modern British food that blendsthe best of local produce, presented in amodern, contemporary way.

The surroundings are dramatically theatrical,with soaring ceilings, red walls, high glossblack woodwork, antique gold wall cover-ings and bespoke furniture in black crocodileskin hide. Opus One bar, with its play on a'glamorous Manhattan' provides the perfectdestination to sip cocktails and enjoy com-pany.

Come and enjoy a glass of Champagne at our new bar on the Opus One colonnade, Opus Re-serve before your dinner or hold an impromptu Christmas get together with a selection of ourtapas-style taster plates to share - perfect for the celebrating.

Opus One Highly Commended at the VisitEngland Awards for Excellence

Only England’s most renowned attractions, accommodation and tourism experiences were short-listed for The VisitEngland Awards for Excellence 2012, with a total of 637 entries counted for theprestigious Taste of England award. Manchester restaurant, Opus One was named one of six fi-nalists in the running for the award and was awarded 'Highly Commended'.

Opening Times:Afternoon Tea: Monday to Sunday - Afternoon Tea served from 12.00pm - 5.30pmReserve @ Opus One: Taster Menu available 12.00pm - 10.30pmDinner: Monday to Sunday 6.00pm - 10.30pm (last orders in the restaurant 10.30pm)Bar: Open everyday from 12.00pm till Late

Peter Garsden, Principalof QualitySolicitors AbneyGarsden in Stockport isappearing as the Sultan inan amateur production ofDick Whittington. Theproduction is presentedby the Macclesfield Majes-tic Theatre in Macclesfield.

An amateur dramatics en-thusiast, Peter has been en-joying acting since the ageof 10 joining the Maccles-field theatre 6 years ago.Commenting on his love ofacting he said, “I am de-lighted and flattered tohave been chosen for thepart of the Sultan. It is veryhumbling to be able to per-form with such talentedsingers, actors, dancers, andbackstage support. The joyof going home after a longday at the office and singingyour heart out should notbe underestimated. Every-one has the same amountof time. It is just a case ofprioritisation. I hope theshow gets the audience itdeserves.”Peter whose firm joined theQualitySolicitors network in2012, is a leading childabuse expert and has lec-tured and written on thesubject of child abuse litiga-tion in legal journals and

the national press. He is thepresident and one of thefounder members of a na-tionwide group calledACAL. (Association of ChildAbuse Lawyers). The Stock-port based solicitors alsospecialise in Family andDivorce law, Wills & Probate-and Personal Injury.

When asked the questionwhich part he would mostlike to play and why Petersaid, “I would love to playthe Dame again before mymemory goes and I get tooold!”

Stockport abuse solicitortakes on new role

Expert Witnesses

FORMEDECON LTD

Forensic and Economic Services

Handwriting and DocumentsDrink/Drive/Toxicology

Vehicle ExaminationFingerprints

Evaluation of Loss of IncomeGlass, Paint, Soil, Foot and ToolmarksRoad Traffic Accident Reconstructions

Control and RestraintBiological Material and Trace Evidence

Blood and Fibres

Unit 41 Enterprise City SpennymoorDL16 6JF

DX 60185 FerryhillTel: 01388 811003 Fax: 01388 811918

website: www.Formedecon.com

Commercial Property Locum Solicitor available. Computer lit-erate. Recent experience includes a year’s CommercialProperty Locum work for a lead-ing commercial practice. PhonePaul Bryson at 01457 763340 ore-mail paul.bryson@virgin.net

Senior residential and commercial property Solicitorwith over 4 years continuousLocum experience offers you costeffective solutions for holidaymaternity and sickness cover .NoAgency fees to pay. Please contact Martin Libman on 0161485 1240 or 07939 508543.

18 years as Locum Solicitors inthe North West. Tel JohnBradley/Lynda Greenwood 07790612906 Available to deal withConveyancing and Family.

WHY PAY AGENCY FEES?Senior Residential Property Solicitor with over 30 years coveyancing experience (29 yearsas a sole practitioner) availablefor holidays, maternity and sickness cover. Reasonable rates.If I can help, please telephoneDavid on 07896 617287 (or emaildavidswann8491@hotmail.co.uk) further details and availability.

DUAL QUALIFIED, very experi-enced criminal specialist advo-cate with higher rights. Crimework and Crown Court work.Very resonable rates, short termlocum contract considered. Please contact Christine on01772 741816 or 07967 530138

Mark Mattison, a Mediatorbased in South Manchester is

available for commercial mediations and for training on

all forms of ADR.

07831 302797mark@markmattison.co.ukwww.markmattison.co.uk

Solicitor with 23 years experience in such matters

available on an Agency basisto assist firms who wish to

keep clients in-house. Please contact by email

harryrosenblum@hotmail.co.ukor telephone/fax: 0161 445 1850

Shareholder Disputes

Classified DirectoryCEDR Mediation

CEDR Mediator

Joe Shammah is a CEDR Accredited Mediator,

undertaking Mediations inCommercial Litigation cases

and Training forSolicitors and Barristersconducting Mediations.

Tel: 07860 844481

email:mediator@joeshammah.co.uk

Contact us....

THE MANCHESTER LAW SOCIETY64 Bridge Street, Manchester M3 3BNTel: 0161 831 7337 Fax: 0161 839 2631www.manchesterlawsociety.org.ukEditor: Fran Eccles-BechE-mail: FranEccles-Bech@manchesterlawsociety.org.uk

Publisher: Julia Baskerville Publications25 Southworth Way, College Farm, Thornton CleveleysLancs FY5 2WW Tel/Fax: 01253 829431 E-mail: j.baskerville@btconnect.comAdvertising enquiresj.baskerville@btconnect.comwww.baskerville-publications.co.uk

All rights reserved, reproduction in whole or partwithout written permission from the publisher is notpermitted. Photographic material and manuscriptsare supplied at owners risk, neither the company notits agents accept any liability for loss or damage.

The Society welcomes articles and letters from members on any topic and items should be sent tothe above address

The views and opinions expressed in the Manchester Messenger are those of the individual contributors and not of The Manchester Law Society.

Locums

Notary Public John Cusack

worldwide documents Notarised

accessible & efficient servicehome & office visits

well-established (since 1984)& experienced

tel: 0797 332 9791

jocusa@live.co.uk

Senior Residential Property Solicitor

seeks position (full time or part time).

Over 30 years coveyancing experience

(29 years as a sole practitioner) Anywhere in the Greater

Manchester area.Email: davidswann8491@hotmail.co.uk

or telephone David on 07896 617287

Luxury Spanish ApartmentGolfing Breaks & Family Holidays

l 2 Bedrooms (1 Double, 1 Twin)l Pool

l Frontline golf viewsl Excellent family facilities

l Gated resort with restaurants, pub and shops

Prices start from £125 Per Week / £29 per night (min 3 nights)

www.alhama-golf-rentals.comirarmitage@gmail.com

07748 327062

Holiday Property

Expert Witness

Qualified Solicitor &non-practising Barristerseeks full-time or locum

position.

Expertise includes paymentprotection insurance & personal

injury claims. Willing toconsider other areas of the law.

Please contact Adrian

m: 07870 272 213e: adriano_9@hotmail.com

Couriers

City centre based couriers covering all aspects of courier work and more.

Contact 0161 272 7576 Mike or Steve.

Easedale is a delightful rural retreat set in several acres of wooded hillside groundswhich are graced with the presence of many different varieties of birds, badgers,deer and red squirrels - one in particular who regularly visits the tree right outsidethe front door!

There are some well-known walks from the door including Alcock Tarn, Loughrigg,Fairfield and the Rydal Round. Grasmere village is only a short walk down the hill,where you will find a wealth of shops, cafes, restaurants and pubs and the famousGingerbread shop. Dove Cottage and Grasmere lake are also only a short walkaway.

Accommodation: Front door entrance into hallway with space for coats and boots.Door leading off to the sitting room/dining room/bedroom (TV/DVD/CD/Ipoddocking station), which has high ceilings, period cornicing and large sash win-dows with lovely views towards Grasmere lake and Silver Howe beyond. Furtherdoors lead off the hallway to the shower room with corner shower, basin and wc,and also to the well equipped kitchen in a modern shaker style.

Available for short breaks Friday to Monday, Monday to Friday or week long book-ings in October, November & December 2012 and January – March 2013 from aslittle as £200

To check availability please email petershrigley@hotmail.com or call07810 793649

Grasmere in the Lake District Autumn and Winter breaks from £200

30 the MessengerPII

A qualified solicitor required to report to and support the Head of Britannia Hotels Legal Department.

Must be a knowledgeable all rounder with significant experience in employment law acting for respondents.

No agencies

Situations Vacant

Please send your cv and covering letter to

sarah.clarke@britanniahotels.com

To advertise in The Messenger

please call Julia Baskerville on01253 829431

or emailj.baskerville@btconnect.com

The Messenger is distributed toover 2500 solicitors every month