Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘LSC’ Category

LEGAL AID CUTS

If you haven’t already, read THIS

Excellent work Mr Torsney and his illegal site.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

New LSC rates and Keycard

Just incase you missed it there is a new Keycard which includes things such as the updated deductions for non-dependents.

The Keycard can be found HERE and is effective as of Monday 12th April 2010.

If you missed the update you might want to look at any cases taken on this week and ammend as appropriate!

Read Full Post »

Ho hum

‘As a result of the tender quality will suffer’

‘We are having to increase targets and reduce administration to remain financially viable’

‘You can no longer go that extra mile for clients’

As House’s organisation, which is already having to heavily subsidise its bids for the new LSC social welfare bid round, desperately crunch numbers so come the depressing managerial statements as above.

It seems these days that client’s are fortunate to find providers who assist clients as well as advise them. House tries to proactively solve client’s problems but with ever increasing targets House see’s more advisers (NOTE: not those which House line manages for fear of certain doom!)  merely telling the client to do something which they should be doing and then closing the case when it doesn’t happen.

It’s a shame and with the ever increasing squeeze on funding House can only see this sort of shoddy help increase.

Just a little random tired moan.

Read Full Post »

Quick Question

Apologies for being vacant but it’s Tender time and House if far too busy trying to keep House’s job!

One question that is not related to House’s Tender but House has heard of a consortium who have 6 Housing advisers with a set amount of matter starts and who are thinking of employing a solicitor who weirdly won’t be based with any of the Housing advisers. However they haven’t factored in any Legal Help matter starts for the solicitor as they think the solicitor just does certificated work.

Is this craziness?  In House’s experience solicitors do a mix of Legal Help and Certificated work. Whilst Certificated work is obviously good Legal Helps are also required. Is House right or talking rubbish, as usual?

Read Full Post »

From HERE.

The table below shows that unless more matter starts are granted than offered then the majority of procurement areas will see a cut in Housing NMS compared to Sep 08 – Aug 09.

In many areas the available Housing NMS to those who don’t provide Family NMS have been severely reduced. 

House isn’t sure what happens if Family providers don’t bid for Housing NMS will those NMS be reallocated? In some areas the Housing NMS available to Family providers are a large proportion of the total available. If they aren’t reallocated then the NMS available in an area would be drastically reduced in many areas.

What House doesn’t know is just how many NMS were originally allocated to providers between Sep 08 – Aug 09 that is because of the NMS clawback the NMS between sep 08 – aug 09 are likely to be less than the NMS which were originally tendered for and therefore the reductions in NMS AVAILABLE to be completed are even greater than the table suggests. House would be quite interested to know the difference in the pre-clawback NMS and the new NMS that being tendered for. House hopes that makes some sense!

House hasn’t done a table for other areas of social welfare law such as debt and benefits but House has noticed that there is quite a large increase in NMS in these areas (again subject to the qualification of the prior paragraph). For example BARNET sees debt and welfare NMS to 450 from 317 and 399 respectively.

House was interested to note the relative difference in Housing Certificated matters. For example in Bexley there were 17 certificates opened and 269 Housing NMS (6.4%). In Lambeth 499 certificates were issued and there were 1521 Housing NMS (32.9%). House would be interested to know the reasons behind such differences. There are many possible reasons, one might be – Could it be that some procurement areas lack advisers capable of identifying and taking matters to certificated work?

PROCUREMENT

SEP 08 –

NEW

NEW

TOTAL

%CHANGE

CERTIFICATED

AREA

AUG 09 NMS

HOUSING

F/H

    MATTERS

             
Barking and Dagenham

CLAC

CLAC

CLAC

CLAC

   
Barnet

971

820

150

970

-0.01

138

Bexley

269

150

100

250

-7.1

17

Brent

1912

1520

200

1720

-10

137

Bromley

437

260

150

410

-6.2

55

Camden

1877

800

890

1690

-10

448

City of Westminister

1443

600

500

1100

-23.8

312

Croydon

454

350

200

550

21.1

92

Ealing

3041

2350

150

2500

-17.8

323

Enfield

291

190

100

290

-0.4

12

Greenwich

819

550

200

750

-8.5

88

Hackney

3481

2930

500

3430

-1.5

687

Hammersmith & Fulham

1048

550

200

750

-28.5

130

Haringey

1586

880

300

1180

-25.6

260

Harrow

791

540

100

640

-19.1

75

Havering

380

310

150

460

21

22

Hillingdon

784

600

100

700

-10.7

66

Kingston & Richmond

308

280

100

380

23.4

144

Lambeth

1521

850

500

1350

-11.2

499

Lewisham

594

260

200

460

-22.6

145

Merton & Sutton

396

390

100

490

23.7

49

Newham

2596

1940

400

2340

-9.9

304

Redbridge

703

540

100

640

-9

102

Southwark

1462

660

500

1160

-20.7

513

Tower Hamlets

2212

1790

200

1990

-10

189

Waltham Forest

515

380

150

530

2.9

85

Wandsworth

1944

1060

600

1660

-14.6

325

Read Full Post »

Updated LSC procurement plans

The LSC have today updated their procurement plans for London. More info HERE. Other regions can be found HERE, not all have been updated / published.

It would appear at least from HERE that cuts in New Matter Starts are quite serious.

Read Full Post »

Factory line advice

Over the last 18 months House has been given ever increasing New Matter Start targets for House’s team to meet.

Today House was doing some file reviews. House noticed that a new adviser wasn’t really tailoring advice that much to the client and could have done some more follow up work, the extra mile that House has been used to doing.

House didn’t really know what to do when faced with this file. House’s targets for the team are due to go up 40 pct in the next few months as the chronic lack of planning by the big bosses means doing the same with less staff. This meant that House thought hrm well at least the client has got passable advice, not bad, just a neat parcel, maybe a bit like a ready meal, fills you up but nothing more. House realised that ironically getting the adviser to do more for the client would sadly be counter-productive when it came to meeting targets.

All rather sad.

Does any other supervisor have any similar experiences?

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »