Advocacy practice assessment

The day I had been dreading finally arrived on Wednesday, the practice assessment for advocacy. I didn't actually feel too apprehensive in the days leading up however, come Wednesday morning I was a bag of nerves and very eager to get it over and done with. 

I met my opponent outside the interview room and luckily remembered to jot down his surname so that I could introduce him correctly. Unfortunately, his name was rather difficult to pronounce and I spent the next 10 minutes prior to entering the room repeatedly asking how to pronounce it - I am sure this came off as extremely rude but I hope he could see how nervous I was!

The hallway was filled with anxious students, some jabbering away, some quietly reading through notes, some wearing suits, others (like me) in their usual uni get-up. My pair was the last to get called in. Luckily the woman taking our assessment was my Tax teacher and I was grateful for the familiarity. She spent a couple of minutes chatting to us and I felt thoroughly calm by the time she pressed the timer and I had to begin. (In retrospect, it may have been better not to have had this prior chatting as, in the real assessment, you are treated as having begun the assessment as soon as you enter the room and should treat the room/assessor as you would a courtroom/judge). 

My intro was a little shaky and I forgot a few things I wanted to say, albeit nothing vital. After I had the introduction of the parties and the application out of the way I regained the flow I had had in the practices I had done at home and the whole thing seemed to whiz by. 

The 'show and tell' section (in which you are required to take the judge through the bundle, showing the relevant parts and telling how they strengthen your client's case etc) was my weakest part. This was mainly due to the fact I left out a large part of the respondent's evidence on the basis that I thought if it weakened my case it was best left for them to bring up. As I found out, it is necessary to address this evidence and try and put a positive spin on it in light of your client's case. Obviously I have used this technique before but thought, with only 10 minutes to make my case, it would be best focussing on all of our evidence and leaving the dissection of theirs to the full trial! Whoops!

My opponent had a very strong start but slowly began to unravel and I felt extremely uncomfortable for him, as I am sure he felt the same during my weaker points. Eventually he abandoned the 'show and tell' and moved on to a rather persuasive summary. 

Either way we were both found to be competent, and luckily not on the borderline. We were both told that our 'show and tell' was the weaker part of our advocacy, we both had felt it. After examining our notes, I was told that mine could be annotated a little more without risking a fail and that his were too annotated, bordering on breaching the NO SCRIPTS rule.

To be honest, the whole experience wasn't nearly as terrifying as I thought it would be and those 10 minutes flew by. The real assessment is on 18 December and we get our case notes on 2 December. I am hoping to get an application for security for costs again but there is a chance I will be given summary judgment. 

Some good advice our assessor gave us was to only have a brief read through of the papers when you get them. That way, when you come back to them in a week or so time you will have remembered in your head only the key issues i.e. those issues you are introducing as the relevant issues to be decided. 

Anyway, no other news this week. I hope everyone else's practice assessments are going well. 

 

Advocacy

I have finally finished the two advocacy workshops that are part of the litigation module. I won't lie, I still find it absolutely terrifying but I think I have a good shot at being found 'competent'.

The basic idea is that two students go head to head in an interim application hearing in front of a tutor acting as the judge. You receive the case papers two weeks in advance and can highlight and make notes as appropriate in preparation. 

As with interviewing, advocacy is a 'skill' and therefore marked as competent/not competent. My practice hearing is on 20 November and I have been given the role of applicant in a security for costs application (there are two roles: applicant or respondent, and two types of hearing: summary judgment or security for costs). One of the scariest things about being an applicant is that you speak first and it is your job to introduce both you and the respondent's solicitor, the basic facts of the case and then your specific points. Originally, I thought our class (all being applicants) had gotten the raw end of the deal but after the practice sessions I actually think the respondent's have it worse. The respondent's have to remain calm enough during your ten minutes of speaking to actually respond to what you have said. Not only do they have to address the points the applicant has made but also put forward their own version of events and reasons why the application should be dismissed, taking each piece of evidence in chronological order and making sure not to miss anything that the applicant has said that may harm their case. This is actually rather difficult!

The workshops themselves were extremely helpful and we got a lot of great practices in. The key here (more than ever!) is to prepare the advance case papers. Unlike interviewing, you can't just wing it and won't get the most out of the sessions without knowing who your client is and what you are actually arguing. Seems obvious but unfortunately very few people were adequately prepared. However, advocacy is similar to interviewing in that, the biggest tip in terms of properly utilising the sessions is to completely throw yourself into it. Most people were happy to have a go and everybody got something wrong. I personally think the ones that were reluctant and didn't give it their all are the ones at risk of not passing. 

A few little points: not wearing attire appropriate for court is an instant fail. Having a script is an instant fail. Writing more than a few bullet points on the case papers is a possible fail. Using two highlighters to show your points and their points is advised so that if you do go completely blank you can at least try to locate the right colour and go from there. 

We also have mock exams for property and civil litigation coming up on 27 November. Property is going fairly okay; it was never going to be a great love of mine but it isn't as hellish as I anticipated. I think I can do well in it with a little bit of focus and time. 

We have also handed in our final electives choices. After much consideration, deliberation and tipex, I finally settled on Private Client and International Commercial Law (which has replaced standard Commercial Law). I think that these, along with Employment, prove to be a well rounded and not too niche set of electives attractive to a majority of firms. Importantly, they are also subjects I predict I will enjoy and are areas I would be keen to eventually practice in - win win!

As for the LLM dissertation I remain undecided along with 80% of my classmates. I honestly think it will depend on my personal circumstances nearer the time. At the moment, as with most of the part time students studying the LPC, I am working four days per week and attending university one day which leaves me two days to try to fit in some relaxation plus the 15 hours workshop prep time. I personally can't see where I would fit work towards a (good) dissertation into that! Also, if i manage to obtain a training contract I don't think I will spend a further three months studying toward a qualification that won't result in me gaining anything. The LLM has never been a specific goal of mine. I would be interested to hear other people's thoughts!

First few weeks- round up

I have been back a few weeks now and I apologise for the lack of blogging, so expect a long one. 

GLS

I finally got the feedback report for the GLS assessment day (note to anyone applying in the future: they say you will receive it by the end of September but this actually means the very last day in September so don't be hanging on every email like I was!). 

All in all I scored 20/35. Obviously this isn't particularly great. My strengths were motivation for law and the GLS, collaborative working and delivering at pace. One of my biggest weaknesses (and my lowest mark of 2/5) was for decision making. This is something I am already aware of and am seriously trying to address, but it has definitely brought it home how very important it is that I change in this area. 

My writing skills were good and presentation skills also good so not a complete disaster!

University

We have completely settled in to Civil Litigation now with the course being in full swing. I actually quite like it although there is ALOT to do and the 7.5 hours suggested prep time for each workshop falls short. So far, my shortest prep time has been around 9 hours and this week I am already on 8 with still one i-tutorial and a test and feedback to go! 

Property Law and Practice (PLP) began last week and I must say it is yet to get me excited. So far we are on the conveyancing procedure and it all just seems dull dull dull. The prep for the coming week is addressing land law issues such as easements, covenants and trusts; it is basically a revision week of the LLB module. Oh the thrill! Anyone getting that I don't like land law??

We also have to choose our remaining two electives this coming week. We did do this last year, but with the change from LPC to LPC LLM some of the modules have also changed and so we need to reselect. This year I was a bit more organised and arranged a meeting with my personal tutor to discuss the options, deciding Private Client was a good choice as this is the area I currently work in and also Commercial Dispute Resolution to add a commercial element to my choices - top decision making right there!

We also need to state our preliminary intentions with regard the LLM dissertation. It is all a bit confusing to be honest and the real sting in the tail is that the LLM is not distinct from the LPC, meaning that the dissertation can bring your LPC mark down (especially considering it is weighted very heavily). In all honesty, my gut is telling me to avoid it like the plague. We are the first year doing it and it does feel like we are all guinea pigs with the tutors themselves not even knowing the answers to some of our questions. With that said, I won't rule it out at this point in time and will see how things look in February when the title choosing and planning process begins.

Work

Work is going really well and I have started doing lone home visits, only to collect documentation but it feels great to have the client contact. I am starting to get to grips with Wills and Probate and it is beginning to feel familiar. The team are fantastic and have thankfully taken me under their wing. Life is good!

The Last First Day

School is back! And without wanting to get too sentimental and yucky, Wednesday was my last ever first day back at "school". Never again will I feel the excitement over new planners and timetables. Never again will we eagerly discuss our potential new tutor or lay out your first-day-back outfit the night before. I must say that the thing I will certainly miss the most is the new stationery. 

But onwards and upwards. 

The first day back consisted of registration with our new tutor, book collection and the first Civil Litigation workshop. 

Our new tutor is honestly amazing. I was sad to see that we were getting a new tutor as our last one was so approachable and a bit of a laugh but I am more than happy with his replacement. She is also the head of Civil Litigation which is great if we have any queries. 

Unlike last year I was a bloody idiot and didn't take my suitcase in anticipation of new books. Luckily for me, there was no book similar in size to the one of dreaded BLP legislation so I just about managed to lug my plastic package of first term books to class. Rookie mistake one. 

My second rookie mistake came in the form of the tiddly folder I thought was appropriate for the first session. My usual lever arches had a day off and stayed in their warm and cosy home on my bookshelf while this teeny weeny ring binder got a trip out to university to aid me in my Civil Lit endeavours. I was sorely mistaken to think this poor excuse for a folder could hold anywhere near the amount of paper we received and in the end I bundled it as best I could into my bag. Inconvenient. 

Civil Litigation was not at all what I expected. For some reason, many students tend to dread Civil Lit. I personally think it has to do with the two Advocacy workshops in the module. Either way, those students are wrong. I was pleasantly surprised and really enjoyed both the prep and the workshop. So far we have only really begun to cover the general litigation process and writing a letter of advice/response in the initial stages of a claim. I am very much looking forward to the progression of this module. 

One thing I am most definitely NOT looking forward to is Property Law and Practice (PLP). Anyone who has taken the time to read this blog from the beginning will know my history with Land Law and I am afraid that I never have, and probably never will, enjoy this area of the law. We have all gotta hate something right? Anyway, this wretched module does not begin for a couple more weeks so I am granted a brief reprieve. 

Other News

I was surprised to learn that not one single member of my class managed to secure a training contract this summer. In fact, surprised is an understatement; I was downright shocked.  There are some fantastically talented and dedicated individuals in the LPC classes, which is the case with every provider. My class is no different. I have no idea what happened but I am guessing that at least a small part of it is the sheer competitiveness in recent years and the ensuing bottle-neck of applicants. I genuinely have no idea what has happened to the world when students achieving high grades at degree and LPC level, volunteering and working 30+ hours, all maintained over a period of 3-5 years, cannot get a job in the legal sector. Who are the people getting these jobs?

My first assessment centre

Phew! What a busy month it has been. With my new job and plenty of overtime at my second job it doesn't really feel like there has been a summer break at all. In the midst of all of this I also got the opportunity to have my first assessment centre experience, and I can tell you from the off (to avoid any false hopes!) I unfortunately wasn't successful. However, every cloud has a silver lining and, now that I am two weeks on from the disappointment, I am confident that I can use the experience for a successful experience next year.

Now, I wasn't sure whether it is the "done thing" to publicly name the firm you're interviewing for but having desperately searched the web for info on this particular organisation's assessment centre (info not provided in the assessment centre pack of course) I was bitterly disappointed. So on that note, the organisation I am writing about today was the Government Legal Service and I hope that my experience can provide an insight to any future hopefuls. 

As background, the application process for the GLS includes an application form and Situational Judgment Test, successful applicants are then invited to complete a Verbal Reasoning Test and, if successful in that, a Critical Reasoning Test. Finally, there is the assessment centre which includes a written task and an interview with a panel. 

The assessment centre is held in London across four days. We found out upon arrival that they were interviewing 112 candidates in groups of seven (four sessions per day) and that over 3000 people had applied; these were incredible statistics and indicative of just how fierce the competition to obtain a training contract is. 

The written task involved advising a minister on a proposed piece of fictional legislation, particularly in relation to four specific members of the public's concerns, within a one hour time frame. The task was typed and we were given a hard copy of the materials and permitted to make notes. Generally, I found the task okay. I finished just in time but felt comfortable and not flustered throughout that hour. 

We then had a 20 minute break in order to have a drink or snack before being called for our individual interviews. Interviews were held by a panel of three (two GLS lawyers and one independent person). They were very friendly and definitely put me at ease. That was until the questions began! 

The first 15 minutes consisted of questioning on the written task. I had expected to be questioned on the rationale behind my answers but the questions seemed to be more technical:

"You have suggested an exemption to this section 13(b), how would you implement it?"

"Who would be better to decide the annual fee in the legislation, the local council or wider government?"

I think I fared okay but my unpreparedness for these types of questions definitely showed and I actually had a moment of complete blankness, which completely threw me off. 

The remaining 55 minutes of the interview consisted of competency based questions requiring the applicant to give an example of a time when they have demonstrated particular competencies, in this case decision making, leading and communication, team working and working to deadlines. These questions were testing. I was obviously aware of the types of questions I would be asked and had thought long and hard about examples I could give, however, I wasn't sufficiently prepared for the depth I would be questioned into these examples and they ended up coming off a little shallow. I often had to stretch the example to fit the question they were asking and it all felt strained. Advice to any future applicants: talk through your examples, write them out, dissect them in every way and analyse them at a great depth before the interview so that you know them inside out and can in turn discuss them in better detail. 

In addition to the competency questions, we were asked to discuss a current legal issue which interests us (I spoke about David Miranda) and finally our motivation for working for the Government, particularly in public law. 

It was intense.

I left the building feeling entirely shell shocked. In my defence, it was my first experience! The questions were relentless and just when you thought you had cracked it they threw in a curve ball. The panel took it in turns to ask the questions giving you little time between questions to compose yourself and I often asked for a moment to think or take a sip of water. With that said, the conversations with other applicants seemed to suggest that private training contract interviews for top firms were even more intense so perhaps I got off lightly!

The GLS recruit on a top down basis. Everybody gets a mark for their written task and interview and then they take the top 30-35 so it really is a case of "may the best man win". I was completely gutted not to have obtained a place but I am determined to give it another (better) shot next year. 

With all that done, I am now preparing to return to the University of Law for my final year on the LPC in less than 2 weeks. Back to business!

Year One Results

As I sat on my bed, at 13:46, longing the minutes to go slower and simultaneously wishing it was all over, I was lured back into 'exam hysteria'. By this point I could no longer care and the constant bleeping of my Whatsapp group message became a comfort. 

By 14:02 I was logged on and hovering the pointer over the 'open' button beside my results. Here they are:

- Interviewing: Competent

- Solicitors Accounts: 90% (pass)

- Employment: 79% (distinction) 

Relief is an absolute understatement and I am over the moon with my results. Needless to say a few drinks are on the cards for me tonight...

In terms of my friends, I don't know their precise marks but I do know that the main instigator of 'exam hysteria' achieved a distinction in the employment elective and passed everything else. That's always the way! Regardless, everyone is returning for a second year of LPC madness and I cannot wait.

In other news...

Remember the legal admin position I was applying for a few weeks back? Well, I got it! In addition to this role a training contract has been discussed and is on the cards for 2015/2016 providing the firm like me so I am extremely pleased. I will initially be based in one of their smaller offices with a lovely tight knit team and I just can't wait to get stuck in. I guess the suit paid off ;)

Given the above, I halted my TC applications once I had received the job offer. Now I know that the TC isn't exactly certain, and probably a lot of you will disagree with my approach, but I am keen to train with this particular firm and would like to see how it plays out. Obviously, I won't withdraw any completed applications and will be interested to see how they fare too. 

I hope you all did well in exams and good luck with your applications!

Professionalism

Now this is not strictly a "law" related blog post but I feel compelled to write it and it does relate to business professionalism (an awareness of business/commercial environment being something we all know we must possess). 

The story starts like this. My best friend is turning 23 next week and I haven't a clue what to get her. We met when we were 11 and vowed from around the age of 14 that we would always make birthdays special. Over the years we have become regulars at our favourite spa, taken trips to the zoo, seen theatre shows, rode rollercoasters and the waltzers until we were sick, posh lunches, beach barbecues, I've sat through AWFUL concerts, sipped pricey cocktails in ice bars, laughed until we cried in comedy clubs... you name it we've done it, all in the name of great birthdays. I digress. 

So here I was trying to figure out a great way to treat my best friend for her birthday and I came across a local spa that offers glamping (that's glamorous camping in case you didn't know). Sounds perfect! Spa by day, tipi by night. I was checking out the menu when I noticed just underneath the menu PDFs a rather large amount of waffle-y looking text. Being open to procrastination I began to read. What I discovered was what can only be described as a long and frustrated rant about....customers! Oh boy. Please find said rant below (I apologise for how long it is):

If it's Winter and you're booking a table sometime around Easter expect that the menu may change. This means a change in the content of the dishes not the number of dishes or the variety on offer. So if you come in the second week of April you may be surprised to find that we're no longer serving a Winter Menu...

If you don't want to take a chance and would like to eat in a place that serves the same menu all year round from an indeterminate source with profits leaking out of the British economy into Multinational overseas investors pockets then please feel free to go elsewhere (to a chain carvery down the road perhaps) and spend £16 or £17 on a three course Sunday Lunch there. We don't pretend to offer the Earth, we're just a hard-working  family business striving hard to keep our loyal team of staff employed, pay our taxes and look after the future of independent places like Wallett's Court.

Ultimately you choose where you go to eat out, don't let us force you into paying £21.95 for a three course Sunday Lunch, if you don't believe it to be good value, let us know AT THE TIME and we'll see what we can do to add value to your experience whilst you're with us.

Now, imagine this... I am coming to your house for lunch. You put the heating on, light the fire perhaps. Now go to Tesco and buy a tin of Heinz Tomato Soup, a small loaf of Mother's Pride, a small packet of butter, a Bird's Eye Traditional Roast Beef for one, a tin of vegetables, a couple of Aunt Bessies' Yorkshire Puddings and McCain's home roast potatoes and a dark chocolate Magnum (this will all come to £10.18, remember that figure).

Now prepare all of that, lay a table with your best linen, crockery, cutlery, glasses and wait for my arrival. When I get to your house bring me a jug of iced water for which you won't charge me of course, then serve me my tomato soup with half a loaf of bread, roast beef dinner with tinned veg and frozen Yorkshires, and chocolate Magnum for pudding.

Now, I may spend the afternoon sitting in your lounge by the fire or in your garden whilst you spend the next hour or so washing-up and tidying the dining room. At the end of that I'll hand you £18.39 (that's £21.95 less 20% VAT) and you'll delight in the profit from your endeavours. That's a healthy £8.21 from your outlay of £10.18 unless you factor in the cost of heating and lighting your house, insurance, rates, income tax, the cost of the glass that I dropped on your terrace (oops, sorry!), the cost of mowing the lawn, the cost of half a loo roll that I used and the copy of Hello that you kindly placed by the loo and I assumed you wanted me to keep that by the way.  Now with all that factored in you will have made a glorious profit of a between a quid and naff all. But hey at least you'll have the reassurance of knowing that you won't have to do it all again for me tomorrow (reasons I won't be returning are to follow). Oh, no you won't because as far as you're concerned I paid you the money and left appearing to have had a nice time albeit without a big thank you.

So, there you are in a few days time spending a little time relaxing with your family and you'll receive a lovely email from me informing you that I've told the rest of the world via the Internet that I had an average time at your house but thought that it wasn't worth the money...

At this point you'll feel like jacking it all in and moving to a volcanic island in the middle of the Mediterranean where you don't have to pander to the needs of spoilt twots like me with aspirations of becoming the next Michael Winner... 

Here endeth the outpouring of my passionate views... For more rants please read my blog at lostfaithinhumanitytoday.blogspot.com

"The more dangerous volcanoes are those that lie dormant for years, holding everything in, then burst open suddenly, usually with devastating effect."

As much as I can sympathise with this business owner's frustrations, this rant, published on the business' professional website, is totally UNprofessional. Customers will moan. They might be ungrateful. They might not understand the profit margins of small business. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Needless to say I have been completely put off, and what a shame. Especially by the bold quote at the end which seems to suggest that the writer is one unsatisfied customer away from a crazed maniacal outburst. I won't name the business in question as I do think they most likely provide a great experience, however, I think I will take my custom elsewhere... 

Suits and tricky questions

Wow, what beautiful and scorching weather we have had these past few day. Almost makes you think it might be summer... 

As you know, I was made redundant from one of my part time jobs shortly before exams *sob*. Obviously job hunting was not at the top of my priority list at the time. Since then, one particular position has caught my eye. Another admin post but this time at a much larger firm that annually recruits trainees. I applied and yesterday I had my preliminary interview. 

First off, it was over 30 degrees here and I was super reluctant to don a heavy and stifling suit. Contrary to what everyone advised me, I knew best, and wore a shirt and cardigan combo. Greatest idea I've ever had until I walk into the offices and come face to face with the previous interviewee, dressed in a suit. Nothing like a confidence wobble just before a big interview eh. 

Moving on to the reason for this post. One of the questions I was asked was:

                                      "What criteria should your next employer or position meet?"

What an interesting question. I was initially a bit stumped. After a moment to think, I was still stumped. And then I realised my only option was to be honest and so I entered in a conversation in which we discussed my particular desire for a job in the legal sector, in which team working is key and where there are opportunities for the development of employees (obviously here I was thinking of post LPC opportunities). 

The interviewer then cottoned on to what I was thinking and asked how long I expected I would be in this role, and I was really dreading this question. With the cost of training and the time it can take recruiters are quite rightly keen to employ people with the intention to stick around. With that said, I know of people who are in charge of recruiting and have told me that people who remain in the same position for more than 3-4 years are generally seen to lack ambition (I tend to disagree with this, but what do I know). What a minefield! Again, I had to be honest and answered that I couldn't imagine being in a part-time position for longer than 2 years as on completion of the LPC and then the LLM I would obviously be wanting full time work. I then mentioned that I might also be wanting to move away from admin and into a role that used some of my legal skills. This seemed to pay off as I then found out that this particular firm are keen to begin a practice of recruiting their trainees from within so it seems that honesty was the best policy.

The recruiter called me this morning to say I was through to the final interview stage next week. Having met some of the employees of this firm and seen the offices I could really see myself working for this firm. *preps heavy and stifling suit*

Exam Hysteria

We have all been there. The final exam of the year. Nerves, yes, but also a faint whiff of excitement for the summer. That feeling that, no matter what the exam may throw at you, in 3 hours time you won't have to worry for another 3 months. The invigilator calls you all to put down your pens and a wave of cool relief washes over you... ahhh calm!

This year I have been cruelly and heartlessly deprived of that heady relief due to, what I am coining, 'exam hysteria'. Electives exams were rather ruthless and consequently we have all been drawn into a blow-by-blow dissection of each and every word we wrote on the papers. The guilt, the regret, the misery.

When I finished the paper I felt a bit disappointed but definitely confident of a pass. I stayed behind with a few friends to grab a pizza in Guildford and the self-doubt began. 

"Oh... did you include [insert relevant case]?"

"Yes question 2 was definitely about [insert relevant topic]"

"You said she worked 40 hours a week? I am pretty sure it worked out at 37.5"

I spent the drive home deflatedly mulling over each and every detail and convincing myself I had failed.  I didn't even do this for my degree finals.

But the conversations didn't stop there. All texts from friends since the exams have been exam related. Some friends repeatedly just stating that they have failed. Some friends remembering bits they did or didn't include and checking if they were in the majority. Others planning their new careers after the embarrassment of inevitably being publicly named and shamed as the University of Law's worst LPC student and then unceremoniously kicked off the course. Tiresome, but infectious. 

My personal way of dealing with anything like this is perfectly summed up in the phrase "worrying won't change a thing" so I don't understand why I have been dragged into all this pessimism. I am slowly withdrawing from the exam talk now (it has been 2 weeks!) and trying to resume with normal life. I hope that my friends can also combat this strange compulsion to berate ourselves but I fear they may need to go cold turkey.

What I can confirm is that it is most definitely catching so beware, fellow law students, and keep away from the infected.

Exams and finishing LPC year one

I have officially completed the first year of the LPC :D I cannot believe it. This academic year has gone so quickly and it's scary to think that I will only be a student for one more year. 

Last week I had exams in the employment elective and then solicitors' accounts. Employment (on Tuesday) didn't go as well as I would have like. In preparation for the exam I re-read the ENTIRE textbook (dedication!) and made notes on each topic. I went through each workshop and re-did most of the workshop tasks. I then annotated the flow charts and did the specimen exam. It would be fair to say I was feeling fairly confident and I slept like a baby the night before the exam. 

The multiple choice element of the exam (20%) went terribly, as expected. So I was pleased to move on to the written questions. The first one was primarily redundancy based, with an unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal element plus a juicy question on restraint of trade. The second was TUPE followed by a question on future liability in relation to transferred employees. It mainly went badly due to time management. At the start of the exam I worked out how much time I had for each section but, inevitably, I ran over on my redundancy question- opting to cover EVERY single option etc. This meant I rushed the second part. However, I did finish and since the exam I know of 3 people who didn't even reach the future liability question, so I am at least thankful for that! 

The real issue I have is with regard to discrimination. 1/3 of the course was dedicated to discrimination claims and so I was surprised to find it was not examined in the paper . Apparently, this surprise was felt by many and has led to a divide on whether there was in fact a potential discrimination claim in the first question. *cue panic* Some have covered it and some haven't. I didn't. And I revised discrimination ALOT. My personal opinion is that some have felt so uncomfortable that it wasn't in the paper that they have shoe-horned a claim in, but I guess only results will tell. 

My advice to anyone studying on the LPC in the future would be that, studying for open book exams is actually no walk in the park! Obviously, more is expected of you and you really cannot rely on your books; there just isn't the time. I think I used my actual textbook twice in the whole 3 hour exam and used my notes sporadically- I only just finished in time. You absolutely cannot be learning or reading big chunks about a topic during the exam so make sure you learn everything in the same way you would a closed book exam. Then, create prompts and case references to quickly glance at while you are writing. 

Prediction for Employment: 58%

On the other hand, Solicitors' Accounts (closed book) was a dream. A 2 hour paper and I managed the ledgers (worth 36%) in 20 minutes and the Financial Statement (worth 16%) in another 20 minutes. This gave me a lovely 80 minutes for the multiple choice element (20%) and the comprehension element (28%). No hiccups and it was pretty painless. 

Prediction for Solicitors' Accounts: 70%

Results are out on 30th July and I am glad to have a 6 week breather to be honest. My immediate plans involve a return to the CAB for my advisor training, continuing with work and completing my TC applications. I might even treat myself to a break! No holidays this year as we are saving for an 8 week trip next summer (destination is as yet unknown) but I am booking in a lot of beach barbecues and countryside picnics. Here's to the summer! 

Interviewing and Advising Exam/ end of term

Save for two exams, I have officially completed the first year of the LPC *fires poppers*. The Interviewing and Advising exam fell on the final day of term and so there was a mix of excitement, anticipation and nerves floating about last Wednesday. 

I am pleased to report that, generally, the exam went smoothly. I think I made two moderate errors: starting to muddle up explaining the law with giving the client the relevant options (two sections which are meant to be kept separate for clarity) and also forgetting to tell the client they would be receiving a letter of advice. I hope that these things won't prevent me from being found competent as I seemed to have a good rapport with the "client" and the interview flowed nicely. I spent exactly 20:19 on the interviewing so had a nice 9.5 minutes to complete my notes. Phew! 

I am now heavily stuck into revision for the Employment elective (exam: 11 June) and Solicitors Accounts (exam: 15 June) so you can consider me off the grid. 

In other news...

Not strictly LPC related but yesterday when I arrived at work I was unfortunately made redundant and given my 1 week's statutory notice. So any job application relief I thought I might have after the TC deadline passes will be short lived. On the bright side, I now won't need to work during exams next week.... every cloud and all that!

"Please indicate your expected salary"

My slow and steady completion of Training Contract applications is going well and the majority of the process is fairly similar for each firm. 

Yesterday I was coming to the end of a shorter TC application when I saw the question in the title of this blog.

"Please indicate your expected salary"

This posed a bit of a conundrum for me. My inner Mr Burns (a little The Simpsons reference for you there) started goading me to type "£30,000!", exclamation mark and all. But I suppose that wouldn't really be my "expected" salary. I asked myself, what is a trainee's expected salary? 

I am due to complete the LPC in 2014. We all know that with the abolition of the SRA's minimum trainee salary in August 2014, the new absolute minimum would be National Minimum Wage (currently £6.19 ph and due to rise to £6.31 in October 2013, making your yearly salary a mere £12,305). For a maximum I looked at the Magic Circle firms: Linklaters at a whopping £39,500 in the first year of training, Slaughter and May at £39,000 and Clifford Chance and Allen and Overy at £38,000. It is yet to be seen whether firms will actually hire trainees at NMW but that could mean a difference of just over £27,000.

So where do you place your own expectations. There isn't a correct formula. The key is to assess the firm you are applying to and be flexible. This means that, although my inner Mr Burns was shouting at me to type £30,000, that figure is probably not realistic for a smaller firm situated outside of a city and with a handful of staff. Look at the firm's profile, look at similar firm's profiles. 

I also had to be realistic about myself. Academically, I am not a star candidate. I didn't achieve a first and I don't possess all As at A-level. Although I am very proud of my 2:1 from a fairly well respected university, it still has the potential to prevent me accessing those Magic Circle firms. In terms of work experience, I have some strong vacation schemes and placements which somewhat redeems me. I  hope that this means I have a good shot at some of the smaller regional firms. For these reasons, I know that my expected salary is probably around the middle to lower end of the scale. 

It is quite an interesting question for firms to ask and I do wonder what the implications of your answer might be. Pin your expectations too high- application binned, there are plenty of applicants who will expect lower. Pin your expectations too low- thousands of pounds of student debt all to work for little more than a waitress. The abolition of minimum wage coinciding with the serious lack of available TCs just screams a potential for exploitation to me. 

A good friend of mine started work in a bank a few years ago and the advertisement for the position stated that the salary was between £12 and £14k pa. At interview he was asked what he expected in terms of wages and he replied £13k- opting for a safe, middle of the road amount and knowing that it was within what they were expecting to pay. 4 months after he started working as a cashier the bank hired another cashier. They got chatting and he was gutted to find out that she had negotiated a £15k salary. 6 months later he was offered a promotion and an increase in salary of, you guessed it, £2000pa. That was the moment he knew he had to leave. How could he take on more responsibility and hours and yet still be earning the same as a cashier. It was the final straw. The moral of the story: don't sell yourself short, because it WILL matter. 

Tread carefully with the "expected salary" question.

BLP Results

Business Law and Practice results are in. I am disappointed to announce that I got a 67. Although this is much higher than the 55 I predicted myself, I was always going to be disappointed because I felt that I should have got a distinction. Realistically, I knew straight after the exam that it was not going to happen. This time around, I didn't earn it... but to get a distinction in the mock makes the grade that much more difficult to swallow.

There is little time for dwelling though. We are fast approaching the end of our electives and the beginning of the next round of exams. I was a bit of a nerd yesterday and stayed late to do some extra work- I am putting all my efforts into getting a distinction for my Employment exam! I must say that I am absolutely loving the Employment elective- wrongful dismissal, unfair dismissal, discrimination, TUPE- so much to get your teeth into. I  have always been a big fan of employment law though so I guess it's possible that I am a little biased.

RESULTS PREDICTIONS AND ACTUAL RESULTS

So I thought it would be good for me to reflect on my results and how well I actually did in comparison to what I thought:

BLP            55     67

Wills           70     100

PLR            C       C

Quite a difference. Maybe in future I won't be so hard on myself.

I hope you all did well in your exams :) and good luck with the upcoming ones. 

Lonely at the Top

*Warning: this is a distinctly "moany" post. Proceed with caution*

As another of my friends gleefully announces that he/she is moving to Thailand/having a baby/getting married I can't help but wonder why I feel like my life is at a stand still. I am a 23 year old woman, succeeding at most of the things I am putting my efforts into, and yet I still can't help but feel like I am stagnating. 

It made me wonder whether this could be one of the big downfalls of pursuing a career in law. After all, even if you don't take a year out, you study everything full time, and begin your TC immediately after you have completed the LPC- you still have 4 years of study before any sort of gainful employment. As most of you will know, I have had a year out AND I am studying the LPC part time so for me that has been extended by 2 years.

On top of that, of my lovely friends from school only 1 of them decided to go to university. So among the 11 of them that I still regularly see, I often feel like the odd one out *cue teeny tiny violins*. They all have 5 years of career-ladder climbing, house-buying and relationship-progressing on me. 

When one of them announces the next big event in their lives we all "ooh" and "ahh"- clearly understanding the importance and magnitude of these huge life milestones. But their days of exams and lessons and late night cramming are all but a distant memory so that when I proudly announce I passed the latest round of hellish examinations, they congratulate but can't really understand what it means. When I moan about TC applications, work experience and the neverending pile of work to be done- they all nod in agreement but can never turn around and say "ohhh I know- what a nightmare!"

At university, I had distinctly separate groups of friends. Uni friends. School friends. It worked out perfectly. Now that my uni friends have all graduated and sadly gone back to their original homes, I am left with a group of friends in which my role is "The Student". 

And the LPC has not yet helped to fill this void. Being part time, the vast majority of us commute and have jobs sandwiching our 1 day per week in attendance. We text, email, FaceBook- all the usual long distance forms of communication, but I still miss the regular face-to-face contact with students! 

With the LPC having most of it's study outside of the classroom, I spend a good 20 hours per week alone, in silence, reading and taking notes. With breaks this can amount to almost 3 working days!! I am genuinely worried for my future sanity.

I wondered if any one else studying law feels/has felt like this? Where the only thing that seems to be progressing in your life is the LLB or LPC? And if so, is law a lonely pursuit? 

To sum up todays moan:

• I have been studying for almost 5 years and am utterly fed up
• I have been perpetually 'broke' for almost 5 years and am utterly fed up
• My contact with real life human beings has been so reduced that sometimes, after a particularly long and lonely studying session, I can be found checking BBC News for word that the apocalypse is upon us... and I am utterly fed up.
• The thought of marriage and babies right now makes me want to run screaming for the hills... but  if I have to be bridesmaid/godmother one more time.... you get the picture. I am fed up. 

Bring on the glorious 9-5 working week I say.

Interviewing and Advising Mock

I did say I would do a teeny post after the mock so here it is. 

If you have been keeping up with my blogs you will not be surprised to learn that I was just a tad nervous about today. 

On the day of the exam you get to receive your "instructions" as a trainee up to 35 minutes before the start of your interview. You can then use your materials to prepare some questions/law that you think might be relevant. I turned up in my lovely new suit (courtesy of Barclaycard...woops) but was so busy faffing about and getting flustered that I lost 5 of those precious 35 minutes prep time. No matter, there really isn't a lot you can do with the minimal information you are provided: client name and details, one or two lines on why they are visiting, conduct issues (none in my case), your fees and supervisor name. So I busied myself with finding the most relevant of my 3 prep sheets, 1 of which can be taken in, ("leaving a partnership" in my case) and then tailoring it as much as I could to suit what I knew about my client. 

I got to the room on time and was relieved to find that the assessment is conducted by just one person, who also acts as your client. 

The assessor leaves the room and tells you to come and get your "client" when you are ready. I was pretty nervous so treated it like a band-aid and got straight into it. I have heard that a few lingered to review notes but I can only imagine this increases the nerves.

I managed to remember to shake her hand, introduce myself, invite her in and SIT DOWN LAST! I also remembered the pesky small talk. However, after this well rehearsed routine (I practised it over and over in the days leading up) I suddenly had an extremely dry mouth and blank mind... 

... A quick glance at my prep sheet allowed me to ask an incredibly wide open question and gain 30 seconds of client talking time to compose myself. 

The rest went swimmingly, and you'll be pleased to hear I was found to be Competent. I am also proud to say that my section on Law/Advice received the top grade of "Good" throughout. I did, however, receive a few "Poor" grades - I didn't tell the client I was a trainee, I forgot to show the client out properly (opening and closing the door for them), and  I didn't adequately outline the costs of the interview. I received a grade of "Fair" on a few other things. The great thing about this assessment is that you receive your feedback immediately after and get a good 15 minutes to discuss your performance with the assessor, a great opportunity to iron out any issues and get some honest critique on your interviewing style. 

My interview lasted 16 minutes and I spent 10 minutes completing my notes sheet (which is also included in the assessment marks). We were advised in the workshops that anything below a 15 minute interview probably means you have missed some vital information so I was just within this section. After 30 minutes you must stop interviewing/writing.

Overall, most of my friends managed to pass the assessment with only 2 not achieving a Competent grade. Not too bad. 

Now for a celebratory cup of tea and a chocolate biscuit. And to ponder whether I will ever get the guts to watch the recording of the assessment... What a wild life I do lead!

Interviewing and Advising

Now that I have completed the Interviewing and Advising workshops I thought I would write a short post to mark the occasion. 

First, a little break down. Interviewing and Advising is, quite obviously, the skill of successfully interviewing and then advising your client. For some reason though a lot of non-LPC folk seem to think it's sessions to practice being interviewed (i.e. for a job) so I thought I had better clarify. You take 2 workshops and then a lovely mock exam. It's another Competent/Not Competent exam so 50% is all you need. The exam consists of interviewing and advising a client for up to 30 minutes. You need to make notes and they form part of your final mark. 

I went into Interviewing with a slight sense of dread. Having made friends with a few of the "18-monthers" I had been witness to their sheer panic at taking the Interviewing and Advising exam in December of last year. 

The groups of 12 are quite small, especially compared to BLP. You pair off and sit opposite one another on a desk and then act out role plays, alternating between client and trainee. You should feel totally comfortable, surrounded by your friends. But the mixture of acting, trying something new and being critiqued by your friends makes the workshops strangely nerve wracking. It's a steep learning curve and one that most get the hang of fairly quickly. The University of Law interviewing exam involves advising a client about a Partnership matter, covered in BLP, so there is also an element of revision too. 

I have interviewed clients before for the CAB but it was a much more relaxed affair. On the LPC, the interviews follow a basic structure which you are expected to keep to, and this is where I think it becomes complicated. For example, you must cover costs in your opening conversation. If you forget you can't just have a costs chat in the middle of discussing the clients problem - you have missed the boat (until the end, but you will lose out on marks). Other more trivial things to remember include making sure the client sits down before you and having "small talk"... *cringe*. In reality, small talk would be a natural part of an interview but it becomes so much more arduous when it's a necessity. 

All of these things to remember resulted in me not actually listening to the client and instead spending the time trying to figure out what I was meant to be doing next! This obviously becomes easier the more practice you do, so this weekend I am planning to find some willing (or unwilling!) test subjects.

A few little tips:

• Completely go for it. Make a fool of yourself now and avoid doing so in the exam.
• Do allllll the prep. There isn't a lot but do it all because you only get 2 sessions to practice this and you need to get the most out of them.
• Ask questions. This isn't an exam you can blag. With a written exam you get to plan, read through, add bits you forgot. You get one shot at interviewing so straighten out any queries. 
• You are allowed to take in 3 sheets of paper- one blank piece to make your notes, the mark scheme (with the handy interview structure on it) and a list of possible questions/law on Partnerships. Prepare your questions/relevant law sheet in advance!
• You have to dress smartly for the exams so do some practices in your suit. This will get you more accustomed to how it will feel on the day. 

My mock is on the 8th May so I will likely be doing a little blog then. If any of you are doing interviewing at the moment let me know how you are getting on with it. 

Wish me luck!