Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles
Authors

Researching Reform: Lawyers muscling in to the McKenzie sector?

Sep 29, 2018, 20:07 PM
family law, McKenzie Friends, litigants in person, unreprsented, The McKenzie Friends’ Trade Association
It was bound to happen eventually, given the huge shift in demand for conventional legal services (people just can’t afford them), but it now looks as if lawyers masquerading as McKenzies are trying to have a piece of what they feel is a profitable pie.
Slug : researching-reform-lawyers-muscling-in-to-the-mckenzie-sector
Meta Title : Researching Reform: Lawyers muscling in to the McKenzie sector?
Meta Keywords : family law, McKenzie Friends, litigants in person, unreprsented, The McKenzie Friends’ Trade Association
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 17, 2014, 08:30 AM
Article ID : 107751
It was bound to happen eventually, given the huge shift in demand for conventional legal services (people just can’t afford them), but it now looks as if lawyers masquerading as McKenzies are trying to have a piece of what they feel is a profitable pie.

An organisation called The McKenzie Friends’ Trade Association has just sprung up, which promises to offer a wealth of McKenzies who all meet a set of Service Standards, written up by the organisation and in conjunction with the current guidance issued by The President of the Family Division and The Master of the Rolls. But scroll down the list and open up the resumes of each on their own dedicated website, and what you find are a group of people who are predominantly solicitors. Their requirements for joining too, are interesting. Currently, the Association requires all its members to have Professional Indemnity Insurance, and a qualification, equivalent to A level or above, in law or other relevant subject, or have 3 years experience as a McKenzie Friend.

Now, we’re not sure how the Law Society would formally react to this (though informally one can imagine they would be sympathetic to this development given the current climate in the legal sector), but this creates an awkward strand to the McKenzie sector – lawyers who are working as lay advisers for a fee.
The McKenzie Friends’ Trade Association has recently come to the attention of the legal sector because it has chosen to set out a series of Service Standards, in line with the Legal Services Board’s recent recommendations. The Board’s April 2014 report suggested, amongst other things, that:
Fee-charging McKenzie Friends should be recognised as a legitimate feature of the evolving legal services market.
  • External regulation of McKenzie Friends should not be introduced.
  • Fee-charging McKenzie Friends should form a recognised trade association.
And so the lawyers got in there, and did just that. The Association’s site though is not courting any interest at present (its current Google Page ranking is 0), so it remains to be seen whether they will make headway with this latest version of the McKenzie.

From our experience, most trusted McKenzies with a proven track record of helping families and being honest with their charging are the ones who are currently inundated with work, and whilst we have nothing against lawyers offering their services at a reasonable rate, they have tough competition.

If the lawyers entering the McKenzie market can do that, not only will they be providing an excellent service backed with years of training and skills some lay McKenzies don’t have, but they will help to remove the stigma associated with the practice of law as it stands. Can they pull this one off?

What do you think? Here at Jordans we are sure that many practitioners will not necessarily agree with these comments. Why not add your view to the debate?

The views expressed by contributing authors are not necessarily those of Family Law or Jordan Publishing and should not be considered as legal advice.
Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
questions_litigant_in_person
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Load more comments
Comment by from