[a]

Today’s search proved fruitful!

[a]

Your experience, David, reinforces my previously stated views on the new bill. It is not needed and it is considerably less transparent than the format of Bill we already know and love.

[a]

I agree totally Ian.

It appears to me that none of Jackson’s aims have been achieved. It’s either time to go back to the drawing board or revert to the current form of bill. After all why try to fix what ain’t broken.

[a]

I note on the web site that there is no longer an option to select more than one location. Is this a permanent change?

[a]

I can still search for multiple locations.

Or did you mean it was no longer possible to select multiple locations in your profile?

[a]

Thanks Chris. It appears no longer possible to select multiple locations in your profile

[a]

Yes, I think that’s intentional. It was causing the problems mentioned upthread, where searches for a Costs Lawyer in a particular area were returning seemingly random results hundreds of miles away (because people had been selecting multiple locations in their profiles). Your profile location is meant to be where you are based, not where you will accept instructions from.

[a]

Thanks again Chris. I have noted that there are still apparent errors in noting where people are based which may be because of the difference in where people work or where people live.

[a]

Absolutely.

[a]

David – was this a ‘Hutton’ bill or the ACL’s alternative version?

[a]

It was based on the ACL version Sue.

[a]

I think the circumstances themselves are unprecedented, which explains why action the Council took would likewise be unprecedented.

Presumably the ACL constitution is silent on what happens in such situations, and the Council have had to make a decision in line with what they consider reasonable and best practice.

Being away on holiday isn’t a good reason for not voting (although of course some people will get ACL e-mails to their work accounts, not their personal accounts, so won’t be able to read the notice until they return to work). I’m sure many members were on their holidays when the initial vote was called (11 July, with a voting deadline of 25 July).

[a]

You are bound to get the odd decision which goes the wrong way and sometimes errors are made. On the hole however I believe Provisional Assessment has worked extremely well and I have heard no other real complaints to justify a different view. I would expect the Provisional Assessment limit to increase at some point in the future depending on what happens regarding the expansion of Fixed Costs.

[a]

I would echo Gary in that I consider that PA has worked extremely well. The only problem I find is that the oral hearing tends to be a waste of time, as it’s almost impossible to convince a Judge to change their mind. It should be more akin to an appeal process before a more senior Judge.

[a]

What email ?Did not even reach me.