Solicitors.........enough work out there??

[MOB]

"I really don't see rising premiums clearing out this already oversupplied market because many overhead costs can be cut with technology and cost sharing."

True but only up to a point.

Increased business failure means increased regulatory and compensation costs and you can't share these.

Increased litigation ( plus adverse investment performance) mean increased insurance premia, and you can't share these either.

These two figures could well move from circa €7k per annum to circa €20k per annum per solicitor.

The lowest prices in the profession - certainly in the commoditised conveyancing stuff - tend to be offered by those who are already operating on a 'cut overhead to the bone' model. They have very little left that they can trim.

With these figures, there is a serious enough barrier to the solicitor who has perhaps recently been laid off and who would otherwise consider practicing in a small way from the living room\home office or indeed from a shared office. If you are billing €300k, these increases are annoying but manageable. If you are doing 6 conveyances a month at €900 each ( which I am sure some solicitors at this end of the market would be charging), this sort of increase is the difference between staying in practice or getting out of law and doing something else.

So, the increased costs will not be enough of themselves to drive solicitors out of business - but they will certainly discourage further entrants.

 

[get real]

There is not enough work for all the solicitors that are now qualified in ireland. Simple as that. Just look at the numbers being admitted in the last ten years.

While i understand the law society simply provides regulation and education and it is a free market i do believe that when the number ofapplications rose dramitically they should have carried out some research as to the long term consequences and simply advised new applicants of the risks. It would have been then up to people to decide if they still wanted to enter the profession. The number of people on ppc 1 was a cause for talk amongst students two/three years ago so i do believe the law society should have been a little more pro-active.

As to what people do now, who knows, ask the "careers advice officer" in the law society....whoops, they havent been appointed yet!!!

My advice, australia!! "g'day, g'day, how's it going, nothing to say just say g'day, g'day, g'day and you'll be right!!"

 

[MOB]

While i understand .....................it is a free market

Correct. This is a crucial point.

I do believe that when the number ofapplications rose dramitically they should have carried out some research as to the long term consequences and simply advised new applicants of the risks. It would have been then up to people to decide if they still wanted to enter the profession. The number of people on ppc 1 was a cause for talk amongst students two/three years ago so i do believe the law society should have been a little more pro-active.

The numbers have been there to see. If the Law Society do anything, anything at all, to try to reduce the number of people qualifying, they immediately draw the ire of the Competition Authority and ( worse) Joe Duffy. So it's just not something they can do.

As to what people do now, who knows, ask the "careers advice officer" in the law society....whoops, they havent been appointed yet!!!

An unfair criticism. The post has been advertised; A more relevant point is perhaps to ask whether this is something in which the Law Society should be involved.

It has always been the case that many people who qualify as lawyers do not ultimately go on to have a career practicing law. One difference today is that the legal qualification does not so easily give you something to fall back on. If you qualify as a lawyer and don't go into practice, (or if you quit practice to try something else), then within 3 or 4 years the chances are that you will never go (or go back) into the practice of law. So it perhaps more easily feels that the time spent qualifying as a lawyer has been 'wasted'. I disagree -but I can see how someone who cannot secure an apprenticeship (or, having qualified cannot secure a position) might feel otherwise.

 

[MoonTheLoon]

Law Society can't limit numbers, but even people with smaller volumes of files would still earn a living if the fees were relatively stable. I can never understand the paradox in competition law when solicitors are supposed to compete with each other on fees (lest they be accused of price fixing) whereas estate agents and GPs have set percentage fees and no one deviates. Or in the case of taximen where they can be fined if they deviate from the set fee! Sheer madness.

We have too many solicitors for the size of the country but it's only solicitors themselves who are to blame. If a solicitor signs up an apprentice then the Law Society cannot refuse that candidate except if they fail the entrance exam. A lot of people go into law for the wrong reasons. Every Tom Dick and Harry you hear about these days is a solicitor.

A previous poster mentioned 20k insurance premium per solicitor on the horizon, I heard 12k from someone working in the field. Just wondering if the 20k is a guess or if you've heard something as well?

 

[Complainer]

Law Society can't limit numbers, but even people with smaller volumes of files would still earn a living if the fees were relatively stable. I can never understand the paradox in competition law when solicitors are supposed to compete with each other on fees (lest they be accused of price fixing) whereas estate agents and GPs have set percentage fees and no one deviates. Or in the case of taximen where they can be fined if they deviate from the set fee! Sheer madness.

Are you living in the real world? Estate agents always negotiate on the percentage fee, and I've never heard of a GP charging a percentage fee - percentage of what?

There is no barrier to taximen reducing their fees, and indeed one taxi company on DNS is advertising a 20% off deal.

 

[MoonTheLoon]

Are you living in the real world? Estate agents always negotiate on the percentage fee, and I've never heard of a GP charging a percentage fee - percentage of what?

There is no barrier to taximen reducing their fees, and indeed one taxi company on DNS is advertising a 20% off deal.

Unfortunately I'm not living in the real world - I'm too sucked into the law my brain has turned to mush hehe

Apologies I meant estate agents charge a percentage fee, and GPs don't undercut each other - I inadvertently said percentage fee for both - sorry

I don't think you're right about the taxi issue, I know of many taximen who were fined for not recalibrating their meters to account for the new fare increase which they didn't want.

Estate agents fees are scandalous for the work they do compared to solicitors, and most are still a percentage.

 

[whitegrass]

If it correct to assume that there is not enough work available to keep all Solicitors going, where will the casualties occur? Tier 1 firms have less commercial and corporate work available - particularly commercial conveyancing e.g. recent injunction application ?!? Tier 1 and 2 firms are moving or will move downstream for corporate work. Commodity, or practically any, conveyancing in lower tier firms is a distant memory. PIAB has all but stopped personal injury litigation. Commercial litigation is available but there is an uncertainty in getting paid. Employment law is busy but pays poorly and family law is very much dependant upon the property market. There are some other niche areas like pensions law which are no doubt busy but expertise are concentrated in a few firms. Probate is also somewhat dependant upon the health of the property (and stock) market.

All in all I would crudely guess that there is 40% over capacity in the Solicitors' profession. This will result in a combination of large scale redundancies, decreasing incomes for all but a very few and decreased pricing based on a simple demand and supply equasion.

The legal profession is heavily aligned with the health of the economy. The numbers in the profession far exceed the current and medium term requirement of the economy.

I can see very poor prospects for a great many Solicitors.

 

[MoonTheLoon]

If it correct to assume that there is not enough work available to keep all Solicitors going, where will the casualties occur? Tier 1 firms have less commercial and corporate work available - particularly commercial conveyancing e.g. recent injunction application ?!? Tier 1 and 2 firms are moving or will move downstream for corporate work. Commodity, or practically any, conveyancing in lower tier firms is a distant memory. PIAB has all but stopped personal injury litigation. Commercial litigation is available but there is an uncertainty in getting paid. Employment law is busy but pays poorly and family law is very much dependant upon the property market. There are some other niche areas like pensions law which are no doubt busy but expertise are concentrated in a few firms. Probate is also somewhat dependant upon the health of the property (and stock) market.

All in all I would crudely guess that there is 40% over capacity in the Solicitors' profession. This will result in a combination of large scale redundancies, decreasing incomes for all but a very few and decreased pricing based on a simple demand and supply equasion.

The legal profession is heavily aligned with the health of the economy. The numbers in the profession far exceed the current and medium term requirement of the economy.

I can see very poor prospects for a great many Solicitors.

Hallelujah, brilliant post.

There's plenty of work in employment and debt collection that can make you a busy fool but very little cash to fund the hours involved.

Only work funded by free legal aid is secure in the present climate.