Post by Patrick Torsney on Jul 10, 2011 10:14:39 GMT
However, in the relatively short term, given that there are organisations running out of matter starts, I am already confident that the advisors will pick up work elsewhere as and when the NMS are redistributed
I hope so. We have to hope the LSC can get its skates on. Hard on the advisors though. Like you say, some of them have already been through this with RMJ and here they are again!
My concern is that this already seems less orderly than RMJ. Also IAS much bigger contracts post-tender and fewer firms out there to pick up work. This is going to be a nightmare.
In relation to any files they have run by solicitors the Solicitors Regulation Authority are likely to have to intervene and appoint independent solicitors to run those files.
Sorry to go back to RMJ, but the following might be useful in any publicity work surrounding this. When RMJ closed, they were in the middle of a campaign to request that the government assist them with a loan of money, a sum of £1.8m, as it would cost in excess of £2m to close the company.
This is a serious underestimate. Costs to the government so far (and source of information in brackets) that I am aware of:
£1.76million - Payments from the Insolvency Service for redundancy, protective awards, pay in lieu of notice (FOI request) £727,000 - HMRC (report to creditors) - not expected to be realised £925,000 - reasonably realisable work in progress (report to creditors)
Total? In excess of £3.6m. And this isn't including JSA, future tax and NI income etc. There may be other creditors etc, and other costs that I don't know about, or ones that I wouldn't necessarily attach here that others would, with me not being a financial expert.
IAS is a larger organisation, but I don't think it unreasonable to compare the situation. Quote this figure at MP's, newspapers, anything, should there be talk on IAS going down. Publicise how the government don't care about how much things cost the country, despite their rhetoric.
I have to agree with Chris too. Clients (and staff) need new homes fast. Lets hope that the Tribunal and the UKBA play their part in minimising disruption.
yeah as chris says there simply isn't the capacity to deal with this.
did the lsc know? well certainly not at the operational business levels
rich
You could be right but we can't really say that. Even if they did know they would not have been able to make any comment on it and would have acted like nothing was happening
Unless this was a crash and burn behind everyone's backs, then it's likely the LSC were aware of it, at least insofar as it being a contract management issue and there likely being potential problems on the horizon. Also, given the RMJ closure and the fuss this caused I can't believe that the LSC were not paying close attention to the viability of such a large, relatively niche, provider. If they weren't, and assuming information was not hidden from them throughout, you would have to question the effectiveness of their contract management
So, I am curious how the LSC will play it, I have to say. I haven't seen any appeals from IAS regarding funding to prevent their closure or that the LSC accommodate them perhaps in terms of advances on billing. It could be too early given it's only the weekend and no official announcement has been made but it does seem a bit more of a 'shock' than the RMJ situation previously, with not even staff seeming to be aware it was on the cards
I wonder who pulled the plug....
Just for a bit of broader perspective, here's the piece Colin started some months ago about the gradual erosion of legal aid and advice work - which we should keep going given developments:
Sorry to go back to RMJ, but the following might be useful in any publicity work surrounding this. When RMJ closed, they were in the middle of a campaign to request that the government assist them with a loan of money, a sum of £1.8m, as it would cost in excess of £2m to close the company.
This is a serious underestimate. Costs to the government so far (and source of information in brackets) that I am aware of:
£1.76million - Payments from the Insolvency Service for redundancy, protective awards, pay in lieu of notice (FOI request) £727,000 - HMRC (report to creditors) - not expected to be realised £925,000 - reasonably realisable work in progress (report to creditors)
Total? In excess of £3.6m. And this isn't including JSA, future tax and NI income etc. There may be other creditors etc, and other costs that I don't know about, or ones that I wouldn't necessarily attach here that others would, with me not being a financial expert.
IAS is a larger organisation, but I don't think it unreasonable to compare the situation. Quote this figure at MP's, newspapers, anything, should there be talk on IAS going down. Publicise how the government don't care about how much things cost the country, despite their rhetoric.
One would imagine the LSC were aware of what was going on, but it does seem a huge surprise. With RMJ there was some notice and staff went in to work and there was some transition. But here it seems offices are shut and locks changed. If IAS does shut, then regionally there are just not the suppliers able to take on the work. In Greater Manchester IAS has around 80% of NMS and in Yorkshire it is well over 60%. A number of suppliers lost contracts in the tender - would they be willing or able to reopen their immigration depts? Would the LSC allow that without another tender? How many existing providers would be willing to expand with 10% cut coming up and non-asylum being cut from scope??
This is a genuine nightmare for the clients.
LSC wanted (still wants?) fewer larger contracts, but this results in chaos if huge, almost monopoly provider collapses.
Post by Patrick Torsney on Jul 10, 2011 12:13:22 GMT
I think that is spot on about the danger of encouraging monopoly provision. I was reading something only this morning from a firm who isn't best pleased with the recent LSC courting of larger providers and who pointed out exactly the same thing
Out of curiosity, when should the LSC have paid its last SMP to IAS?
I wonder if it wasn't paid and so may have precipitated events or, was paid and has now gone into the administration pot
