Ministers urged to rethink plans for legal aid cuts

Victims of domestic violence, clinical negligence and the disabled are among those likely to lose out unless the proposals are changed say opponents.

A group of 24 national charities are the latest to warn that the cuts could end up costing more in the long term.

In their case, the charities including Mind, Scope, the RNIB and Mencap say cuts to legal aid for those appealing benefit decisions could see around 100,000 people, many of them disabled, left with nowhere to turn for help if they fall through the net of welfare support.

Their campaign comes as MPs debate the Government’s Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill in the Commons this week.

James Sandbach of Citizens Advice said: “We believe removing welfare benefit appeals from legal aid would end up a deeply costly move for the Government. The upfront savings of just £16m would have a dramatic effect on the lives of 100,000 people each year, would undermine the Governments reforms to the welfare system and will cost more in the long run as people’s problems spiral out of control.”

The Government has said with one of the most expensive legal aid systems in the world the need to make savings is urgent.

But similar concerns about family legal aid cuts have been voiced by an alliance of groups including the Bar Council, the National Federation of Women’s Institutes and the Association of Lawyers for Children.

Richard Miller, head of legal aid at the Law Society said: “We understand that changes have to be made and have proposed cost cutting measures ourselves, but many of the cuts in this Bill will be totally counter productive and end up costing the tax payer so much more.”

“They are simply axing whole categories of law without any consideration whatsoever of the very varied needs of different groups of clients.”

“The Government has said that a key reason for its proposals is to reduce unnecessary litigation, but for example changes in family legal aid could lead to the perverse result that victims who would not otherwise have brought litigation in respect of domestic abuse they have suffered, but would just have sought to get out of a relationship as quickly and simply as possible, will now be forced to bring injunction proceedings they don’t want to bring, merely in order to qualify for legal aid.”

Mr Miller said: “The ending of legal aid in clinical negligence cases could see people suffering from catastrophic injuries who cannot get the compensation they deserve, and those that can find lawyers able to represent them could then find themselves losing up to 25 per cent of the damages to pay for it as part of the new plans.”

“The new thresholds for legal aid will also mean that many more people will be denied legal assistance altogether and legal advice centres will not be able to take up the slack since they too are losing funding. They will struggle to maintain their current levels of service, let alone fill the chasms that withdrawing legal aid will cause. Courts will end up seeing a lot more litigants in person with the added costs from that.”

Tom Paul, practice manager at Hull Community Legal Advice Centre where legal services are provided by Howells said: “This is an area with high unemployment and a lot of economic difficulties. Fifty per cent of our funding comes through the Legal Services Commission so if legal aid is removed from debt advice, social welfare and employment cases as proposed, it is bound to cut the number of people we can help.”

Right to compensation “could be lost”

A hypothetical case

A BABY is found to have severe developmental problems after being born following an emergency caesarean section at a hospital in Yorkshire.

It is suspected she suffered a hypoxic event, a lack of oxygen, at the time of birth and a diagnosis of cerebral palsy is being discussed.

The child will never walk, talk or live an independent life and will require lifelong care and assistance. Her mother wants to know whether her condition is due to negligence, but what if legal aid is no longer available to help?

Bev Theato, a clinical negligence solicitor at Switalskis in Yorkshire has highlighted the possibility, saying sweeping cuts would mean children “who have been injured through no fault of their own may not receive the compensation to which they are entitled”.

Lawyers will be expected to fund the cost of the case themselves, possibly for years, not only investigating if such negligence occurred but paying for expensive expert medical reports.

“If legal aid is withdrawn, then I do not know how such cases will proceed” she said.

Vicky Medd, a family law colleague said under the proposals a woman whose marriage has broken down owing to mental abuse but who has never involved the police or taken out injunction proceedings would no longer get legal aid to help her deal with her husband over issues such as contact with the children.