Legal Representation Grant Scheme: a review | findings

Participants identified four potential roles for legal representatives in hearings: a legal/procedural role, an explanatory/advisory role; a facilitation role; and a challenging/arguing role. However, these roles were not given equal weight by all participants and one view was that the role was 'muddy'.

Young people thought that legal representatives should have a role in arguing for what the young person wants - regardless of whether they agree that this is what is best for the young person.

There was a lack of certainty over whether and when legal representatives should be appointed in cases which might meet the 'effective participation' criterion.

Different local authorities made different levels of use of the scheme. There were also  variations in the ways many administrative aspects of the scheme were handled by local authorities, particularly around the recruitment, selection and appointment of solicitors to the scheme and to individual cases.

Key barriers to solicitors taking on Grant Scheme cases included short notice, high existing workloads, long distances to travel to hearings, and a perception that the fees were inadequate.

Level of contact between legal representatives and young people in advance of hearings varied. Those young people with little or no contact with their legal representative in advance of the hearing appeared to be particularly dissatisfied with the experience of having a lawyer.

Young people identified both advantages to having a lawyer speak for them at hearings and reasons for sometimes speaking for themselves. However, young people were dissatisfied when they felt their lawyer 'just sat there' and did not represent their views adequately.

Professionals identified both positive and negative impacts on the hearing itself from legal representatives' involvement. For example, they could help hearings focus on important legal issues, but equally they could get bogged down in legal jargon.