Reports findings of 40 in-depth interviews. Suggests that those who purchase legal services are not necessarily
Around four in ten of those sampled were not confident that they could judge how good a service from their lawyer was. Furthermore, two thirds would not know how to go about making a complaint if they were unsatisfied with the service they received. the same proportion of people thought that they could not judge how good a service from an accountant was. More felt unable to judge service from MPs and financial advisers. Professions that consumers felt better able to judge included GPs, teachers and police officers.
In the end, despite their belief that they could not judge the quality of service, two-thirds said that they would recommend their lawyer.
Australian research showing that broad principles are more easily understood and lead to more predictable outcomes than detailed rules in contract law.
CAB survey respondents doubtful that CLS has improved access to information or legal advice (page 12).
Client confusion between CLAC and CAB identity, and assumed that they were fully staffed by volunteers.
Most had to be directed, referred or signposted there by others. In contrast, those clients whose perceptions of the CLAC were based on the long-standing, recognisable, and trusted brand of the Citizens Advice Bureau found it easier to access the service because they felt they knew something about what the service offered and who could go there – Page 35
Consumers knowledge & confidence of the legal services market – pages 24-26
Discusses what resources SMEs draw on to inform themselves of HR issues (page 36 – 37).
How consumers interact with other complex services
In relation to the COURTS service, how people learn about it is discussed on pages 23 – 25. Discussion on information provided to court users (page 40 – 43).
p6 Discussion how disclosure could result in worse outcomes for consumers due to changes in lawyer behaviour
Quotes MORI poll in 2005 that found that:
Levels of awareness amongst general public of advice agencies:
Reports on Legal capability, an important aspect of how consumers interact with law.
Legal Capability can be defined as the abilities that a person needs to deal effectively with law-related issues. These capabilities fall into three areas: knowledge, skills and attitudes, emphasising that capability needs to go beyond knowledge of the law, to encompass skills like the ability to communicate plus attitudes like confidence and determination.
The knowledge people need is to:
* Be aware of civil law and recognise legal issues
* Know where to find out more
* Understand the issues
* Know the routes to a solution
* Know where to go to get help
The skills required are the ability to:
* Communicate effectively
* Make decisions
* Plan ahead
* Keep track of calls and correspondence
The attitudes needed are:
Survey found that -
At the time of the problem, did you know what your legal rights were relating to this problem?
63% did not know their legal rights
At the time of the problem did you know what formal processes(such as court proceedings and tribunals) are sometimes used to deal with these sorts of problems?
68% suggested that they had no knowledge of processes
only 23% knew their rights and the processes
Those who knew their rights met all of their objectives 59%of the time compared to only 29%for those who did not know their rights.
Value of legal education in empowering clients – page 2
Within survey cohort, there was a reasonably high level of knowledge about clients about the availability of free advice. But people just seek advice even if they know about it in general (page 6).