*/
DCTs such as TripAdvisor or MoneySuperMarket allow consumers to search for providers based on key criteria and allow providers to promote their services. DCTs are not new to the Bar – the Bar Council’s Direct Access Portal is a long-standing DCT, for example.
Many DCTs allow consumers to search for providers by location, price, service offered, availability and reviews – as do some law-focused DCTs. The process of barrister selection by consumers* using DCTs is often, therefore, surprisingly similar to the way they choose between other service providers. However, we appreciate that clients of barristers cannot judge the quality of service offered in the same way they can judge the quality of a hotel room.
We are asking barristers, referral Bar and direct access alike, to sign up to one (or more) of our pilot DCTs, and share with us their experiences of using them. Your insights will contribute to the evaluation of our pilot.
It’s worth noting that not all DCTs offer client reviews – the Direct Access Portal is a good example of a DCT that doesn’t. Some DCTs focus on star ratings, or currently include reviews towards the end of the barrister selection process.
When responding to reviews, you must be aware of the obligations placed on you by the BSB Handbook. Responding to a review is your opportunity to clarify, correct and learn more about how your clients perceive the service you deliver. We suggest you politely acknowledge and thank the client for their feedback. And, if the feedback is critical, we suggest you set out how you will address the issue or learn from the feedback. Adopting this approach allows you to reassure existing and future clients that you value their views, and take their experiences seriously.
You are permitted to respond to an online review so long as you do not disclosure confidential or privileged information.
If a client review itself includes confidential or privileged information, any public response you provide should not reveal any information beyond that which the client has already revealed. If you are unsure about what to say in response, you may wish to simply acknowledge the review and contact the client privately about their feedback.
If you think that an online review about you or your practice is not from a genuine current or former client, you could contact the relevant DCT and follow their complaints procedures.
If you believe an online review is defamatory you can, of course, pursue legal action. However, you might also consider whether you can achieve a better outcome with a different approach. Potential clients may be deterred from instructing you if they feel you have been heavy-handed with a dissatisfied client. It may be more beneficial to encourage other clients to leave reviews on the same website, to give potential clients a more balanced picture.
At this stage, we have an open mind. Once we’ve gathered relevant evidence, and evaluated our findings, we will decide on our next steps.
Insights gathered from the barristers and chambers who take part in our pilot will directly influence our final conclusions – so why not get involved?
To learn more about the BSB’s DCT pilot, see the BSB website here or email us at dctpilot@barstandardsboard.org.uk.
DCTs such as TripAdvisor or MoneySuperMarket allow consumers to search for providers based on key criteria and allow providers to promote their services. DCTs are not new to the Bar – the Bar Council’s Direct Access Portal is a long-standing DCT, for example.
Many DCTs allow consumers to search for providers by location, price, service offered, availability and reviews – as do some law-focused DCTs. The process of barrister selection by consumers* using DCTs is often, therefore, surprisingly similar to the way they choose between other service providers. However, we appreciate that clients of barristers cannot judge the quality of service offered in the same way they can judge the quality of a hotel room.
We are asking barristers, referral Bar and direct access alike, to sign up to one (or more) of our pilot DCTs, and share with us their experiences of using them. Your insights will contribute to the evaluation of our pilot.
It’s worth noting that not all DCTs offer client reviews – the Direct Access Portal is a good example of a DCT that doesn’t. Some DCTs focus on star ratings, or currently include reviews towards the end of the barrister selection process.
When responding to reviews, you must be aware of the obligations placed on you by the BSB Handbook. Responding to a review is your opportunity to clarify, correct and learn more about how your clients perceive the service you deliver. We suggest you politely acknowledge and thank the client for their feedback. And, if the feedback is critical, we suggest you set out how you will address the issue or learn from the feedback. Adopting this approach allows you to reassure existing and future clients that you value their views, and take their experiences seriously.
You are permitted to respond to an online review so long as you do not disclosure confidential or privileged information.
If a client review itself includes confidential or privileged information, any public response you provide should not reveal any information beyond that which the client has already revealed. If you are unsure about what to say in response, you may wish to simply acknowledge the review and contact the client privately about their feedback.
If you think that an online review about you or your practice is not from a genuine current or former client, you could contact the relevant DCT and follow their complaints procedures.
If you believe an online review is defamatory you can, of course, pursue legal action. However, you might also consider whether you can achieve a better outcome with a different approach. Potential clients may be deterred from instructing you if they feel you have been heavy-handed with a dissatisfied client. It may be more beneficial to encourage other clients to leave reviews on the same website, to give potential clients a more balanced picture.
At this stage, we have an open mind. Once we’ve gathered relevant evidence, and evaluated our findings, we will decide on our next steps.
Insights gathered from the barristers and chambers who take part in our pilot will directly influence our final conclusions – so why not get involved?
To learn more about the BSB’s DCT pilot, see the BSB website here or email us at dctpilot@barstandardsboard.org.uk.
The new Bar Council earnings report presents a collective challenge for the self-employed Bar, remote hearings are changing and Bar Conference is back next month
Launch of the Institute of Neurotechnology and Law
Paul Magrath of ICLR recalls the chequered history of law reporting prior to the 1865 establishment of a Council of Law Reporting
Leading drug, alcohol and DNA testing laboratory, AlphaBiolabs, has made a £500 donation to North West charity Child Concern as part of its Giving Back campaign
Gail Evans, Technical Trainer at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest trends in illicit drug use as seen in the laboratory, from designer drugs to ‘unexpected’ substances in a donor’s sample
Louise Crush explores the value you can measure in monetary terms alongside the many non-tangible benefits to working with a financial adviser
By Professor Jo Delahunty KC, Kate Brunner KC and Dr Ann Olivarius KC (Hon) OBE
The ‘non-party political’ employment silk advising Labour talks to Stephanie Hayward about employer failure to tackle workplace sexual harassment and the urgent need to reinvent whistleblowing culture
From Parliamentary standards to barrister standards – Kathryn Stone OBE, Chair of the Bar’s regulator, talks to Anthony Inglese CB about roots, respect and reviews
Jessica Foster reviews State Trials and Error – fundraising and showcasing the musical and theatrical talent within the legal profession
Alex Goodman KC on why our electoral laws need an urgent upgrade – they were not designed to address the corruption of popular opinion by AI and deepfakes