*/
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.
Rupika Madhura is the Bar Standards Board’s Head of Regulation Policy and Research.
Richard Parnham is a Policy Manager at the Bar Standards Board.
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.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group
Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study
How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings
Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Seeing the full picture – Baljit Ubhey OBE outlines the CPS action plan to tackle violence against women and girls, offering insights directly relevant to courtroom practice
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
