Letter: Enriching lawyers
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Enriching lawyers
A M Robinson (letter, 6 February) fails to acknowledge the realities of civil legal aid as they occur in litigation.
The Legal Aid Board relies on the advice of the applicant's lawyer in deciding whether to fund a claim. Such advice is not independent, since the lawyer is paid for advancing the claim, regardless of its merits. The success rate is 17 per cent. So in 83 per cent of cases, the only beneficiaries are lawyers and experts.
The often blameless health service is unable to recover its legal costs, promoting what has been described in Parliament as legal aid "blackmail", whereby cases are settled for commercial considerations.
Legal aid does not secure access to justice or ensure compensation for deserving cases. Instead, it impoverishes the health service and enriches lawyers. It is hardly surprising that the main supporters of legal aid are lawyers.
ANTHONY BARTON
London N1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments