Legal Services Consumer Panel expresses concern at rise in McKenzie Friends

Cuts to legal aid are likely to lead to rising numbers of litigants in person and an upsurge in the involvement of amateur and professional ‘McKenzie Friends’ in court cases, the Legal Services Consumer Panel has said.

Launching its annual work programme, panel chair Elisabeth Davies said: “This year we’re also not losing sight of the fact that some of the recent legal developments are out of economic necessity.

“The reality is that more people now have to represent themselves in court or can only afford to pay for a little legal work.”

She noted that the Civil Justice Council had predicted that people who represent themselves in court “will soon become the rule rather than the exception”.

Panel members will try to get to grips with the extent to which there is a market for McKenzie Friends and the kinds of people involved, though the work programme voiced fears that struck-off solicitors may already be active.

McKenzie Friends can include both those who are simply personal friends assisting litigants, and people who charge fees for this.

The programme noted: “We wish to look into rules on lawyers acting as McKenzie Friends as there is anecdotal evidence that some practising lawyers are offering assistance to litigants in person in this capacity, either free of charge or at a reduced rate.”

It said any restrictions impose on lawyers in this role should be “justified and not wrongly limit access to professional legal help”.

An “emerging market of unregulated McKenzie Friends” was a concern, the panel said, pointing to self-employed people or organisations that charged for such services.

“These businesses may provide valuable expertise and charge lower fees than a legal advisor, thus representing a good option for some consumers,” the panel said.

But it said consumers could be at risk if they were unclear as to the limits of what a ‘friend’ could do, and their competence and fee scales.

“There is anecdotal evidence that some individuals acting as McKenzie Friends are struck-off solicitors raising obvious ethical concerns,” it said.

“Should an individual receive poor service from a McKenzie Friend business, there is no recourse to the Legal Ombudsman."

The panel said its first step would be to “draw a picture of these new businesses and the services they offer” and talk to all involved in the justice system about their experiences.