Is there any point studying Law other than LNAT universities ?

[Historyismylife]

Our DD has visited several universities some that require LNAT and some that don't. We have split visits between her dad and me so whilst she has seen them all, we can't necessarily compare what we haven't seen. For the first time, we jointly visited Reading Uni last Saturday and I found it really refreshing - there were no airs and graces, the lecturers were engaging, campus was welcoming. DD liked it too. It felt like they recognised that new students are not the finished article but could become so in their time there.

My DH liked it too but was bit disappointed with the law firms they have links with - not the big names you see at Bristol, Nottingham, Oxford, etc.

Most of the places she has looked at are AAA or above so whilst entry requirements are similiar some require LNAT and some don't. Any opinions on how this makes a difference once you hit the real world after uni - you can probably tell I'm not a lawyer, both DH and I have science degrees but work in finance so DD is bucking our family trend.

No - no double-barrelled name for recruiting partner.

Boo :(

Maybe the practice was widespread though [cheers up again].

2:1 perfectly ok if you have the cv.

I think my comments have been taken out of context about being focussed! There are way more solicitor vacancies for training than barrister pupillages. Therefore there can be a huge need to ensure you tick every box several times if you wish to be a barrister. It's supply and demand really. To those who are concerned about their DS doing bits and bobs - get going. There may be a need to make up for list time.

My DD was a pupil with a Grade1 Chambers in her field and, as a pupil, represented a client in one of the major family law cases this year. We are not alike, you will all be pleased to hear. Clients are in plentiful supply for her thank you very much.

Newt, i could have written a lot of your post about your practice. I wonder if we work in a similar area. We might know one another...

Maybe Eurochick. I'm an employment lawyer. Currently working 24/7 since I have a Court of Appeal hearing in a few weeks on a multi million pound case which is going to be the death of me.

Love it but I am well and truly shattered!

We probably do 95% of our own advocacy (obvs not in the CA!). Only don't do it where we've charged a rock bottom fee and can only afford for Counsel to do it because they're so much cheaper.

To all the parents on the thread, please do take note that the system is not what it used to be. It's quite true that we can afford to interview only those with firsts or 2.1s from a very good university (that we've heard of!). If your DC has poor A level results or is predicted a 2.2 it's simply not worth their while trying. It's a combination of the fact that we take far fewer trainees nowadays because the legal market has changed and because of the fact that everyone seems to get at least straight As at A level and decent degrees. I do worry they're not spending the requisite 75% of their time at university partying and socialising . I'm so glad I went in the early 90s and not now!

As a result, legal work experience, wherever they can get it, is absolutely crucial. That is where it is useful to have some contacts. It won't get you a VP place (unless a parent is a v important client) but it might get you some informal work experience. It is also crucial IMO that they understand what they are taking on. Law is a tough profession and its really hard work. If you're not up to scratch you are likely to get moved on very quickly in a fairly cut throat manner. Work life balance is tricky. One of my DC has started sending me calendar appointments if he needs me...

There's also a lack of understanding about pay. A good lawyer can earn a lot of money. Well into six figures (although earnings of over £120k are likely to be in London or at equity partner level where you have no employment rights). An average lawyer will earn average pay. Lots of people are surprised that an experienced lawyer (in terms of PQE) can be earning circa 45-50k in the regions and never really hope to earn much more than that. Paralegals are likely to be on not much more than NMW. Junior barristers can earn very little, particularly in the regions.

For what it's worth, this is my D's pathway so far.
I would like to think that she is quite a good example of someone who has worked extremely hard, and also has had the tenacity to research what is available to her, and then to go for it.
Mediocre sixth form.
Applied for Kings , did v well on LNAT, but ultimately did not take the place, since her teaching at A2 in one subject was not the best, and she knew that she was not going to get the grades.
Went to a RG Uni in the North. Got a First, and finished in Top 10 in her year. Whilst at the Uni, she did lots of work experience, vac schemes, Mini pupilages. She decided that she did not want to become a solicitor.
She was awarded a Scholarship from one of the Inns of Court in London, as well as a scholarship from the Bar training provider.
She decided that she would like to try and become a Barrister.
However, she also applied for the LLM[Masters] AT Cambridge, and was accepted.She was pleasantly surprised to discover that she could defer he rBar training for the year , so she will complete this next year after the completion of the Masters.
Obviously, she still has a lot of hard work to do, and getting a pupilage will be extremely difficult, but I can honestly say that we never anticipated her ending up at Cambridge. She is a great example of somebody who did not have the best start in terms of 6th form/Uni.
Her A level grades are very good, but they are not the very best. Some may look down a little on her choice of Uni[Liverpool]. However, she worked very hard, and showed a great deal of initiative, which i think has stood her in good stead.
I guess what I am trying to say is, if the person has the desire and determination, then anything is possible.

Not the same area then - I'm in international disputes, an area where we do quite a bit of our own advocacy too.

I've been at the independent Bar and law firms so I've seen both sides of it.

Have a look on LinkedIn at the firms that she would be interested in working at Associates & Partners - especially in the sectors/areas of law of most interest. This will give you an idea of the kind of uni she should go to. Then take a look at some of the training partners from that firm where they studied - this will be an insight into their background which will act as a benchmark of what they value. You’ll find most went to oxbridge and at many firms there will be a snobbery internally around which college.

Law firms are all moving more towards a sector approach now - find out what sectors the firm she is interested in wants to grow and try and differentiate work experience/Vac schemes around these.

Languages can also act as a huge differentiator - say you want to work in projects/energy - look at the banks funding these/ where construction is etc

I said "was a pupil" babybarrister. Please read what I said. In addition, I am talking about 2016/17. Please name the two Grade 1 Family sets.

Yes Bubbles. Badly done babybarrister. Not very pleasant at all.

Also, what sort of law does your own chambers do babybarrister?

My DD is doing Law at Birmingham and I hadn't even heard of lnat until reading this thread. There was no mention of it through her application process.

Am confused now...

There's no particular reason why anyone other than applicants to unis requiring it, and law faculties, should have heard of the LNAT, although it does need to be taken at an external test centre rather than at school so parents will generally know (well, mine have needed lifts). The LNAT is being used on this thread in a rather dodgy way though, to signify top law faculties. There are some very good ones which do require it but there are also some very good ones which don't.

I'd be very surprised if no-one on the pupillage committee had heard of the LNAT, assuming a reasonable set. Purely as a matter of general knowledge. I think a number of people have said it's irrelevant except as an aptitude test for certain unis at undergrad level. You keep missing the point, babybarrister.

No I couldn't care less babybarrister :) It will clearly astonish you to know that it's of absolutely no consequence to me whether a pupillage committee of a set doing the sort of law that my DC are unlikely to want to do (if any other DC become barristers) know what the LNAT is. But it surprises me that they don't, even if it's redundant as a measure of aptitude by the time students are applying for pupillage. One measure of a decent barrister should be lack of pomposity though, it would be really good if they could integrate that into the BPTC.

Oh sorry, they had heard of it. Still not that bothered, :) but that's as I said it was likely to be. They must think you're a twit for sending a note!

Not that there's anything wrong with your sort of law of course babybarrister - it's vital - I simply mean that my DC didn't fancy going down that route.

Actually LNAT can be taken at a school not an external centre as it is taken along with a number of others such as STEP, TSA etc at the school I invigilate at. It is a super selective indie though.