Black barristers will be disproportionately affected by negative reviews posted on digital comparison platforms, the Bar Standards Board has been told. An event organised by the Black Barristers Network also highlighted the potential limits to what barristers can say publicly in response to negative feedback – a problem that equally applies to law firms and individual solicitors.
The session was organised after the Bar Standards Board encouraged barristers to sign up to its ‘digital comparison tool’ pilot.
The pilot, which builds on a similar pilot run by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, CILEx Regulation and Council for Licensed Conveyancers, will allow potential clients to locate and select lawyers through criteria such as location, ratings and reviews to help the process.
The BSB heard that barristers specialising in certain areas of law, such as criminal defence, family and immigration and asylum, are more vulnerable to complaints being made against them – and those areas have a higher concentration of barristers from ethnic minorities, particularly black barristers.
One barrister said digital comparison sites were inappropriate for the work that barristers do: ‘We’re not a restaurant where someone can say if they like the pasta or not. We’re a provider of legal services, we’re dealing with complex matters, we have obligations under the BSB handbook.’
The BSB heard that if a client submitted a negative review, the barrister might not be able to fully respond and defend themselves publicly because of confidentiality, legal professional privilege and contempt of court risks.
‘Sometimes in our job we have to give negative advice. If there’s no case, we have to tell our client there’s no case. Some clients are grateful for us to be frank and honest. Some will hate it… Those clients may write on these digital comparison sites and say we’re a terrible barrister.’
Junior barristers, who often in the course of qualifying will do different types of hearings for the first time, could be disproportionately affected by digital comparison sites, the BSB heard.
The cab rank rule was another concern. ‘Barristers do not have a choice what cases they are allocated,’ the BSB was told. ‘If you do your best and the outcome is not what [the client] expected, they don’t understand, you tried to manage their expectations. They’re not happy and they leave a poor review.’
BSB representatives told the event that the pilot was not just about reviews but exploring different platforms that enable barristers to connect with clients and make sure that particular market works for both barristers and clients.
Attendees were told that the purpose of the pilot is to encourage people to participate so their views can be taken on board. BSB representatives stressed that they do not regulate digital comparison tools and cannot compel them to remove reviews. ‘All we can do is collect information, talk to those DCTs and see if they would consider doing things differently. We’re not obliging barristers to take part in this. [We’re seeing] what role can we play as a regulator.’
The pilot runs until September. An evaluation will be published towards the end of the year.
