*/
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.
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
