Something for nothing

Chancery Lane is a curious sort of street. A legal ghetto full of fusty barristers' chambers and a smattering of solicitors' offices, pursued by purveyors of legal uniforms offering wigs for the former and silk ties for the latter. Time was when there were also quite a few book shops, but the internet waits for no one so these are gradually going to that great big library in the sky.

It is probably a little unfortunate that one of the larger buildings just off Chancery Lane is the luridly labelled 'London silver vaults'. Anyone entering this legal ghetto would probably associate this with the vast profits of the lawyers practising around abouts.

Travelling down Chancery Lane the other day I was struck by a new kid on the block - the National Pro Bono Centre. A glistening edifice of steel and stone, with huge windows and banks of computers, topped off with a sign shrieking the names of its sponsors. But not a lot seemed to be going on inside. It was all rather quiet.

I am not exactly sure what it does. It certainly ticks all the boxes and looks really good on Chancery Lane. But I wonder how much cash it has. Would it be better invested elsewhere? No doubt the first annual report will show it has been doing an excellent job. And why was the centre located in the middle of the legal ghetto? Might it have been better located in Lambeth, Stockwell, or Hackney? Or are we simply talking about some sort of PR exercise making the lawyers working nearby feel good?

As a legal aid lawyer I always have a bit of a problem with pro bono work. West End firms sometimes trumpet their pro bono work as though they are providing some form of panacea for the ills of the world. But it's hard not to think it is a little bit more to do with individual consciences and £1m fees and the fruits of really very substantial bonuses than resolving problems.

The real problem with pro bono is that it can never, ever take over that vast tract of boring sausage factory work which is the very guts of legal aid. Much of it is 'pro bono' in that one can only charge for work which the Legal Services Commission is prepared to pay for '“ which rarely includes the form filling. I regularly see people who are not eligible for legal aid but out of sheer compassion I feel obliged to give them some advice.

Seeing individual tenants with their individual rent arrears and preventing them from being homeless is not headline grabbing work. Working for a very difficult hoarder who reeks of stale urine as he visits you in your office is not something that the big boys in the City are going to relish doing. Likewise the complex 'small money' divorce where all that is being argued about is who keeps the council flat can take up massive amounts of time, but again is simply not the sexy work which some of the bigger firms seem to thrive on.

Last week I had a client ring me regarding a piece of commercial litigation that was not legally aidable. It fell outside scope and she had simply run out of money to pay her solicitor.

She rang me to see if legal aid was available and sadly I had to tell her it was not. Why not ring the National Pro Bono Centre, I asked. Quick as a flash she said she had tried that three weeks ago. They had apparently told her they would call back, but only on a Tuesday night as that was their call back time. Three Tuesdays on she was still waiting for the call.

In order to sort out the problems of those who have no money, you need to get your hands dirty and work the hours.

There are many people out there with problems. Yes, sometimes very small problems, but still very great problems for them. I do not believe a few do-gooders with a conscience problem in the bigger firms are ever going to scratch the surface of that.

Cosmo buys into the pro bono ethic, however. He will quite often lie at the feet of a waiting client in reception giving them the comfort they require unconditionally and without cost. I didn't see any dogs in the National Pro Bono Centre. Perhaps they need one?