Underdogs' solicitor locked out of legal aid
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Yvonne Hossack, a solicitor who has specialised in fighting battles for the elderly and disabled, lost her appeal yesterday against a decision to deny her firm any legal aid contracts in the coming year.
It is feared that the decision could mean disaster for thousands of highly vulnerable people who do not have enough money to pay their legal costs, including residents of care homes who face eviction as local councils struggle to save money.
Her applications for legal aid were rejected last month by the Legal Services Commission (LSC) because of a typing error in the forms submitted by her firm. Privately, LSC staff say they came to the decision reluctantly, but that strict rules covering the bidding process for legal aid contracts did not allow them to contact Ms Hossack and have the mistakes corrected.
Her firm has acted for more than 2,000 elderly or disabled clients, and has successfully opposed plans by local councils to close care homes. She claimed in court that the LSC was unable to find enough solicitors prepared to take on her firm's workload.
But in the High Court, Mr Justice Mitting ruled against her, and ordered her to pay the Commission legal costs of £1,079.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments