Nice People Thread Number 11 - A Treasury of Nice People

lostinrates

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Just goes to show that you don't need to be hte Daily Mail to be taken in....

The £84k figure was a dishonest one from the MoJ. They've been taken to task for it by the Stats lot in an open letter - that figure was arrived at by including VAT and travel to court costs, and Chambers expenses, and ignoring barristers earning less than £10k a year from public funds. (Letter dated 13th March 2014 from Chair of the UK Statistics Authority, Sir Andrew Dilnot CBE).

Concerns have also been raised with us about statements made, following the publication of the statistics, to the effect that average earnings for a criminal barrister who works fulltime and is paid from public funds are £84,000 per annum. We understand that this figure represents the mean fee income from public fBunds for fulltime barristers where any barrister with a fee income of less than £10,000 is excluded. This figure includes VAT, which barristers must pay to HM Revenue and Customs, and expenses such as travel costs.

£84,000 fee income

Minus 20% VAT - £70,000

minus £5,000 travel to court

minus average Chambers contribution

£53,333

minus Bar Subscription, insurance, practising certificate, CPD, necessary books and similar (none of these are voluntary) - average about £5,000

£48,333

minus sundry necessary expenses such as wig and gown cleaning, court collars and cleaning, stationery etc

£46,333

So a taxable income of just over £46k, on average, paid months to years after you've earned it, working often stupid hours on very complicated stuff, no sick pay or maternity pay or pension contributions, etc.

I wouldn't do full-time criminal law for that. I did that 3 month trial last year I mentioned, and it was absolutely all-absorbing and exhausting, and frankly well underpaid for what I was actually doing. I'm not doing another trial like that again in a hurry. That level of work, commitment and responsibility isn't worth getting out of bed for at that amount.

GPs earn a hell of a lot more, and there's no sign of anyone's pay in the NHS being cut at all, let alone by 30%. In fact, I'm not aware of any cuts in fees at all in any other job where public funds pay some or all of the costs. Barristers and solicitors (and legal aid in general) are seen as an easy target.

I think the difficulty is a lot of the non specific costs apply to other people. Most jobs have a 'cost' of attendance, even if its just maintaining a work wardrobe and commuting,

I don't disagree this is shoddy, and certainly knew baby barristers who were scraping things together ( have mentioned here I think, have filled in form b's with clients who didn't work who were getting more in housing and allowances than I was earning, and more than young barristers were getting some times. ( not sure if the changes to how cases should be seen through improved that or not) .

Compared to criminal solicitors today how does that look?

Nikkster

bugslet wrote: »

sounds a complete plant pot. A lot of us make mistakes, helps us spot the good ones.

Understatement. Not entirely convinced it'll help me spot and/ or end up with a good one, but either way I'm much better off with a couple of years of being single since then

Nikkster

PasturesNew wrote: »

Probably expects you to travel over there too!
Really, there aren't any limits to the cheekiness ....
My £1's still on the table.

So is my £2

I think they know that is never ever going to happen. Ever. I'd agree that they are looking for attention, but in the form of a text response (but of sympathy, felicitations) rather than anything else.

Nikkster

lostinrates wrote: »

Popcorn always seems to suit, but its getting really boring! Noodles. Meat.

Salad, fruit, veg are very iffy. It could be the symptoms are NOT food related, but I'm trepidatious. I'm eating fruit and veg a little more at home now, but only when I know I don't have to go out.

Well, I'm sure the things we eat and drink interact with our biochemistry, if not have a direct effect on things.

Noodles and meat - ok, I'd be missing the veg, but at least this is semi-interesting.

Popcorn on the other hand, I'm not a fan of. Esp not the stuff you get at the cinema (bleugh).

I hope you find you can eat more things that you enjoy soon.

neverdespairgirl

lostinrates wrote: »

I think the difficulty is a lot of the non specific costs apply to other people. Most jobs have a 'cost' of attendance, even if its just maintaining a work wardrobe and commuting,

I don't disagree this is shoddy, and certainly knew baby barristers who were scraping things together ( have mentioned here I think, have filled in form b's with clients who didn't work who were getting more in housing and allowances than I was earning, and more than young barristers were getting some times. ( not sure if the changes to how cases should be seen through improved that or not) .

Compared to criminal solicitors today how does that look?

The non-specific costs I include are only those which don't apply to employed people. I only included those which are tax deductible, and suits, work shirts and commuting costs aren't included.

The "travel costs" part is from Chambers to court, only. Travel costs between home and Chambers are the normal, employed-as-well commuting costs. But then you need to pay for the cost of a 3 week trial in Reading / Oxford / Southampton / Harrow etc on top of that.

Costs for clothes in the list I gave only applies to wigs, gowns, bands and court collars.

Stationary costs aren't paid by employed PAYE types, nor do they pay for the computer they use at work.

I'm not sure about criminal solicitors. I don't do much crime any more (and pay is certainly one of the reasons, but far from the only one).

michaels

PasturesNew wrote: »

Last month, as a quick overview, I earnt £65 and $165. If I rooted about I might be able to find another £10 or $20 or so somewhere... but not much more.

DW and I made £100 each for switching unused bank accounts to coop bank. Next they will be switched to Nationwide or M&S for another £100/£150 each. May be you need to think about a few other sources of income. Matched betting is great for a few k for example.

michaels

Nikkster wrote: »

I have no problems with 'no strings', none at all.

Files info away...although actually of no use too me, even before being married I never did no strings and never would (and no PN not just because no one would have me).

michaels

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

The non-specific costs I include are only those which don't apply to employed people. I only included those which are tax deductible, and suits, work shirts and commuting costs aren't included.

The "travel costs" part is from Chambers to court, only. Travel costs between home and Chambers are the normal, employed-as-well commuting costs. But then you need to pay for the cost of a 3 week trial in Reading / Oxford / Southampton / Harrow etc on top of that.

Costs for clothes in the list I gave only applies to wigs, gowns, bands and court collars.

Stationary costs aren't paid by employed PAYE types, nor do they pay for the computer they use at work.

I'm not sure about criminal solicitors. I don't do much crime any more (and pay is certainly one of the reasons, but far from the only one).

Although being self employed presumably you can earn profit rather than income, avoid NI and pay your spouse to do the 'admin'. Plus the 49k is pretty similar to what I earn PAYE with none of those advantages although I admit I generally do fewer than 40 hours/week and only about 2 hours a day travelling.

Nikkster

PasturesNew wrote: »

I thought that ... in about 1990 if I remember correctly.

If that's my lot then so be it. Not 'the dream' but infinitely better than being in a 'relationship' like that!

PasturesNew

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

I don't do much crime any more

Glad to hear it! I don't do ANY!