BLG exits continue as two partners head to Camerons

  • Print
  • Comments (17)

Readers' comments (17)

  • BLG is sub-scale, lacks the resources to expand, has poor morale, poor profitability, no clear strategy to turn itself around and is hemorrhaging partners and staff.
    Apart from that it's a great firm.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The sad thing is that it used to be a great firm in its 80s and 90s heyday.

    The culture of a law firm is quickly lost once senior management begins to tolerate and even encourage selfish behaviour, and once that goes the profit will tend to go with it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • hang on a second, hasn't BLG just recorded a hiuge jump in profits at the half year point and hasn't it all just pulled off the acquisition of Halliwells insurance practice, landing a place on the Chartis panel?
    BLG lost its way a long time ago, perhaps that was down to these department heads and maybe, just maybe, Jabba the Cut couldn't stand working with these egos anymore?
    Low morale, yes, but in the long term it will be better off.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Would the last one out please turn off the lights!
    As a student about 7 years ago, I was really keen to go into litigation. I was devastated when they rejected me for a training contract because, at the time, they were considered a stand out firm for litigation. I would not go there now if they paid me football player wages. It is true what they say - things happen for a reason.
    My only fear with all these partners leaving as of late, is that they were part of problem.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • If BLG can keep up this strong run they will be knocking on the door of the magic circle pretty soon.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why would BLG be thinking of knocking on the magic circle's door? That's as ludicrous as thinking that Camerons or Taylor Wessing will ever knock on the magic circle's door. The legal profession is stratified into a global elite of 7 firms; a second 'overweight' tier of generalist commercial firms and lastly international specialists. BLG is not trying to be a generalist commercial firm with all the lack of differentiation, and susceptibility to consolidation, which this implies. It is a specialist firm focused on the international insurance industry. That's why it has been booting out generalists and loss-making, non-aligned, practices.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • if it is so focussed on international insurance, why has it disbanded its reinsurance team and bought dozens of personal injury claims monkeys in Manchester?
    The same old arrogance and self - delusion still persists, it seems

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I was at BLG for many many years and still think fondly of it. Seems sad that many of the partners who I remember as being part of "the future" of the firm now seem to be leaving. The horizon for BLG now seems to be set on volume claims work, something which it looked down upon somewhat when I was there.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • So many tools and no box.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Only people with absolutely no knowledge of the insurance market and the nature of panel arrangements in large insurance companies would make these comments. Dinosaurs who dwell in some Dickensian legal world before organised in-house legal functions and the rise of procurement. If those outside BLG are so antiquated in their thinking that can only be to its advantage. Jurassic Park!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The personal injury claims monkeys comment above illustrates how ignorant some people are of the fee earners who moved from Halliwells, the majority of whom specialise in high value Catastrophic Injury and Disease work. I don't deny it is worrying people are leaving, after only having left a firm which shed fee earners left, right and centre before going bust. Perhaps views both internal and external would improve if the very people who created the extra 17% income were not hived off into a makeshift sub-LLP and were included on the firm’s website after 6 months?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Assuming that the above detractors are likely to be ex- BLG folk who unfortunately fell the wrong side of the increased rigour of the new management, would it not be better to spend your redundancy money on group therapy so you can get over it? Get a life guys!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Shocked at reading that 17% "hike" only gets BLG to £300k PEP. And how much of this "improvement" is down to simply shedding staff as opposed to a real upturn in work? With this level of PEP, how on earth will they attract good people or keep whatever ones they may have left? Can't see Magic Circle firms being interested in what is now clearly a lame duck firm.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Still a decent insurance litigation firm. However, noncontentious work is nonexistent now (who will want to do a training contract there?), the recent acquisition has split the partnership (no doubt more departures to follow), yet more redundancies recently so morale is at an all time low and the decent Associates have been leaving in droves over the last 12months. The firm is wobbling.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous 12.08pm - difficult to see the link betwen 17% hike in revenue and shedding staff. profit perhaps, but you need people to bring in revenue. Barlow's has defnitiely had its issues over the years, but from what Ive been reading of late at least they've realised they should focus on their strengths, and recent half-year figures seem to bear out the sense in that strategy

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • OK, so everyone criticising BLG is disgruntled ex BLG. What do they all have in common? Catch up!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • £300k PEP is last year's figure, before the acquisition and 17% hike.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (17)