Can LPC providers justify such high fees?

  • Print
  • Comments (1)

Readers' comments (1)

  • What campaign?

    This article says that the JLD is campaigning as follows -"First, we’re campaigning for greater transparency from LPC providers on where your fees go, second we are trying to ensure that the profession is better informed about the different LPCs on offer and finally by representing the interests of LPC students within the profession."

    Checking the JLD website I can see no reference to the LPC campaign. The JLD is funded by the profession through the practice certificate and it is critical that all PC supported work is carried out transparently so that the profession can be reassured that levied funds are being used effectively. The Law Society's Education and Training Committee, on which I sit as a Council member, would be very interested to know what the JLD campaign amounts to and how we can work together with them.

    The LPC is a compulsory course which students must buy. What students cannot do is buy a 'plain vanilla' version of the course without any of the whistles and bells the providers add to make their courses more attractive but which add expense. Meanwhile recruiters, other than those who have developed bespoke LPC's, find it difficult to evaluate the range of courses now available. I have been urging the Law Society to set up a resource for disseminating information about the different LPC's (and Law degrees) that are available. So far there has been no progress with that idea. I urge the JLD to work collaboratvely with the Law Society's E and T Committee to improve the prospects of success in this area.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields


Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down.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 (1)