Activity 2: Balachandra and Sachetan

This exercise will help you to identify:

• What is and is not a breach of a Legal Rep's duties
• When a complaint may be appropriate
• When you may be at risk of giving immigration advice in addressing a complaint
• How you can address the matter of a complaint without giving immigration advice

Balachandra and Sachetan are both asylum seekers from Sri Lanka. They are both unhappy with their solicitors. They have been discussing their circumstances and have come to you for help in making a complaint.

Balachandra has been paying his solicitor with money he borrowed from his family in Sri Lanka. Balachandra says he chose to pay for his own legal advice because he doesn't trust 'government lawyers' who never do anything.

Balachandra was refused asylum last month. His solicitor has advised Balachandra that he does not think he is likely to win an appeal. Nonetheless, as Balachandra was receiving asylum support, the solicitor helped him to lodge an appeal without charging him further. His solicitor has asked for a further £2,000 should Balachandran want further assistance with his appeal. He has reminded Balachandran that he might still be able to get legal aid.

Balachandra is unhappy because:

• He has already paid his solicitor £1,000 and now his solicitor is asking for more money
• He had to wait almost a year for a decision on his asylum claim, but his solicitor only sent three chasing letters in all that time
• His solicitor is now refusing to take his calls and insists on his making an appointment
• He thinks his solicitor wasn't trying hard enough - his solicitor kept telling him that the case may be refused, despite the high fee he was charging

Sachetan is a refused, appeal-rights exhausted asylum seeker. Last month he borrowed £500 to pay a solicitor to help him with a fresh claim.* He gave his solicitor a copy of his appeal determination and some brief information about his asylum claim. His solicitor told him not to worry, lots of people are being granted asylum at the moment. He has not seen his solicitor since.

Last week he received a package from his solicitor. The covering letter informed him that he has an appointment in Liverpool next week to lodge his fresh claim. With the letter there was another letter addressed to the Home Office, together with a bundle of printouts from the internet - newspaper articles and court judgements.

Initially Sachetan was pleased, as there seemed to be a lot of evidence there. However he has since noticed that the letter is only three pages long and contains several mistakes. At one point the letter refers to someone else who he does not know. Many of the articles that accompany the letter are quite old and some look like articles his original solicitor submitted for his appeal.

Sachetan has decided not to attend his appointment next week. He has been told that the Home Office sometimes detain people and refuse their fresh claims.

*Don't know anything about Fresh Claims? Have a look at Appendix 2!

Consider the circumstances of Balachandra and Sachetan in turn and apply what you know about the duties of a legal representative.

1. Has either solicitor acted in breach of their duties, and if so, how?

Now remember your boundaries as an unregulated caseworker. Think about the definitions of 'immigration advice' and 'immigration services.'

2. Does helping or advising a person on a complaint about immigration advice or services need to be regulated?
3. What advice can you give to Balachandra and Sachetan?
4. What advice can't you give to Balachandra and Sachetan?
5. What might be the danger areas when speaking to them?

You will find activity 2 answers here - no peeking!