The Problem

Cases were going unworked by file handlers for lengthy periods of time. Whilst the firm had processes in place, such as a report to flag inactive files, it wasn’t effective. Many cases were slipping through the net for simple things, such as call notes from reception being logged onto the case, post being added by an admin team etc; therefore, flagging it as having been worked when, in reality, the case had not progressed. This was causing substantial compliance concerns.

The Solution

LPS developed bespoke code to check cases daily to not only see if they were inactive but to ensure that proactive actions had taken place, i.e. correspondence must have been sent that progressed the case, so making a call, sending an email or letter. Additionally, for certain case types, the process was further enhanced by ensuring these actions were performed to the client so as to keep them appraised of the cases progress.

If the algorithm detected that the case did not meet the specific requirements, then a task was to be generated on that case for the user to review which they could not delete; it would only be removed once they made the predetermined criteria for having progressed the case. Should they not do so, it would be escalated into a supervisor task list for an urgent review.

The Benefit

Aside from the obvious compliance benefits of this process being in place, it had additional operational benefits; stagnant cases were either closed or progressed, there were less frequent unnecessary calls from clients as they were more confident that their cases were being worked by sight of these regular updates. This allowed the fee earners to be more productive and consequently, more profitable overall. Furthermore it reduced the administrative burden on the supervisor to ensure cases were actually being reviewed and progressed, allowing them more time to focus on other areas of compliance.

The ability to tailor the algorithm in a granular way allowed it to suit each individual case types needs. Additionally, allowing the firm to identify areas that could be automated, i.e. if the firm was awaiting a DSAR, there was no need to constantly tell the client this manually, when the system could produce an email or letter automatically notifying them this was still the case. 

Overall such a minor development of the system yielded substantial benefits in regards to both compliance, profitable and even client satisfaction.

How can Legal Practice Support Help?

If you would like to discuss the automation of case review reminders, or any other type of automation into your Proclaim system, or to discuss general Proclaim development, please do not hesitate to contact enquiries@legalpracticesupport.co.uk for further information.

James Denby is Head of Proclaim Development at Legal Practice Support and possesses in excess of eight years’ experience, both in-house and as an external consultant, in developing legal case management systems.  James is also uniquely in the position of having worked as a Senior Manager within a law firm, and as having conducted his own caseload as an experienced Paralegal.  As a seasoned Proclaim Developer, James understands the requirements of any IT system/workflow/task from the view of the user, as well as from an IT perspective.