Latest NSRLP Data: SRLs report less satisfaction with legal assistance

Continuing our commitment to collect and regularly update data on the Self-Represented Litigant phenomenon, this week we release our 2017 Intake Report, based on intake forms completed by 63 self-represented litigants in 2017.

Following the publication of the original National SRL Study 2013, which described and analyzed  the experiences of 259 SRLs whom I interviewed in-depth, members of the public representing themselves in court continued to contact NSRLP, eager to share their stories and experiences of navigating the legal system. While we did not have the financial resources (or personnel) to replicate the detailed, 60-90 minute personal interviews of the original Study – in those days our team was very small – we wanted to find a way to gather this important data and to continue to report on SRL experiences. We developed an “Intake Form” in SurveyMonkey, and posted it on the website.

The information our survey collects

The survey tracks SRL demographics using some of the same variables from the 2013 Study, allowing for regular updating and comparison – for example, SRL gender, age, income, education level, and party status. The latest Intake Form also asks about the SRL’s experience with: prior legal services, mediation services, and bringing a support person to court.

A final “open format” question provides a glimpse into SRL personal experiences, and as such, is the most detailed and fascinating part of the data.

Since 2014, we have revised the form a couple of times to reflect new and emerging developments (for example, the growth of unbundled legal services, and access to mediation services) and have  to date issued three reports: results from intakes for 2014-15 (69 respondents); for 2015-2016 (73 respondents) and now 2017 (66 respondents). We already have received many more completed intakes since January 2018, and we shall report the results of all 2018 responses in early 2019.

Data from 66 completed intakes for the 2017 Intake Report was analyzed by Windsor Law students Becky Robinet, 3L, and Kaila Scarrow, 1L.

So what did we learn from the 2017 sample?

Some things stay the same…

Many of the findings in the 2017 Intake Report mirror earlier results. For example:

• While most respondents continue to report modest annual incomes (a total of 65% earn below $50,000), 8% of respondents (also 8% in the 2015-16 Intake Report, and 6% in both the 2013 Study and the 2014-15 Intake Report) reported incomes of more than $100,000.

What does this mean?

This result again supports the hypothesis that even for individuals in higher income brackets, the cumulative cost of legal services over the mid to long term is simply not affordable.

• 68% of respondents reported that they have had, at some point in this case, the assistance of a lawyer. This was a key finding of the 2013 Study (where 53% of respondents said they had previously retained a lawyer) and borne out in data from both the 2014-15 Intake Report (65%) and the 2015-16 Intake Report (56%).

What does this mean?

In the open comments section which concludes the Intake Form, many respondents described spending large amounts of money on the preparation of court documents and court appearances by a lawyer, until they reached the point where they could no longer afford to top up the retainer. We are seeing the same trend as in previous years: that individuals are depleting their resources significantly in order to initially hire trained representation, but ultimately end up representing themselves.

• We continue to see very detailed advice offered to SRLs by other SRLs. Respondents offered personal experiences of preparing court documents, preparing for appearances, how to research, and how to stay strong during the extreme stress and pressures of navigating and engaging the legal system.

What does this mean?

Last year we were struck by the growing sophistication and nuance of the tips offered by SRLs to others who are facing similar circumstances. This trend continues as more and more members of the public are forced to represent themselves, and are gaining experience in the process that they want to share with others.

• We continue to see SRLs who are frustrated, overwhelmed, stressed and defeated by the legal process. Many described poor treatment by actors in the legal system, facing aggressive counsel, financial pressures, and a general lack of understanding of the plight of an SRL. Many reported that these stresses negatively affected their emotional and physical health.

We are also seeing some changes…

• Almost half of the 2017 respondents identified as a person with a disability (this was a new question).

What does this mean?

This number may be skewed by our outreach  efforts in 2017 and the development of a new Primer for SRLs with Disabilities.  We also added accessibility features, including audio, on our website. Canada-wide data from 2012 reports an estimated 3.8 million adult Canadians say they are limited in their daily activities due to an impairment, representing 13.7% of the adult population.[1] For those coming alone to the courts, a disability represents an often overwhelming additional obstacle.

• We see a dramatic decline in the number of respondents who describe themselves as satisfied with earlier legal services (this question has changed, from an assessment of prior legal assistance in any matter, to legal assistance in this current case).

Of the individuals who told us that they had worked with a lawyer at an earlier stage in this case (68% of the sample), two thirds (65%) said the services they received were “poor”. Just 8% responded that they were “well satisfied” with the services they received (this number drops to 5% among those who had retained a lawyer from a private law firm rather than receiving legal aid or pro bono assistance).

In 2013, 35% of respondents said that earlier experience with legal services (in any matter) had been “poor”, and in 2015-2016, this rose to 43%. 65% is a significant increase.

What does this mean?

There are a couple of possible explanations. The most intuitive – as someone who communicates on a daily basis with frustrated legal consumers – is that members of the public are becoming more outspoken and forthright about their dissatisfaction with lawyers. For many years, the conventional wisdom was that many people disliked and mistrusted lawyers in general – but were generally satisfied with their own (the “mistrust in general” syndrome). Today the dissatisfaction and mistrust seem to extend to their “own” also.

• In 2017 we asked for the first time about access to unbundled legal services. 25% of those answering this question said they had received such services, but most concerning is the assessment of the value of limited scope services – zero stated that they were “well satisfied”.

What does this mean?

This is concerning – unbundled services have been held up (by NSRLP among others) as an important aspect of improving Access to Justice. We do not know the causes of the dissatisfaction with unbundled services, and need to ask more detailed questions about experiences with unbundling when we revise the Intake Form[2].  From my own conversations with SRLs, I wonder if the primary cause of dissatisfaction is that although the overall costs of legal services is reduced by unbundling, the hourly rate charged by many lawyers for unbundling is just as high as their usual rate (commonly $500 an hour, and upwards). I hear regularly from SRLs that this is just too much to pay for an  hourly rate.

• The numbers for successful access to pro bono services are worryingly lower than in the original Study (currently at 24% compared with 64% in 2013 and 58% in 2015-16).

What does this mean?

Presumably this number reflects the growing demand for pro bono services and the impossibility of these agencies being able to meet public demand. This is also borne out in our daily interaction with SRLs, who sometimes tell us that they “qualified” for pro bono services, but then learned that no lawyer was available to assist them.

You can read the complete Report – which also includes data on SRL use of mediation services, and McKenzie Friends (support persons) – here.

NSRLP appreciates very much the willingness of SRLs to continually share their information and experiences, enabling us to constantly update our intake form, and report out this important data.

[1] Statistics Canada. “Disability in Canada: Initial Findings from the Canadian Intake form on Disability”, available at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-654-x/89-654-x2013002-eng.htm

[2] Forthcoming summer 2018.