Today’s blog post is written by Jo-Anne Stark, B.Comm. JD, CLC. Her book, Mastering the Art of Legal Coaching: A Legal Professional’s Guide to Empowering Clients is available here. Jo-Anne can be found on LinkedIn here.
I am a lawyer, business owner, advocate – and also a “disrupter.” Why? Because I believe that with innovation and creative thinking, we can find solutions to the access to justice problem in Canada… and I generally think outside the box when I look for solutions. As lawyers, we are either part of the problem, or part of the solution: I prefer to find a way to be the latter, even if it means balking tradition.
I am a bit of a technology geek and grew up in a home where computers were the norm, going back decades, long before Apple was a household name. I was encouraged by my father to think about ways that computers and the information highway could be used to help people and make it easier to provide goods and services to the public.
Fast forward many years and I graduated with my Commerce and Law degrees, convinced that I could provide quality service to legal clients in private practice in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Over time, I began to realize that many clients could not afford the cost of retaining traditional law firms to manage most legal matters due to the large overhead expenses. From office space to support staff to advertising, expenses were considerable, and this was reflected in the hourly rates I was required to charge my clients – whose legal matters ranged from family law, to contracts, to civil litigation. I was left feeling unsatisfied and stressed from the “business of doing law,” using an antiquated and outdated approach which rarely put the client first. I left private practice in 1997 and began working in wealth management, moving up the ranks to General Legal Counsel positions.
Over time, I also served as an arbitrator in thousands of hearings for landlord and tenant disputes in both Saskatchewan and British Columbia, where I later relocated. From that perspective, I was able to realize the incredible challenges faced by self-represented litigants as they attempted to navigate legislation, regulations, rules, and practice guides to argue their positions. I decided that there had to be a better way. 
So I enrolled in certified coaching programs and in 2014 began testing the concept of using coaching to help clients. I had my own misfortune of being dragged through nine years of unnecessary litigation to end a marriage during this time, and through that experience I realized first-hand how completely frustrating the justice system was, and how unaffordable the cost of full representation had become. In my opinion, it is not reasonable to expect people who are separating to finance a divorce that costs in excess of $200,000 – and that was with me doing much of my own legal work to assist my lawyer! So I guess you can say that I truly know the pain and frustration of an SRL; sometimes it takes walking a mile in someone else’s shoes to really understand. Following that trial, I launched Stark Solutions Legal Coaching & Consulting (http://starksolutionslaw.ca) to assist clients who wanted a legal coach or unbundled legal services, to help them manage their own legal affairs. It was the first all-virtual, all-legal-coaching law firm of its type in Saskatchewan.
After doing several presentations to the public, lawyers, and law students, I realized that this problem was so large that it required much bigger thinking on my part. 
I launched a non-profit organization called the Legal Coaches Association Inc. at the end of 2019 (http://legalcoachesassociation.org/) and wrote a book: Mastering the Art of Legal Coaching: A Legal Professional’s Guide to Empowering Clients. 
I believe that legal coaching is an amazing solution for helping self-represented litigants in Canada, so much so that I have invested my own savings and time into establishing this association to join together with other legal coaches, so that we can promote this method to regulators and to the public.
There was also a call to action to provide specialized legal coach training, and I developed the Certified Legal Coach (CLC) training program for legal professionals – who can now learn the specific skills required to be an effective legal coach and belong to an association that promotes quality services at an affordable price. 
These training programs will be conducted in-person through 12-hour weekend courses at cities throughout the country, but are currently offered online in weekend webinars. Those who complete the program can use the CLC certification mark and be recognized by the Legal Coaches Association as a Certified Legal Coach, the first certification of its kind in North America. The Association ensures that those members with the CLC mark have completed the specialized coach training, have a formal legal education, and have at least three years of experience in providing legal services in a particular area of law. These Certified Legal Coaches will be added to a directory, made available to the public; they will also be part of a grass-roots advocacy effort to bring awareness to regulators and to all Canadians seeking access to justice.
The book and training program also provide a high-level overview of how to transition to a new business model, one that uses technology and a client-centric approach to deliver legal services. Stark Solutions offers business consulting services to any legal professional who wants to say good-bye to the traditional practice of law and adapt innovative new ways to offer services at an affordable price – from literally any location, with a simple WIFI connection. There is no need for expensive office space or even support staff: legal coaching can be offered as a service in a unique platform that is easy to use (both for the client and for the lawyer!).
In my other role as Director of Advocacy for the BC branch of the Canadian Bar Association, I help members develop even more solutions to the access to justice problem in that province. By developing a virtual legal coaching platform for experienced professionals to service self-represented litigants, I believe that the average Canadian can finally access affordable legal help when they are facing legal problems. Access to justice is an enormous issue that has been growing exponentially – every year we see thousands of litigants attempting to navigate the complex justice system with all its rules and procedures – and now there is a solution for many of them: legal coaching services offered by qualified legal professionals. My career path has taken many interesting turns over the last 25 years, and has shown me that lawyers, more than ever, need to embrace change and learn to do law differently!
This is a fantastic start to a world changing culture on making legal pursuits available to the public at a reasonable costs . I thank You
Thank you Derek: there are days when disrupting the status quo is a bit of an uphill battle – but every time I hear words of gratitude from people seeking legal help it makes it all worthwhile.
Ok,, ill bite, i need to submit NEW evidence, It makes quite clear that the dna evidence used to determine outcomes in my case, was unreliable,, false,,, or fraudulent,, maybe all three. I do not wish to appeal a decision, i need a new evidence submission to support the voiding of all decisions based on the problems with the evidence. No lawyer will help. I have tried repeatedly. Could someone tell me which form to use, and how to put this forward in the supreme court of BC. Thank you
I don’t know the answer to your questions Sandra
but you might want to look at the MotherRisk case (that was posted here- I believe)
that discusses the false positive tests resulting in numerous mothers losing access to their children, families torn apart etc.
Some of those victims were eventually exonerated but in many case, the damage was already done…
It is not uncommon that testing turns out to cause more harm that it does good and so much of what is relied on as fact is junk science, strongly contested, disinformation that costs people their lives, freedom and reputations.
Best wishes
Hi Sandra, I may be unqualified to answer, (only some self-legal training as a self-litigator who found this (WONDERFUL) article in my search for legal mentoring), but I currently faced the same challenge. Here’s what I did so far. 1. Notices to Admit (in NL). to directly challenge the perjured evidence and to collect proof from the adversary. 2. Apply to have the false evidence struck out under a Comtempt or Summary Judgment Application, (if the perjury pertains to the core of their case then it may actually strike out enough to render their case “unsustainable”. (then you win by default so to speak). If not, you may succeed in having some of their key evidence removed to strengthen your position against their weakened position. Please DO NOT take or consider this as legal advice.. but merely as suggestions as to possible legal devices to consider in your (unique case). .. Also, on the psychological/motivational challenges inherent in self-litigating (anything), my go to is Tony Robbins on YouTube. Tony rocks the harsh realties of life. Sandra Olson is also just GREAT for that by way of the fact she understands from the outside and inside of the legal $y$tem, (and it is that). Godspeed to you.
Congratulations Ms. Stark, the work that you are doing will help many Litigants navigate the costly, and emotionally draining Justice system. Finding affordable ways to seek Justice is essential when you apply a “Gender Lens”, as women suffer the most loss in the Judiciary, due to systemic discrimination.
Thanks Alison – certainly much more work yet to be done!
Thank you Alison – as you know, the system is broken and it will take time to transition the legal system and legal service providers to one that is client-centric.
I think you are spot on! (Nine years?!!! ) I wish I was younger and could take part. There’s another niche to be filled, communication. Be it disabilities, cognition difficulties or terminology, on the technology side or the legalise.
I’ve had minor strokes and now having difficulties in all the areas I mentioned. I recently learned it’s a form of Aphasia called DYSPHASIA, no “g” in the spelling. I lost cognitive skills and a lot of my tech knowledge and there’s the physical fatigue. It’s difficult to describe and express to anyone the type of assistance and support services I now require via email or on the phone.
I’m in the east end of Toronto and it boils down to legal aspects in order to get my life back on track and then prepare to get to court.
If someone has patience and the know how of aspects involved, can navigate the legal system, please contact me! ( Not sure if it’s allowed) phone is easier for me 416-755-4995. Bernadette
Some kind of coaching service could be helpful in some circumstances. However, often it is not just a bad legal system that is the problem. I am one of these people who have been actively attacked by the judicial system. The biggest thing I need is someone to go into the court and witness the way clerks and judges are acting toward me.
All this would be interim treatment for a deeper problem. That is that the judicial system in English speaking countries has long been taken over by corrupt lawyers. We need to end the adversarial system and and develop a way of monitoring judges, getting rid of ones who can’t or won’t do the job properly.
PART 1 OF 2
I agree unbundling is a great idea-for appropriately paired client/coaches Ms. Stark.
You hit the nail on the head in addressing the millions of missing clients who can’t afford traditional services. Respectfully the question now is what groups remain excluded & unserved?
A reasonable person privy to the facts would refuse to support a court system dragging anyone through years/decades of unnecessary, frustrating litigation, especially when clients are burdened with doing the work.
MANAGE YOUR OWN LEGAL AFFAIRS
Herein you expose the hidden clause/undisclosed fine print of my experience of unbundling which is to “assist clients who want a coach to help them MANAGE THEIR OWN LEGAL AFFAIRS.” Thank you for stating point blank that this is the nature of that contract.
I learned this costly lesson because the newly minted lawyer with NO personal injury experience, did NOT explain to me, a brain injury survivor facing an impending drop-dead crisis that I, the disabled client was expected to do the work & in essence I remained a self-represented litigant paying my boss to tell me what to do. If I wanted, agreed to or could have managed my own legal affairs, what followed would have been fair. Under the circumstances it was an unconscionable contract at best.
I was dumbfounded when she dumped a mass unorganized medical/legal file at my home & failed to inform me a monthly 7-hour drive, to ensure it was still sitting where we left it, was the plan.
PART 2
In the interest of averting damages bound to result from such an ill-fitting pairing,
the reality of what the coach understood to be her role & what a desperate brain injury survivor THINKS is happening (information asymmetry) must be disclosed in a Plain English contract & reiterated when necessary per the agent’s responsibilities outlined in Providing Legal Services to Persons with Disabilities.
Failure to have this honest conversation about the fact’s unknown to me, my experience was a disaster costing mass distress, wasting precious time & money & in the ugly end forced me to find a lawyer able to save my rights at the last minute.
I’m heartened you’re taking necessary precautions to protect both coaches & the covert self-represented client by ensuring the necessary legal education, specialized training & at least 3 years experience in the area of law services are being offered in are in place before adding coaches to a public directory. Failing to do so would be negligent.
In sum, unbundling is NOT the answer to the legal industries failure to provide “goods & services customarily provided to the public” to millions of missing Persons with Disabilities; despite SCC case law stating it must do so up to the point of undue hardship but continues to hide behind scarce resources excuses the SCC dismissed as an invalid reason for failing to uphold the law per the Constitution/Charter & Human Rights Act.
Currently there remains- nothing for us.
If you ever need a case study of how badly it can go I can provide you with the documented fiasco I’m still paying for.
Best wishes with your book & your new business