Barlow Lyde & Gilbert

Recent BLG press releases have suggested that the faction at Barlows that wants a narrow focus on high-end litigation work has nosed ahead in the debate over where the firm should be headed. Here, Dedman is trumpeting the appointment of the other non-contentious bods, but there was a release recently which indicated that Barlows would no longer be investing in their non-contentious capability, so they won't be there long! Very odd. I wonder who is in charge there.

Nemesis -14 Nov 2007 | 11:30

Barlows didn't issue a press release saying they were ceasing transactional business. We are a client and checked with BLG directly. Their transactional team is growing AND they are picking up new litigation work so no conflict and no problem with their strategy or leadership.

Samantha -22 Nov 2007 | 17:44

Samantha's comment looks suspiciously as though she is not a client at all, but Richard Dedman or one of his marketing minions in disguise.

BLG -10 Dec 2007 | 14:44

Top equity partners at BLG are now earning more than 20% less than they were in 2003/4. This has had two predictable results; a number of real heavy-hitters at BLG (Canning, Warren-Smith, Mendelowitz) have walked. Second, BLG finds it hard to attract the calibre of people they want to join them. A number of lateral hires have been made recently, but none of these people are genuine leaders in their field. The last person BLG got of that calibre was Tim Taylor in 2002.In truth, BLG should not beat itself up about its falling profitability. It remains what it always was; an insurance practice and insurance rates are miserable compared to most other lines of business in the City. In the early/mid 2000's, BLG experienced abnormally good trading conditions. Canning's team had a series of big, high-profile accountant negligence cases (which resulted in considerable jealousy against her from some of the men) and the reinsurance dept put in stellar results. Canning has now gone and reinsurance work fell off the end of cliff 18 months ago. However, when things were going well, BLG's management convinced itself that it knew what it was doing (rather than simply being in the right place at the right time) and embarked on a publicity drive which until then had been a very un-BLG thing to do. That culminated in the truly awful ad campaign in 2006. The good results also masked the chronic waste and lack of vision in certain areas; e.g. corporate and overseas offices.BLG now has a new management structure but still seems to lack a unified vision for the future. There remains a strong faction which wants to focus on high-end litigation, pretty well to the exclusion of everyone else.All of this is reminiscent of Davies Arnold Cooper in the 1990's.

Super Blue -11 Jan 2008 | 12:11

Associates at BLG know that insurance rates can never support leading market salaries. The difficulty many associates have is the cognitive dissonance of many of the partners when it comes to dissatisfaction. They think that a departure generally means an inability to cope with supposedly brilliant work. Rather, most departures are the result of an inability to deliver the expected magic circle quality with less resources.

Anonymous -02 Jul 2008 | 18:55

The last contribution strikes a chord with me. I left the reinsurance "team" a while ago for a far better position. A certain partner in the department put it around that I was not up to the job. The reality was that despite some extravagant promises made to me as to the quality of the work I could expect, there was in fact hardly any work at all.

anon -21 Aug 2008 | 16:58

re the above : this may explain why I get called or emailed virtually every day by a BLG lawyer on a case I have on with them. I thought they were just seriously on top of things and eager to get on with it. Perhaps it is because they do not have enough cases on to be busy (and therefore giving me time to respond to correspondence)?? Good people though, and very nice offices - glad I am not paying for them though. Overheads must be a killer. I have heard though that although the reception is vast (it really is!) and the meeting rooms impressive, the back offices for the lawyers and support staff are not quite so spacious.

Opposition Insurance Lawyer -23 Sep 2008 | 13:20

No doubt BLG get a good hourly rate to help pay for the overheads. The DWF offices in Leeds are very impressive with huge meeting rooms (for power meetings no doubt, ho ho) but have to be paid for with rock-bottom northern hourly rates. Ouch. That's gotta hurt 'em eventually even at northern prices per square foot - especially the personal insurance department who cannot charge the same fees are their corporate colleagues. How long before DWF does a Hammonds or a DLA and ditches the PI department to go corporate through and through? 3-5 years max I'd say, especially as the Ricksons lot are apparently not too happy with the outcome of the takeover (sorry, "merger").

re the killer comment above: -24 Sep 2008 | 18:15

The contributor above who once worked in the reinsurance "team" might like to know that the reinsurance department is no more, having been merged with (i.e. taken over by) another more profitable insurance-focused department. Given the amount of effort and money that once went into promoting reinsurance (or more correctly, one individual in that department) its strange how Barlows kept that one quiet from the press.

Catalogue Man -12 Feb 2009 | 12:12

Re the above. Colin Croly, advertised on BLG's website as "Mr Reinsurance" has just left. Come on Barlow's publicity machine!

Catalogue Man -12 Mar 2009 | 12:21

Oh Dear!

They were doing ok in Manchester - it looked quite promising - until they saddled themselves with a load of Halliwells detritus!!!!

doomonger -03 Aug 2010 | 17:32

Doomonger, you can only work in Plexus Mcr or Kennedys Sheffield. Which one?

Cecil singh -17 Sep 2010 | 20:54

Truth

to Cecil: BLG simply haven't got the work in Manchester to keep the Halliwells Insurance Team busy. Bottom line, Chartis were not up for being sold like a chattel. If they were, things might be different.

South Yorks Girl -20 Sep 2010 | 22:06

Keep up

To South Yorks Girl, here's a little update for you. Should keep em busy now, eh?

http://www.legalweek.com/legal-week/news/1898664/barlows-lands-chartis-panel-role-wake-halliwells-takeover-deal

Anonymous -01 Dec 2010 | 15:05

To keep up

It is not about being busy but being one firm. Barrows M'cr is a proper 'pack it and stack it' fixed-fee bulk operation. Wafer-thin margins, reduced partnership prospects over the next few years and no dosh to give out at pay review. How can Barlows compete with the established regional bulk provider operations without harming the premium City office/reputation/work? Answer: it can't!

ken Barlows -27 Jan 2011 | 22:51

Ken is correct.

Barlows have a dilemma and Ken is right to flag it up. Most firms are looking to increase the value and complexity of the work they do, not the opposite. Barlows M'cr is the poor relation to the City and overseas offices. I bet most M'cr Barlows employees haven't met more than two partners from the City office.

D Barlow -02 Feb 2011 | 10:17

Brain drain

Does the management at Barlows realise that it's the clever guys leaving? Randall, Strong, Howell, Munro, Parker et al. If it wasn't for the Aerospace and Employment bods hanging around Barlows could quickly become a personal injury firm.

Amy -23 Feb 2011 | 15:22

To Amy

What a silly, snobbish comment. A lawyer's IQ is not determined by the area of law he/she choses to practice. It's attitudes like yours that give the legal profession a bad name.

Observer -24 Feb 2011 | 13:13