by Peter Garsden (as published in the Delia Venables Newsletter for Lawyers Sept/Oct 04 edition)

In my previous article in this newsletter, in May/June 2004, I described how, back in February 2003, our firm, Abney Garsden McDonald, consisting of 2 Partners and 17 fee earners, attempted to migrate to the paperless office. I explained in the article that the centre of operations must be an efficient computer network with shared folders, efficient fast scanning machines and an administrative system which enables documents to be found easily.

I described the hardware and software one needed, how to organise items on the network and the administrative systems that we had introduced to make sure that there were sufficient back-ups on paper and electronically of all documentation in case anything went wrong, and how we delivered post electronically in the morning.

At the end of the article, I explained that our attempt to go paperless had only been a partial success due to the fact that most of the fee-earners were unhappy to completely embrace the concept. The culture change was too sudden and alarming. I include in this article more detail on what we did and the problems encountered and describe where we are up to now. I finish by giving you my forecast for the future as well as my concept of what the paperless office could be like.

Where did we go wrong?

Before we introduced the paperless office, the subject was mentioned at numerous meetings. We also held 3 or 4 user group meetings to which all staff, from senior fee earners to administrative operatives, were invited. We discussed possible pitfalls and how the new system would work.
A great deal of time was spent devising a postal delivery system which was simple and straightforward. The post is scanned in, saved to a back up folder divided into years, months and fee earners and then emailed to the relevant fee earner. Additionally, the paper post is delivered. We ensure that the process is completed by mid morning.

From October 2002 until the end of January 2003, we operated the 2 systems side by side. In other words, the paper was not only put on the individual files, but also distributed electronically so that it could be saved in the electronic folders. The purpose of this was to get the fee earners accustomed to the new system.

Although "D Day" was set as 1st February 2003, the message was not properly communicated to all fee earners, who were not aware that from the above date, all paper folders would no long be updated. The idea was that we would only have a paper file up to the end of January 2003. All new files would only be opened on computer and there would be no cardboard equivalent. Unfortunately the culture shock was too great for some of the senior fee earners.

After 2 or 3 months, the fee earners called a meeting and complained that they did not know where they were up to with their files. It was taking them much longer to work out what had happened on the file. They were feeling lost, frustrated and were starting to panic. Why was this?

* The fee earners were not universally as adept at using the computer as I had imagined. They could not find their way round the various folders and programmes as quickly and efficiently as I had anticipated. They were becoming frustrated when things went wrong.

* Taking away the paper file was conceptually too sudden and was creating a feeling of insecurity.

* To save time, the fee earners were delegating the job of saving their post to secretaries. Unfortunately an insufficient description of the file was being used. This meant that one could not look at the history of post and see immediately what had happened. ie. A file description such as "04.07.23LET (To Client)" rather than "04.07.23LET (Client re. Medical Reports Sent)".

* The fee earners found it much easier to flick backwards and forwards through a correspondence clip to see what had happened than to open and close, sequentially, files on the computer. Unfortunately, Windows is not yet powerful enough to emulate flicking through a correspondence file quickly. It is still necessary, for certain purposes, to print off documents, say, for an incoming fee earner who wants to read into an existing case.

* We use a "Case Monitor Sheet" to highlight the major steps in a case such as the issue of Proceedings, service of Pleadings, obtaining of records etc. to use the example of Claimant Personal Injury work. Unfortunately, the Case Monitor Sheets were not being routinely and regularly filled in. It is fundamental that the Case Monitor Sheet be completed with the major steps in the case. Anyone taking over the file or a paralegal who is asked to assist, can immediately get an overview of where the case is up to. Our "Case Monitor Sheet" is a replacement for the "Case History" that one usually sees in Case Management Systems.

Where are We Up to Now?

Following the rebellion by the fee earners, it was agreed that I would not force them to go paperless if they were against it. Contrary to my wishes, therefore, the fee earners decided to go back to paper files. Thus, we now have a duplicated system therefore, whereby all the paper is saved on the network/scanned in, as well as printed off and filed by the secretaries. Unfortunately this duplication of effort does not assist in the efficiency goal we originally set ourselves. The fee earners, however, are happier.
We still run the Group Actions completely paperless. Income and outgoing documents are scanned and saved on the computer network. It is much easier and quicker to find a document electronically in a file, which might run to over 100 lever arch files on paper.

Personally, I continue to run my individual files paperless without any difficulty. I find it difficult to understand the difficulty the fee earners find with a paperless system. Undoubtedly the administrative work required when a file is opened is somewhat alarming when one considers how many checks and balances have to be carried out, namely the money laundering personal identification system, conflict checking, paper file opening, accounts data inputting etc. The paperless system does away with a lot of this wasteful administrative work.

The support staff and paralegals were very supportive of the paperless system. It means that when a paralegal was asked to work on a file, he/she did not have to climb 3 flights of stairs to retrieve it. He could immediately ascertain what was going on on screen. The secretaries found it much easier to refer to previous documents and correspondence on screen than to find paper in a file that may not be with her tape. Support staff enthusiasm may be related to the their level of IT and computer skills. Not all senior staff were brought up with keyboards and computers.

The difficulty sparked off an intensive computer training programme for fee earners - "Tips and Tricks". This helped give them more confidence with the computer and speeded up their operative skills. We covered such matters as efficient organisation of incoming emails, the use of internet favourites, links, toolbars, keyboard shortcuts etc. It is somewhat ironic that some solicitors firms, which use Case Management Systems, do not even provide any secretarial support and expect the fee earners to do most of their own typing.

We have recently changed our old analogue tape machines for new digital dictation equipment, which will hopefully speed up the processing of correspondence and save time. The use of digital equipment with sound files means that the monitoring of work is easier. Dictating off-site becomes much more efficient.

We already use computerised time recording and accounts software. We are about to install, for some work types, the Eclipse Legal Proclaim Case Management System. The fee earners have said that when we have Case Management, the migration to the paperless office will be far easier. The plan is to attempt to go completely paperless once the case management system is installed. There is no doubt that the Case Management screen gives a much better overall view of the file and core details than our present Microsoft Word and folder system. The name, address, telephone number and core facts about the case are presented to the fee earner immediately on screen. There is also a better Case History window with more space for a description of each item to be inserted. The Case History window can be sorted into different types of document. One can thus see, for example, all the medical reports in chronological date order without having to go in and out of different folders. It seems that, conceptually, the Case Management System is a lot closer to the paper file than our present Microsoft folder and sub folder system.

Costs Assessment

When our files are ready for billing, we copy onto a CD ROM all incoming and outgoing post and send it to our Cost Draftsman's firm, who are located in High Wycombe. This is a lot cheaper than sending large boxes of paper through the DX system. The worry of paper going missing can be alleviated. If we lose a CD ROM, we can easily replace it. The same thing is not true of paper.
Initially our Cost Draftsman attempted to use 2 computer screens to view the various letters. Eventually, however, they abandoned this system. What they now do – and the same applies to Counsel as far as I can ascertain – is to print off the entire file and cost it in the old fashioned way. It seems that should one of our cases go to detailed assessment, we will have to provide the Court with a dummy paper file rather than a CD ROM. Counsel, who have been sent a CD ROM, do not like it generally and prefer a paper brief.

Paperless Trial

There is no doubt that in a case where disclosable documentation is extremely large, efforts should be made to use a paperless electronic system. Where there are many parties to a case, it is much quicker to create a bundle of documents on CD ROM using a database in the background than to prepare several large paper bundles, which can be seen being delivered to the Royal Courts of Justice on trolleys. It is much easier to send a CD ROM to each of the parties through the post than a large bundle of documents. Counsel finds it much easier to transport electronic discs to Court than large bundles of paper. The cost of discovery is much less. One can fit 650 megabytes of data onto a CD ROM and 4.7 gigabytes onto a DVD. This is the equivalent of thousands of pages of A4. If one compares the cost of paper at between 10p and 20p per page, the cost savings are obvious.
There is not space in this article to explain how it is possible to conduct an entire civil trial electronically on screen rather than paper. Special software, however, is available using light pens and touch screen technology. Both Judges and Counsel must be trained to use this system. In one of our largest Group Actions we contemplated running the trial on screen. We engaged the services of Kroll Ontrack, Cardinal Tower, 12 Farringdon Road, London, EC1M 3HS. Tel: 0207 549 9600, who scanned in and databased our entire document population onto CD ROM with optical character recognition text to enable us to carry out word searches. Undoubtedly, this system saved us an enormous amount of time when conducting evidential research.

It is unlikely that the cases will go to trial and therefore the paperless Court system will not be tested.

Kroll Ontrack, however, have conducted a number of large commercial fraud trials using this system. The big enquiries such as Shipman, Bloody Sunday and others have been carried out in this way, with consequent time and cost savings for the Court system.

Website Technology

A lot has been written about the use of "Deal Rooms" to negotiate settlement of cases, particularly where the parties are on different sides of the world, using secure websites. Keith Ross of Ross & Co. is a major proponent of this system.

We have used secure areas of our website to publish progress on the various Group Actions we are running. It is a lot easier and cheaper to disseminate information about the progress of a case by using the internet than to send out a mail merge letter which can run to thousands of pieces of paper. Obviously, one needs to tell the various solicitors in the Group that something has happened. One can direct them, however, to the website, by sending everyone an email far more easily than individual mail merge letters. Most solicitors these days are connected to the internet and can access information quite easily. Because the internet is not completely secure, one must be careful that the information published on even a secure site is not extremely sensitive.

Feedback from my last article

Following my last article, I received quite a lot of feedback from interested solicitors. I continued to be interested in hearing from any firm who have attempted to go paperless in the same way as I have. I highlight one or two queries briefly.

Postal delivery software

I explained in my last article that with most Case Management Systems there can be purchased a scanned image postal delivery system. Eclipse Legal supply a scanning and distribution system which is more efficient than our present email facility. One is presented with a Batch Scanning Screen with a large window to view the image once it is scanned in. The idea is that first of all one selects all documents and scans them in en masse. One then views each document and attaches it to the appropriate reference or fee earner. This post is automatically attached to the case and appears in the fee earner's inbox without it having to be delivered by email. This is better than the email system because:

* Sending large images through the email system slows it down and places demands on the network

* Many duplicate copies of the post appearing in email outboxes and inboxes is avoided.

* If post is wrongly delivered it can easily be transferred to the correct addressee without using the email system.

It is prudent to save each document separately. Large images containing main different documents are not only difficult to navigate but also place demands upon any computer network. The Case Management Delivery system also creates an automatic backup of all the scanned in post. The delivery system for the admin staff is thus quicker and more efficient. The post will thus be delivered.

Summary

The lessons I have learnt from the process can be summarised as follows:

* Introduce the paperless office slowly with a pilot scheme if possible.

* Make sure all your fee earners embrace the system and are completely on board before making the change.

* Do not try to create a completely paperless environment. One must retain paper documents in various different situations. Courts still need to see original documents.

* Train all staff thoroughly.

* Be prepared to use the old-fashioned paper system willingly when requested.

* Do not get frustrated if other people are not as enthusiastic as you are.

The future

My vision of the future is:-

* An office with no paper, less dust, more space and a much cleaner environment where all members of staff can access any document they need quickly and efficiently on screen. The frustration caused by losing a piece of paper will go away. Frustrating hours spent searching for paper, which has gone missing, will no longer be spent.

* Fee earners will spend much less of their time shuffling pieces of paper from one place to another. Administrative boring tasks will be automated and lawyers will spend more of their time doing what they are good at, namely advising on the law and tactical guidance.

* Secretaries will change their role from typists to legal assistants. The role of paralegal and secretary will merge more than at present.

* Communication systems with clients will improve through the use of email, the internet and other systems.

* Cases will run more quickly and smoothly. Time delays caused by slow communication systems will be reduced.

I hope I have not painted Nirvana but a reality, which is not too far away. I appreciate that governments are committed to introducing technology so as to improve efficiency. I think my vision is probably 10 years away. Only time will tell.

© Peter Garsden, Abney Garsden McDonald

Peter Garsden is a Partner in Abney Garsden McDonald, Solicitors, 37 Station Road, Cheadle Hulme, Cheshire SK8 5AF. Tel: 0161 482 882. Email: peter@abneys.co.uk. Website: www.abneys.co.uk.

Abney Garsden McDonald is in the Legal 500, a member of the Multi-Party Action Panel and has members of the firm on the Personal Injury Panel. We specialise in Child Abuse compensation claims and general Personal Injury work. Peter Garsden is a founder member of ACAL (Association of Child Abuse Lawyers www.childabuselawyers.com).