[Luckypupil]

I should have said they wanted it done on the cheap as well

[Luckypupil]

(Original post by Crazy Jamie)
You've touched on an important point here. There is a distinction to be made between things that applicants do for themselves, and things that they do because they think Chambers want to see them. It is the former actions that not only have more chance of standing out on an application, but which in my view actually improve the quality of a candidate in interview. Simply put; if you are genuinely content with what you already have when you walk into a pupillage interview, you will come across as more relaxed and less desperate, which goes a long way to making a better impression. When I had my interview from which I was offered pupillage, I was in a position that I could genuinely have stayed in had my pupillage search not been successful, and as such I wanted pupillage, but I wasn't desperate for it. The distinction is important, and it harks back to what I was saying in an earlier post about candidates making the right decisions for themselves, and not the decisions that they think they people expect them to take.

Nicely put

[seraphina]

(Original post by Giving Up)
I am drained and I am giving up. Good luck to everyone else.

(Original post by Luckypupil)
My advice would be to give up.

By that I mean concentrate on getting a really good job, that can be legally related or not. You will get your confidence up, your sense of purpose will return AND you can reapply the following year being in the comforting position of not especially caring about whether you get pupillage.

I'd massively second Lucky Pupil's suggestion. I currently work for the Civil Service, on the Fast Stream programme. It's still my dream to be a barrister, I'm still very much going for it and it still hurts when I get a rejection (as some of my other posts will demonstrate). But nonetheless I know that ultimately, if I don't ever get a pupillage, whilst I'll be disappointed, I'll still have a good, permanent graduate job.

My job isn't directly legal (in that I'm not working as a government lawyer) but the government has to deal with loads of legal related issues - eg. I've helped prepare for a judicial review and developed the policy for a new bill. I don't get the impression that any sets have taken the view that this shows a lack of determination. I think that most panels understand how difficult it is to get a pupillage and appreciate that having a decent back up plan is sensible and are also genuinely interested in hearing about my experiences. Also, I definitely feel more confident at interviews, both because I know it realistically doesn't matter as much if I fail (however keen I am to succeed) and because I've experienced challenging situations at work and take the view that if I can deal with an angry Cabinet Minister I can deal with a probing pupillage panel.

I'm not necessarily saying that the civil service specifically would be the right alternative choice for everyone, but going for another grad job that appeals to you - banking, accountancy, working for a charity or a big company etc etc - shouldn't hinder and may help your applications, arguably more than the paralegal type jobs and will also allow you to get on with your life.

I'd also suggest that Giving Up slows down a bit on all the pro-bono and mini-pupillages. Once you've done a bit of each - enough to "tick the boxes" and to have something interesting to talk about, I suspect there's a massive degree of diminishing returns in doing more. And anyone who has had a reasonable amount of interviews before probably doesn't need to polish the cv much more, just focus on filling in the form well, developing interview technique and hoping that luck work out for them. I still try to do a bit of pro bono when I get the chance (which sadly is increasingly rarely thanks to my work load), but that's more because I love and feel strongly about the work I do (with the National Centre for Domestic Violence) than to look good on a CV. Next holiday, do something lovely and entirely un-pupillage related, and try to make this holiday be soon!

Finally, there's nothing worse than an armchair psychologist, but you do sound rather more unhappy than the average struggling applicant. It's hard to read someone's real tone from a post, but if you're honestly as mentally and physically exhausted as you say, and this is all the time, not just for a day or so each time you get a rejection, I'd cautiously suggest it might be worth speaking to your doctor in case you're a bit depressed or similar.

[tarheelboy]

Hi all. I'm currently a tenant and was involved in reading applications this year at my chambers. I've have decided to post to give you all a bit of general but hopefully helpful advice for those who are applying again next year. I've been reading this thread today and feeling in turn sad and happy for various posters here, because it was only a few years ago that I myself was pressing refresh on a similar thread on this forum constantly waiting to hear about rejections, acceptances and interviews. I was lucky enough to get pupillage at the set of my choice and be taken on, but I remember exactly how this feels.

Here is my (unofficial and personal, I can only speak for myself and not for my chambers or anyone else) guidance on what I personally thinks works and doesn't work. It goes without saying that not every barrister will form the same view on every application or on what the perfect application would be.

1. Tailor your application to the chambers you are applying to. Really do your homework. This includes getting the name of the chambers right and clicking the right buttons on OLPAS. It's heartbreaking to read what might be a good application that has been sent to the wrong set. But more importantly it means that you have to realise that you are not applying to be a barrister in general, you are applying to a very specific place that might be your home for the rest of your career. So, don't say you want to do chancery or media law when that is not a practice area of the chambers you're applying to. If you have a background in human rights and activism and are applying to somewhere commercial, explain why you are suddenly changing your focus. If you are a former police officer applying to a very defence oriented, lefty set, explain why. Have a compelling reason. It means that you go from being a person who looks like they have no idea what chambers is about to an applicant who is interesting and different from the others and stands out.

2. If a set has a 'brand', take it seriously. It's not good enough to just say 'I am really interested in family law' or 'I care about human rights'. 99% of applicants are going to say that. You have to actually prove it. Not everyone has the time and funds to do 65,000 mini-pupillages or work at international tribunals and the people reading your application know that. But even if you have had to work at Starbucks to get yourself through university (and you should explain that because it can reflect well), you still have to show some evidence of genuine interest, whether it's volunteering for witness support or working with smaller, local, community organisations or organisations like FRU. Sometimes it is worth taking the time to build up an appealing CV before applying. In terms of things like FRU, it is also obvious when someone has just done the training or one case and then never gone back. If FRU is the only such experience on your application it is worth spending some real time there. Generally, it is quite impressive when someone has put in a good chunk of devoted time to and organisation or project and can speak comfortably about the work they did there (it's better than a week here and week there all over the place).

3. 2 or 3 mini-pupillages is great (especially at chambers similar to the one you are applying to), 11 is kind of pointless.

4. Don't be afraid to be yourself and let some personality shine through. Reading stacks of these applications can be tiring and when you read one that has a 'voice' and through which you can get a sense of the person, it is hugely refreshing. That being said, show judgment. Don't make corny jokes or write poems. You also don't have to say that you've wanted to be a barrister since you were 5 years old. Generally applications that show maturity and evidence of genuine interest are better than those that just make vague claims.

5. Get a barrister to read over your application for you. This is probably the most useful advice I can give.

6. Remember that at this stage you are likely a person with substantial qualifications and work experience, who is probably very marketable in a number of fields. The Bar is not the be all and end all of life.

I'm sorry if this advice is really general and obvious but it was apparent to me that many applications were in need of it. I'm happy to answer more specific questions if anyone here has any, again really just from my own personal standpoint.

p.s. I also think LuckyPupil and Seraphina are right. If you are feeling pupillage application exhaustion and are drained, if you have time it might be good to forget about pupillages for a year or so and use your legal skills elsewhere, then think about whether you want to reapply. Having some solid work experience under your belt may well make you a better applicant, not to mention give yourself some distance from the process and a place from which to reflect upon it.

[InnerTemple]

(Original post by tarheelboy)
-x-

Thank you for taking the time to post this.

[tarheelboy]

(Original post by InnerTemple)
Thank you for taking the time to post this.

I'm happy to help if I can.

Another thing that worked for me, but may not be for everyone, is that the year I was successful I only applied to 3-4 chambers after a 2-year break of not applying. They were places that had a similar focus and I really wanted to go to, making the process far less stressful and meaning that I had more time to meaningfully build up my CV in a way that would really appeal to chambers of that kind.

[jcasey1989]

Has aanyone ever done either a second round interview at Hardwicke chambers or a first round at Crown Office? If so what can I expect?

[legallovely]

Has anyone heard from 1 High Pavement?

[user1434]

Has anyone heard nothing from St Ive's? I see that many received rejection letters in the post on Thursday/Friday last week and from what I can tell either one or two people received invitations to interview via phone call on Friday lunch time (all of which are to be this Saturday according to chambers). Anyone else got nothing so far?

I'm guessing its either (1) a now very late/lost rejection in the post (the letters were presumably sent out on Wednesday and the stamp I provided them was a first class one), (2) the person phoning around invitations has other major time commitments so its taking time to do so, or (3) they didn't receive my application in the first place despite being posted in plenty of time.

[GreenMatt]

I've heard nothing whatsoever from them.

Matt

[charly533]

(Original post by jcasey1989)
Has aanyone ever done either a second round interview at Hardwicke chambers or a first round at Crown Office? If so what can I expect?

Hey. For the second round at Hardwicke I was sent an ethical problem in advance which was discussed at length during interview. I was also given a scenario about making a presentation in Chambers and was asked how I would go about it/keep people interested etc. My application was discussed in much greater depth and I was also specifically asked why I had applied to Hardwicke. I vaguely recall there being some questions about current affairs as well. There were approximately 6 members of Chambers conducting the interview and the questions were delivered evenly between them all.
That's all I can really remember I'm afraid but I hope that helps to some degree!

[getmetothebar]

(Original post by legallovely)
Has anyone heard from 1 High Pavement?

I haven't heard anything! Hoping its not a silent rejection.

[getmetothebar]

Has anyone else who put down their BPTC results as predicted on their application to Iscoed Chambers had an e-mail this evening asking for an update on them? Just wondering if it's a generic e-mail or its a good sign that I've received it.

[Pupillage123]

(Original post by NedTheCat)
You don't even need to have BPTC/LPC to be a paralegal so that's always an option. One word of warning though: personally I think the 'average' candidate looks like this...2.1, Very Competent, Paralegal. And there's a glut of defendant personal injury paralegal jobs out there at the moment so there'll be a lot of those on applications. So you may want to try and mix it up a little to make yourself stand out. But make sure you're working in law whatever you do.



This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Thank you NedTheCat, really helpful :-)

[london law girl]

Anyone else got an interview at 4KBW (Timothy Raggatt) this week? No info provided whatsoever...which is a bit worrying for a single round!

[InnerTemple]

(Original post by tarheelboy)
I'm happy to help if I can.

I do have a question which you (or others) may be able to help with.

I have recently passed my FRU test and will be heading into the office to pick up a case sometime this week. Should I still list FRU on application forms (being honest and stating that I am new to it so have not picked up a case yet)?

I am thinking that listing FRU shows that I am keen to get experience, though I appreciate that merely passing the test does not say much more than this. Would listing FRU in the above way be damaging/ pointless/ acceptable?

[Crazy Jamie]

(Original post by InnerTemple)
I have recently passed my FRU test and will be heading into the office to pick up a case sometime this week. Should I still list FRU on application forms (being honest and stating that I am new to it so have not picked up a case yet)?

I am thinking that listing FRU shows that I am keen to get experience, though I appreciate that merely passing the test does not say much more than this. Would listing FRU in the above way be damaging/ pointless/ acceptable?

I would think it entirely appropriate to note it down on any application form stating that you have recently been accepted into it (or whatever the most accurate wording would be in that regard). FRU is a relatively recent trend for those seeking pupillage, and most practising barristers either do not know what it is or know very little about it. There is a good chance that you would be asked about it in any interview, which would provide an ideal opportunity to clarify matters if need be. But as far as I am aware it is far from the case that everyone passes the FRU test anyway, so I would certainly be putting it down on your applications even at this early stage. Even if you haven't actually had a case yet I would still consider it appropriate to note it if I was reading your application, and I expect others in the same position would too.

[InnerTemple]

(Original post by Crazy Jamie)
I would think it entirely appropriate to note it down on any application form stating that you have recently been accepted into it (or whatever the most accurate wording would be in that regard).

Thanks for the reply!

[tarheelboy]

(Original post by InnerTemple)
I do have a question which you (or others) may be able to help with.

I have recently passed my FRU test and will be heading into the office to pick up a case sometime this week. Should I still list FRU on application forms (being honest and stating that I am new to it so have not picked up a case yet)?

I am thinking that listing FRU shows that I am keen to get experience, though I appreciate that merely passing the test does not say much more than this. Would listing FRU in the above way be damaging/ pointless/ acceptable?

Definitely put it down. It always helps. I was talking more about when people mention FRU 2 years before the app but have done nothing since.

Also, I think most practising barristers will know what FRU is!

[iMaiden]

(Original post by InnerTemple)
I do have a question which you (or others) may be able to help with.

I have recently passed my FRU test and will be heading into the office to pick up a case sometime this week. Should I still list FRU on application forms (being honest and stating that I am new to it so have not picked up a case yet)?

I am thinking that listing FRU shows that I am keen to get experience, though I appreciate that merely passing the test does not say much more than this. Would listing FRU in the above way be damaging/ pointless/ acceptable?

FRU ask that you don't hold yourself out as one of our reps unless you've taken out a case and been authorised to act on it. With that in mind, I'd only suggest that you word what you put on your application carefully.