TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[BillSikes]

Hi, received a TI invite for Browne Jacobson. Any specific tips/advice greatly appreciated!

What office?

 

[mhs234]

What office?

London office VS

 

[Justin]

Did anyone else apply for HCR Law? I just got a first round interview but it mentions that the AC, If successful is in Cheltenham, not sure if this is a mistake on my part where I applied, or if theyre all there

I think they’re all there

When is your interview?

 

[floral.tcla]

I haven’t got a VS so I’m seeking other options and I’m sure many of you are too, eg the legal cheek virtual vacation scheme. I’ve been getting emails from Platforum9 about virtual, free legal career experience they apparently offer but idk it seems fishy. Idk how they even got my email address. I was wondering if anyone else has received it?

 

[lolasparks]

Anybody heard from the BBC legal diversity thing?
They said today in the emails...

Did you get the email about still sorting through the shortlist?

 

[allenpopi]

Guys, for written exercises, is it okay to write "executive summary" as the first subheading? Or does it seem too rehearsed?

 

[ad.]

Hi! I was just wondering what everybody’s personal thoughts and opinions are on this:
If you have got upcoming VSs, are you still applying to DTCs to hedge your bets or do you prefer to focus on preparing for and converting your VSs (and take some rest from applications as well)?

 

[jojo23]

Did you get the email about still sorting through the shortlist?

At like 9:30pm yeah😅

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Guys, for written exercises, is it okay to write "executive summary" as the first subheading? Or does it seem too rehearsed?

Hiya @allenpopi

I think it really does depend on the context of the written exercise. If the task is framed as a memo, especially to a partner or client, starting with an “Executive Summary” is not only acceptable but often expected. It shows you understand how to frontload key information in a reader friendly way. During a previous vacation scheme, I was actually called up for failing to include an executive summary in a memo which involved providing advice, particularly since there were many different considerations on the table.

That said, it’s important to match your tone and structure to the specific scenario. If the exercise feels more like a short note, internal email, or something more informal, a labelled executive summary might feel slightly overengineered/rehearesed. In those cases, it’s often better to just incorporate your summary into the first paragraph without a heading. I think a good rule of thumb is to take your cue from how the written task is framed. If it resembles a formal legal memo or briefing note, using "Executive Summary" as a subheading shows you understand professional communication norms. Just make sure it’s actually a summary and not an introduction (keep it brief, focused, and clearly reflective of the content that follows).

Hope that's helpful!

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Hi! I was just wondering what everybody’s personal thoughts and opinions are on this:
If you have got upcoming VSs, are you still applying to DTCs to hedge your bets or do you prefer to focus on preparing for and converting your VSs (and take some rest from applications as well)?

Hiya @ad.

This is definitely a strategy I took during my final application cycle. Even though I had three vacation schemes lined up back-to-back, I still continued to draft direct training contract applications to firms. This wasn't just to hedge my bets, but also because these were firms that I was genuinely interested in. Some of these firms also had healthy direct TC intakes (e.g. Freshfields and White & Case), and I didn’t want to close off those opportunities. Interestingly, I found that I wasn’t alone in taking this strategy. Most people I knew who had multiple schemes were still submitting a handful of direct TC applications alongside their preparation.

I think it's ultimately about what you feel comfortable managing. If you think adding a few more applications won’t burn you out or detract from the schemes you already have, it can be a sensible thing to do. That said, don’t underestimate how intense VSs can be, especially if you're in the lucky position of having several schemes. It’s also okay to focus on rest and prep if that’s what you need.

Good luck with your schemes!

 

[Eajob]

Gateley Manchester VS offer!!

Me too Maybe see you there!

 

[ashwright]

Hi @ashwright and huge congrats on getting to the interview stage 🥳 🥳 I am sure you will nail it! My best advice for you to avoid sounding robotic is to not memorize your answers during your preparation. Instead, I think you should simply aim to remember how to link key competencies/motivations with aspects of a wide set of your experiences, and then to practice as much as you can coming up with good answers on the spot. This way, you will develop the most important interviewing skill of all: an ability to express your thought in articulate manner even if you have not considered the issue in the past. I believe this is essential because (i) no matter how much you prepare, it is unlikely that every single question you will be asked will be one you have memorized an answer for; (ii) even if they are, it is unlikely the exact form and framing of every question fits the specific phrasing you have memorized; and (iii) even if you are extremely lucky in this regard as well and everything fits perfectly, given the nerves you will naturally be experiencing during the interview, it is likely you will inadvertently deviate from your pre-prepared 'optimal' answer, which might then make you overthink the issue and end up derailing your entire performance.

More generally, to keep calm on the day, I have two central pieces of advice: to focus on doing well, not on being perfect, and to aim to speak at a slower pace. I have explained these two tips in a lot more depth in a previous post, I will quote it bellow:

Hi, Andrei! Thank you so, so, so much for your message!! I really appreciate your kindness - it honestly means a lot to me. I followed your advice to a tee and, for the first time in a long time, I feel like the interview went really well!! By linking the key competencies with my experiences, I was able to answer every single question they fired at me! Like you said, there were some questions that I could/did not anticipate in my preparation but thanks to your approach, I was able to answer such questions pretty well, pretty quickly.

The best 'side-effect' of taking your approach was that I was way less anxious since I wasn't worried about forgetting a word in my 'script'. As a result, I was able to crack jokes (where appropriate!) and engage in casual conversation. Whilst I'll hear a response in a couple weeks, I feel content in knowing that my interviewers genuinely seemed engaged with and interested in me. Overall, the interview was a far cry from the gruelling interrogation I was fearing.

Thank you, Andrei. You're genuinely a fantastic person & we are genuinely so lucky to have you here on TCLA. You single-handedly helped me feel less anxious about an interview than anyone else I have come across in my life. The legal profession is going to be all the more better with you being part of it. 🤝

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Gateley Manchester VS offer!!

Me too Maybe see you there!

Well done you two! Hope the scheme goes so well for both of you! (I also went to Manchester for the first time last month and fell in LOVE with that city 😭🥰🔥😩😳😩🥰🥰😭♥️♥️😭🥰🔥).

 

[allenpopi]

Hiya @allenpopi

I think it really does depend on the context of the written exercise. If the task is framed as a memo, especially to a partner or client, starting with an “Executive Summary” is not only acceptable but often expected. It shows you understand how to frontload key information in a reader friendly way. During a previous vacation scheme, I was actually called up for failing to include an executive summary in a memo which involved providing advice, particularly since there were many different considerations on the table.

That said, it’s important to match your tone and structure to the specific scenario. If the exercise feels more like a short note, internal email, or something more informal, a labelled executive summary might feel slightly overengineered/rehearesed. In those cases, it’s often better to just incorporate your summary into the first paragraph without a heading. I think a good rule of thumb is to take your cue from how the written task is framed. If it resembles a formal legal memo or briefing note, using "Executive Summary" as a subheading shows you understand professional communication norms. Just make sure it’s actually a summary and not an introduction (keep it brief, focused, and clearly reflective of the content that follows).

Hope that's helpful!

Amazing, thank you @Ram Sabaratnam !

 

[trainee4u]

apparently this is not an original idea.
Found this on LinkedIn

#socratease #birminghack #birminghack2025 #universityofbirmingham… | Siddharth Shringarpure | 102 comments

We won 1st place for the Best AI Hack (that isn’t just an LLM wrapper)! 🥇 In a world where every other LinkedIn post is about another GPT-powered… | 102 comments on LinkedIn

www.linkedin.com

In just 24 hours, we built an AI system that:
💬 Analyses your speech fluency — because “uh” and “like” shouldn’t form half of your vocabulary.
🎭 Tracks eye contact & facial expressions — helping you engage, not just exist in conversations
🧩 Evaluates logical flow — helping you sound more like a TED Talk and less like a hallucinating LLM

turns out the sourcecode is on github, lol, so saves me re-implementing it

SocratEase

SocratEase: Speak smarter with AI-powered feedback.

devpost.com

GitHub - siddharth-shringarpure/SocratEase: SocratEase: Speak smarter with AI-powered feedback.

SocratEase: Speak smarter with AI-powered feedback. - siddharth-shringarpure/SocratEase

github.com

 

[Andrei Radu]

Hi, Andrei! Thank you so, so, so much for your message!! I really appreciate your kindness - it honestly means a lot to me. I followed your advice to a tee and, for the first time in a long time, I feel like the interview went really well!! By linking the key competencies with my experiences, I was able to answer every single question they fired at me! Like you said, there were some questions that I could/did not anticipate in my preparation but thanks to your approach, I was able to answer such questions pretty well, pretty quickly.

The best 'side-effect' of taking your approach was that I was way less anxious since I wasn't worried about forgetting a word in my 'script'. As a result, I was able to crack jokes (where appropriate!) and engage in casual conversation. Whilst I'll hear a response in a couple weeks, I feel content in knowing that my interviewers genuinely seemed engaged with and interested in me. Overall, the interview was a far cry from the gruelling interrogation I was fearing.

Thank you, Andrei. You're genuinely a fantastic person & we are genuinely so lucky to have you here on TCLA. You single-handedly helped me feel less anxious about an interview than anyone else I have come across in my life. The legal profession is going to be all the more better with you being part of it. 🤝

Hi @ashwright I am so happy to hear about your experience - moments like this are why I love doing this job 🥲 thank you so much for the kind words and keep us updated on the response!

 

[member7830]

what's the best way to research a firms market position/ who their biggest competitors are?

 

[Logan1101]

Do internships even matter? They are worse than Vacation schemes!

Even if you get a competitive internship with a firm, you don't get considered for a training contract or any advantage when applying versus thousands of other applicants. It's an absolute joke. I know cause I completed one for both private practice(London) and in-house.

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Hiya @member7830

I just wanted to include the following thread by @Amma Usman which beautifully sets out how you can go about researching firms and their competitors. Hoping this helps you get a start. Let us know if you have any other questions

In this guide, I’ll be talking about how to identify a law firm’s competitors. This is a skill that’s not only useful for applications but also helps you get a much better understanding of the legal industry as a whole. Honestly, this was something I initially struggled with. I found it hard to figure out where one firm stood compared to others in the same space. However, once I cracked the code, everything became so much easier. Applying to firms felt less overwhelming because I already knew the industry inside out. For any firm I applied to, I also had a clear picture of who their competitors were, which made answering application and interview questions so much smoother.

Understanding a law firm’s competitors is crucial because it helps you position yourself as an informed candidate. It shows you’ve done your homework and understand not just the firm but also the broader landscape they operate in.

This is a simple four-step method I use to figure out a firm’s competitors, with some examples to make it easier to follow.

Step 1: Identify the Firm’s Core Practice Areas

Start by looking at the firm’s primary areas of expertise. You can find this information on the firm’s website under "Practice Areas" or "What We Do."


Example 1 (CMS):
CMS has a strong focus on tax law, real estate, and energy and infrastructure.


Example 2 (Transactional Law Firms):
Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins specialise in high-yield debt and large-scale private equity (PE) transactions. Travers Smith focuses on mid-market private equity.


Step 2: Search for the Firm’s Chambers Rankings

Visit Chambers and Partners’ website and check the firm’s rankings in their core practice areas. Focus on the practice areas where the firm is ranked highly.


Example 1 (CMS):
CMS is ranked Band 1 for Tax in the UK.

Example 2 (Transactional Law Firms):
Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins are consistently ranked at the top for Private Equity: High-End Capability and Capital Markets: High-Yield Debt. Travers Smith is ranked in Band 1 or 2 for Private Equity: Mid-Market.


Step 3: Identify Other Firms with Similar Rankings

Look at which other firms are ranked in the same or adjacent bands for those practice areas. These firms are likely competitors as they operate at a similar level of expertise and reputation.


Example 1 (CMS):
For Tax, other firms ranked in Band 1 or Band 2 include PwC Legal, DLA Piper, and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.


Example 2 (Transactional Law Firms):
In high-yield deals, firms like Weil, Gotshal & Manges and Simpson Thacher frequently compete with Kirkland and Latham. In mid-market private equity, Macfarlanes and Addleshaw Goddard are notable competitors to Travers Smith.



Step 4: Analyse the Scope and Type of Deals

Investigate the types of deals the firm works on. Are they advising large multinationals, mid-market clients, or startups? Do they focus on complex cross-border transactions or smaller domestic matters? Identify other firms handling similar client types and deal scopes.


Example 1 (CMS):
CMS often works on mid-market deals and has a strong client base in the energy sector. Firms like Eversheds Sutherland and Pinsent Masons also operate heavily in these areas.


Example 2 (Transactional Law Firms):
High-Yield Private Equity: Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins typically handle large-scale, cross-border transactions for major PE clients like Blackstone and KKR. Their deals are often complex, high-value, and heavily leveraged.

Mid-Market Private Equity: Travers Smith advises mid-market PE firms like Bridgepoint and Inflexion, often on buyouts, exits, and growth capital investments. Their deals are smaller in scope but require tailored, hands-on advisory.


Confirm Your Findings

If a firm appears consistently across all four steps, it’s very likely to be a key competitor.


Example 1 (CMS):
When analysing CMS, you’ll notice that Eversheds Sutherland, Pinsent Masons, and DLA Piper come up repeatedly in tax law, real estate, and mid-market energy deals. These firms are strong competitors of CMS.


Example 2 (Transactional Law Firms):
For high-yield private equity deals, Kirkland & Ellis and Latham & Watkins consistently compete with Simpson Thacher and Weil, Gotshal & Manges. For mid-market private equity deals, Travers Smith faces competition from Macfarlanes and Addleshaw Goddard.


Note:

Although I’ve been going on and on about band rankings, band rankings are not everything. A firm may not have a Band 1 ranking in an area, but still have a good specialty in that practice - within a niche instead. Find out which law firms compete within that niche as well, to decide their respective competitors.

Another special note:

If you’re trying to figure out if firms are competitors, I wouldn’t rely on Band 1 rankings alone. It’s a good starting point, but there’s more to it. For example, just because a firm is Band 1 in infrastructure and five other firms are too, doesn’t mean they’re all direct competitors. You’ve got to dig deeper into what they actually do within that area. Are they working on the same type of projects? One firm might specialise in financing infrastructure deals, while another focuses on disputes or PPP projects, so they might not be directly competing.

You also need to look at where they’re operating. If one firm’s focus is primarily in the UK and the others are big in Asia or Africa, they’re not really clashing for the same clients. Cross-border work is another factor. If two firms have a strong global reach, they’re more likely to compete than if one only works regionally.

Another thing to check is their client base. Are they going after the same kinds of clients, like government bodies or private equity investors? If you notice they’re working for completely different sectors, they might not even be on each other’s radar. Rankings won’t tell you that, but their deal announcements or case studies might.

Then there’s reputation, beyond just being ranked Band 1, are these firms seen as leaders in the field? Do they publish thought pieces, host events, or push innovation like new ESG approaches? Sometimes a firm might technically rank the same but not have the same level of influence in the market.

Volume and size of deals also matter. A firm doing smaller or mid-sized infrastructure work won’t really be competing with a firm that handles billion-pound projects. It’s about scale, not just rankings.

One thing that really gives it away is lateral hires. If two firms are always poaching talent from each other in a certain area, it’s a big sign they see each other as competitors. And finally, you’ve got to think about strategy. If a firm has publicly said it’s focusing on growing its infrastructure practice and targeting the same regions as another Band 1 firm, that’s a clear overlap.

So yeah, Band 1 rankings are helpful, but they’re just scratching the surface. You’ve got to think about clients, geography, deal size, and strategy to really figure out if firms are competing. It’s all about the bigger picture.

Why This Approach Works

This method saves time and ensures accuracy by systematically cross-referencing rankings, deal types, and client profiles.

Best of luck this cycle… we’re rooting for you !!!

 

[Ram Sabaratnam]

Do internships even matter? They are worse than Vacation schemes!

Even if you get a competitive internship with a firm, you don't get considered for a training contract or any advantage when applying versus thousands of other applicants. It's an absolute joke. I know cause I completed one for both private practice(London) and in-house.

Heya @Logan1101

Having been in a similar situation before, I understand where your frustration is coming from. It’s disheartening to secure competitive internships and then find they don’t translate into more long-term opportunities at those organisations.

But I don't think it follows that these experiences are without value. The fact that you were able to access both competitive private practice and in-house internships is a pretty big achievement. Even if the training contract didn’t materialise, you’ve gained something substantial: a clearer sense of what lawyers do, and what kinds of legal environments you operate well in. That’s definitely not trivial.

To get the most out of these for future applications, I think it's worth thinking about what these internships gave you that you didn’t have before? What felt interesting? What did you observe about legal practice? What kind of problems did you get to help address? What kind of tasks did you get to carry out? Think also about what these experiences taught you about your own interests and aptitudes. This kind of reflection can be powerful when you get to drafting future applications, not only as evidence of your clear competence, but as an indication to recruiters of your thoughtfulness and resilience.

Again, none of this negates the disappointment. But it does mean your work and experiences have value, even if it isn't yet obvious to you. Really encourage you to leverage these achievements going forward. Let us know if you have any questions about how you can do that effectively. Happy to help.