finally got a VS offer 😭 was starting to lose all hope that i can start training in 2027
Test Yourself with SQE Questions - Join Us On 9 April 2025 at 6pm
Think you'll take the SQE in the future? Join us at 6pm on 9 April 2025 with BPP to test how well you would perform. You'll practise answering mock SQE questions based on your law degree (or conversion course if you're non-law). There are prizes for the highest scoring participants!
Register HereThat sounds pretty harsh. Was there any other feedback?Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.
Nothing substantive/ something I can improve upon; I was told I got "excellent scores" in all components and was a strong candidate, but that it came down to these "details" in making a decision.That sounds pretty harsh. Was there any other feedback?
If I may ask, was your work experience in your home country at the overseas offices of international law firms?Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.
My country's regulations don't allow international firms to set up offices. Nonetheless, a chunk of it was at national Tier-1 corporate law firmsIf I may ask, was your work experience in your home country at the overseas offices of international law firms?
This is extremely harsh especially because you weren’t even asked a question directly in relation to this and seems to me like you indirectly prove your commitment in your answersJust got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.
Hi, this is completely normalDuring a VS if we’re mostly and more naturally given work by trainees (particularly our trainee buddy) rather than our supervisor (because they don’t necessarily have much we can help on at the moment), is that problematic, how would it reflect in feedback given? (Assuming our supervisor knows what tasks we’re doing and what we’re up to throughout the day, and assuming we also speak to them on a daily basis so they know we’re present). Thanks in advance for your advice
I believe (and hope) that this experience was an anomaly - many of my international friends have secured VS & TC offers this cycle & the feedback from my other AC did not focus on my background in the slightest! As non-natives, we unfortunately have extra hurdles in the recruitment process immigrationally, financially, and naturally, but they are surmountable, as others have done before us. Wishing you the best of luck with your applications💫This is extremely harsh especially because you weren’t even asked a question directly in relation to this and seems to me like you indirectly prove your commitment in your answers
Really scared now as an international student myself! You are clearly a great candidate and I’m sure you’ll get an offer elsewhere
Thank you @Andrei Radu! Your insights and own experiences are genuinely so helpful, as well as Jessica's. Really appreciate all the helpAs @Jessica Booker said I think this will depend on the details of your situation, but I think if you have genuine questions that a partner would be well-placed to answer it would likely be fine to take them up on the offer. I was in this situation as well last year when following the VS a partner at a firm called me and offered to keep in contact and answer any questions during the period I was deciding on the TC offer. We ended up having two 15/20 minute conversations which helped me understand the firm's market position, competitors, and strategy in a lot more depth. I could tell the partner did not mind speaking with me at all about this; if anything, they seemed to actually enjoy helping me out.
They are just making this stuff up i swear, they literally couldn’t find anything negative to say about you and had to make something up - so I wouldn’t let it get to you, if the firm were to be discriminating purely based on nationality then it’s probably better not to have them as your employer…Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.
I got the VS offer as well, it was in an email and it was 3 days after the AC but there were 3 AC dates and I was in the last one so I think it depends on what date you did the ACDid they email you or was it over the phone? Also how long after your AC?
I just completed it and it was 3 questions but I dont know if it was great doing within a group.... It definitely threw me off a bit and makes you self conscious how strong other candidates are :/I did it but not in a group. Was disappointed tbh, would have liked to hear others' answers. It's just 3 VI-style questions, no follow-up, maybe a couple of minutes per question (entirely up to you). Had i been in a group it would have been the same but you'd have got to hear other peoples' answers first (or not, if you are the first one to answer).
This is really not an issue - I wouldn't worry about this as it is very normal.During a VS if we’re mostly and more naturally given work by trainees (particularly our trainee buddy) rather than our supervisor (because they don’t necessarily have much we can help on at the moment), is that problematic, how would it reflect in feedback given? (Assuming our supervisor knows what tasks we’re doing and what we’re up to throughout the day, and assuming we also speak to them on a daily basis so they know we’re present). Thanks in advance for your advice
I completely understand your frustrations here. However, based on your brief post (so I am making some quick assumptions), it may just come down to use of language and how that is interpreted.Just got feedback post AC, and I was rejected because my interviewers were "uncertain about my commitment to the UK" (international candidate, recent graduate from RG London, some work experience in my home country). I am not sure how my interviewers assumed that given: I was not asked anything about my commitment to the UK, and I did make a case about training in the UK (spoke about how I chose to study law in the UK in the first place, cited diversity and opportunities to deal with international law) while answering "why our firm". I was told I was a "fantastic" candidate otherwise, with a unique background and fresh perspectives. Not only am I unsure how to deal with this going forward, but this remark has left a sour taste - it feels like a cop-out, biased way to reject international candidates.