TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[FCL25]

heya for mine I've typically had around 7-10 days, but I know some firms may only give you 5 days while others maybe a month!

Was this for AG? Thnx

 

[g.cl.2020344]

Was this for AG? Thnx

this cycle was for PWC, but last cycle I had S&M and W&C

 

[vshunter]

Was this for AG? Thnx

You got addleshaw AC?

 

[FCL25]

You got addleshaw AC?

Not heard back yet following VI, but just wanted to make sure that If I do, I'll have more than a few days to prep lol.

 

[RTL]

Hi! Does anyone have any tips for Forsters VI? Any insights would be much appreciated!

 

[Defnefresko]

Forsters VI invite

 

[jacksollaf]

LOL. I attended their open day last year; just to not even receive a VI 🥂 Waiting for the PFO confirmation...

They are probably writing this right now: "For those who are not successful at application form stage, we will also endeavour to let you know on the 10th January. Whilst we are unable to provide individual feedback on application forms, we will put together some feedback on the common downfalls and provide some tips for a strong Forsters form."

 

[jojo23]

For the reed smith vi + test, do we have to do them on the same day or can I do it across 2 days?

 

[vshunter]

Not heard back yet following VI, but just wanted to make sure that If I do, I'll have more than a few days to prep lol.

I heard back on 19th and AC was 29th

 

[jacksollaf]

THIS HAS TO BE THE FUNNIEST FEEDBACK FOR PFOs in the history of applications!! It's a general one for everyone who got PFOd, but please read this:

"AI sentences: Some applicants left sentences in their applications which made clear the answer had been created in AI. For example, the paragraph would start with ‘here is an updated version with more information on...’."

 

[elsx]

THIS HAS TO BE THE FUNNIEST FEEDBACK FOR PFOs in the history of applications!! It's a general one for everyone who got PFOd, but please read this:

"AI sentences: Some applicants left sentences in their applications which made clear the answer had been created in AI. For example, the paragraph would start with ‘here is an updated version with more information on...’."

oh wow ! Which firm was it from?

 

[thelawnet]

Here's the full Forsters PFO, which is very good:

• Eligibility: Some candidates applied too early. To be eligible for the 2025 vacation scheme or 2027 training contract, you need to be able to complete your degree, law conversion (if needed) and SQE before September 2027. Therefore, if you are studying a history degree finishing in 2026, you would not have sufficient time to complete the PGDL (one year) and the SQE (one year) prior to commencing your training, for example.
• Firm name: we saw many people spell the firm name incorrectly e.g. Fosters, Foresters. It is also Forsters’ rather than Forster’s. Some applicants used the wrong firm name, e.g. Farrer
• Grammatical errors: we saw a lot of American spellings where it was not expected e.g. organized, prioritized and realized. This can be a sign that AI has written the answer and shows the answer has not been thoroughly checked before copying into the for
• AI sentences: Some applicants left sentences in their applications which made clear the answer had been created in AI. For example, the paragraph would start with ‘here is an updated version with more information on…’.
• Length: many applications were too short, we provide a relatively short word count to encourage applicants to be efficient and succinct with their answers, however you should be aiming to reach within 10% of the word count. If you do not provide enough information, it limits the number of marks you can achieve.
• Marylebone: some applicants mentioned that they are excited by the idea of working in Mayfair, however we moved to Marylebone in January 2024

Question One was

"Work experience: Tell us about any paid employment, position of responsibility or volunteer work you think is relevant to your application (up to three separate roles). We want to understand your role, what you learnt and why the position was of interest to you. Please include dates for the role. (approx. 100 words per item)"

the feedback:

• Dates: some disregarded the element of the question asking for the dates.
• Lack of explanation: some applicants didn’t actually explain what their job was.
• Lack of variety: two or three very similar examples were given. You would have benefitted from selecting a wider variety of experiences e.g. rather than 3 1-week legal internships. The selection of similar examples limited the skills and achievements you spoke about. You may like to choose examples of different types (e.g. paid, unpaid, voluntary, position of responsibility), and different lengths (e.g. 1-week, 3-month summer placement, holiday job you return to, gap year work experience).

Question Two was
"Why Forsters: What are two things you have personally found interesting about Forsters through your research? Please explain why these are interesting or matter to you."

the feedback:

• Options picked considered too safe: many candidates avoided talking about clients, cases, lawyers and departments. In summary, they avoided talking about anything legal. We want to know which areas are of interest to you, and be able to see you have researched them thoroughly. We would advise you aim for a legal element, as well as talking about the easier elements to talk about, such as values, culture, D&I and CSR (which required less research
• Six seat training contract: the rotation system was one of the most commonly listed answers. To avoid a generic application, it would be better to choose something less obvious from the website. Some people made the mistake of calling it a four-seat training contract.
• Variety of legal areas: many applicants said they were attracted to the wide variety of departments on offer, but they did not go into detail as to which appeal the most/why they would like to sit there/what they know about the team.
• For insight, the most common answers were the Tate case, Art and cultural property, an interest in private wealth (without further details) and our value of We take happiness seriously,

Question Three was
"Tell us about one goal you have set for yourself recently and describe the steps you are taking and skills you are developing in order to achieve it."

the feedback:

• Need to break down the steps further: often steps were too broad e.g. ‘I am focusing on my health’, this needed further clarification of the steps e.g. I have designed a meal plan, I have designed a weekly gym schedule, I have challenged myself to 10,000 daily steps. You may like to make the steps more measurable to add detail.
• Lack of skills identified: many candidates missed identifying the skills they have developed.
• For insight, the most common answers were running, learning a language, building confidence, improving public speaking, time management skills.

I like their PFO letter very much because it does make it clear that in reality if you so much as make as one bad spelling "decision", e.g., "judgement" for "judgment" or "prioritize" for "prioritise" you WILL be PFOed and there's no mincing of words or pretending that things like this won't get your application tossed instantly.

 

[jacksollaf]

oh wow ! Which firm was it from?

forsters!!

 

[sapphireoreos]

Here's the full Forsters PFO, which is very good:

• Eligibility: Some candidates applied too early. To be eligible for the 2025 vacation scheme or 2027 training contract, you need to be able to complete your degree, law conversion (if needed) and SQE before September 2027. Therefore, if you are studying a history degree finishing in 2026, you would not have sufficient time to complete the PGDL (one year) and the SQE (one year) prior to commencing your training, for example.
• Firm name: we saw many people spell the firm name incorrectly e.g. Fosters, Foresters. It is also Forsters’ rather than Forster’s. Some applicants used the wrong firm name, e.g. Farrer
• Grammatical errors: we saw a lot of American spellings where it was not expected e.g. organized, prioritized and realized. This can be a sign that AI has written the answer and shows the answer has not been thoroughly checked before copying into the for
• AI sentences: Some applicants left sentences in their applications which made clear the answer had been created in AI. For example, the paragraph would start with ‘here is an updated version with more information on…’.
• Length: many applications were too short, we provide a relatively short word count to encourage applicants to be efficient and succinct with their answers, however you should be aiming to reach within 10% of the word count. If you do not provide enough information, it limits the number of marks you can achieve.
• Marylebone: some applicants mentioned that they are excited by the idea of working in Mayfair, however we moved to Marylebone in January 2024

Question One was

"Work experience: Tell us about any paid employment, position of responsibility or volunteer work you think is relevant to your application (up to three separate roles). We want to understand your role, what you learnt and why the position was of interest to you. Please include dates for the role. (approx. 100 words per item)"

the feedback:

• Dates: some disregarded the element of the question asking for the dates.
• Lack of explanation: some applicants didn’t actually explain what their job was.
• Lack of variety: two or three very similar examples were given. You would have benefitted from selecting a wider variety of experiences e.g. rather than 3 1-week legal internships. The selection of similar examples limited the skills and achievements you spoke about. You may like to choose examples of different types (e.g. paid, unpaid, voluntary, position of responsibility), and different lengths (e.g. 1-week, 3-month summer placement, holiday job you return to, gap year work experience).

Question Two was
"Why Forsters: What are two things you have personally found interesting about Forsters through your research? Please explain why these are interesting or matter to you."

the feedback:

• Options picked considered too safe: many candidates avoided talking about clients, cases, lawyers and departments. In summary, they avoided talking about anything legal. We want to know which areas are of interest to you, and be able to see you have researched them thoroughly. We would advise you aim for a legal element, as well as talking about the easier elements to talk about, such as values, culture, D&I and CSR (which required less research
• Six seat training contract: the rotation system was one of the most commonly listed answers. To avoid a generic application, it would be better to choose something less obvious from the website. Some people made the mistake of calling it a four-seat training contract.
• Variety of legal areas: many applicants said they were attracted to the wide variety of departments on offer, but they did not go into detail as to which appeal the most/why they would like to sit there/what they know about the team.
• For insight, the most common answers were the Tate case, Art and cultural property, an interest in private wealth (without further details) and our value of We take happiness seriously,

Question Three was
"Tell us about one goal you have set for yourself recently and describe the steps you are taking and skills you are developing in order to achieve it."

the feedback:

• Need to break down the steps further: often steps were too broad e.g. ‘I am focusing on my health’, this needed further clarification of the steps e.g. I have designed a meal plan, I have designed a weekly gym schedule, I have challenged myself to 10,000 daily steps. You may like to make the steps more measurable to add detail.
• Lack of skills identified: many candidates missed identifying the skills they have developed.
• For insight, the most common answers were running, learning a language, building confidence, improving public speaking, time management skills.

I like their PFO letter very much because it does make it clear that in reality if you so much as make as one bad spelling "decision", e.g., "judgement" for "judgment" or "prioritize" for "prioritise" you WILL be PFOed and there's no mincing of words or pretending that things like this won't get your application tossed instantly.

Wait this is actually so great of them to do!! So many law firms would NEVER

 

[CallumJR]

Here's the full Forsters PFO, which is very good:

• Eligibility: Some candidates applied too early. To be eligible for the 2025 vacation scheme or 2027 training contract, you need to be able to complete your degree, law conversion (if needed) and SQE before September 2027. Therefore, if you are studying a history degree finishing in 2026, you would not have sufficient time to complete the PGDL (one year) and the SQE (one year) prior to commencing your training, for example.
• Firm name: we saw many people spell the firm name incorrectly e.g. Fosters, Foresters. It is also Forsters’ rather than Forster’s. Some applicants used the wrong firm name, e.g. Farrer
• Grammatical errors: we saw a lot of American spellings where it was not expected e.g. organized, prioritized and realized. This can be a sign that AI has written the answer and shows the answer has not been thoroughly checked before copying into the for
• AI sentences: Some applicants left sentences in their applications which made clear the answer had been created in AI. For example, the paragraph would start with ‘here is an updated version with more information on…’.
• Length: many applications were too short, we provide a relatively short word count to encourage applicants to be efficient and succinct with their answers, however you should be aiming to reach within 10% of the word count. If you do not provide enough information, it limits the number of marks you can achieve.
• Marylebone: some applicants mentioned that they are excited by the idea of working in Mayfair, however we moved to Marylebone in January 2024

Question One was

"Work experience: Tell us about any paid employment, position of responsibility or volunteer work you think is relevant to your application (up to three separate roles). We want to understand your role, what you learnt and why the position was of interest to you. Please include dates for the role. (approx. 100 words per item)"

the feedback:

• Dates: some disregarded the element of the question asking for the dates.
• Lack of explanation: some applicants didn’t actually explain what their job was.
• Lack of variety: two or three very similar examples were given. You would have benefitted from selecting a wider variety of experiences e.g. rather than 3 1-week legal internships. The selection of similar examples limited the skills and achievements you spoke about. You may like to choose examples of different types (e.g. paid, unpaid, voluntary, position of responsibility), and different lengths (e.g. 1-week, 3-month summer placement, holiday job you return to, gap year work experience).

Question Two was
"Why Forsters: What are two things you have personally found interesting about Forsters through your research? Please explain why these are interesting or matter to you."

the feedback:

• Options picked considered too safe: many candidates avoided talking about clients, cases, lawyers and departments. In summary, they avoided talking about anything legal. We want to know which areas are of interest to you, and be able to see you have researched them thoroughly. We would advise you aim for a legal element, as well as talking about the easier elements to talk about, such as values, culture, D&I and CSR (which required less research
• Six seat training contract: the rotation system was one of the most commonly listed answers. To avoid a generic application, it would be better to choose something less obvious from the website. Some people made the mistake of calling it a four-seat training contract.
• Variety of legal areas: many applicants said they were attracted to the wide variety of departments on offer, but they did not go into detail as to which appeal the most/why they would like to sit there/what they know about the team.
• For insight, the most common answers were the Tate case, Art and cultural property, an interest in private wealth (without further details) and our value of We take happiness seriously,

Question Three was
"Tell us about one goal you have set for yourself recently and describe the steps you are taking and skills you are developing in order to achieve it."

the feedback:

• Need to break down the steps further: often steps were too broad e.g. ‘I am focusing on my health’, this needed further clarification of the steps e.g. I have designed a meal plan, I have designed a weekly gym schedule, I have challenged myself to 10,000 daily steps. You may like to make the steps more measurable to add detail.
• Lack of skills identified: many candidates missed identifying the skills they have developed.
• For insight, the most common answers were running, learning a language, building confidence, improving public speaking, time management skills.

I like their PFO letter very much because it does make it clear that in reality if you so much as make as one bad spelling "decision", e.g., "judgement" for "judgment" or "prioritize" for "prioritise" you WILL be PFOed and there's no mincing of words or pretending that things like this won't get your application tossed instantly.

Thank you for sharing. I think this is the most useful feedback a firm has ever shared and it will help a lot of applicants to improve their applications. I hope more firms will follow and provide feedback like that!!!!

 

[👩🎓]

For the reed smith vi + test, do we have to do them on the same day or can I do it across 2 days?

You can complete the test in a number of sittings as it saves your progress but when you start the VI you cannot pause it - hope that makes sense - I did the test on one day and the VI on another.

 

[MR218]

Has anyone who has done the K&I AC got any insights they’d be willing to share?

 

[jta227]

Is it me or do some of these firms massively underestimate how long it takes to do their test? Simmons & Simmons' email says it should take 45 minutes to complete their blended assessment... I would be surprised if most people only took that long (or maybe I'm just slow 😭 )

 

[futuretrainee101ac]

Yes me too!! Have u taken it yet

No I haven't taken it yet! Have you??? Hopefully tomorrow. If you have taken it , how did you find it

 

[chrisbrown]

Is it me or do some of these firms massively underestimate how long it takes to do their test? Simmons & Simmons' email says it should take 45 minutes to complete their blended assessment... I would be surprised if most people only took that long (or maybe I'm just slow 😭 )

They usually state the minimum length of time the test should take someone to complete.

Sometimes people underestimate the difficulty and/or length of tests so firms give the time as a rough guide for people. 🙂🙂

I’ve completed online tests and taken over an hour even though it says it should take around 45 minutes 🥲🥲