TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[maymays]

Has Mishcon switched to Amberjack?

 

[legal18]

I have identified a firm’s competitors. How should I go about answering how they differentiate themselves? What sorts of factors should I consider? Thank you!

 

[001hussa]

what are best resources for group exercise prep?

Was going to ask this too, anyone have any advice for group exercises?

 

[fitzer401]

Best of luck to everyone waiting to hear back for Mischon Spring VS this week and Ashurst SVS. Hopefully some good news for people in this forum!

 

[TonyStark]

Just have to keep going mate, I was exactly in your position. After my 3rd VS that I didn't convert, I thought screw this. But it's true that if you can get a VS, you can get a TC, you just unfortunately have to keep applying and applying. All the struggle will be worth it in the end once you get that call - every now and then I look back at a memory from uni when I had to leave at 5am to get a 4.5 hour train to London to attend a whole day AC, commute back in the evening and get a rejection email right before I started a shift at my part-time job. The rejections are brutal, but experience is experience and you only need one to say yes.

Hey, what would you say your biggest lessons are on converting a VS?

 

[desperateTCseeker1998]

Tricky trying to get the motivation to write any applications after several post interview PFOs and getting ghosted by every other firm... do not have the energy for this, why does even trying to write an application reduce me to tears atm?

 

[Chris Brown]

Tricky trying to get the motivation to write any applications after several post interview PFOs and getting ghosted by every other firm... do not have the energy for this, why does even trying to write an application reduce me to tears atm?

I am sorry to hear you are feeling this way. Just know that you aren’t alone in feeling like this. This whole process is so stressful and demotivating. To try and find the will power and energy to write more applications is incredibly difficult. I am genuinely amazed by the resilience some people have on this forum who have gone through 3+ cycles. 🥲

It takes up so much time and effort to produce high quality, tailored applications and all we get in return is a generic automated PFO. I guess it makes the eventual win (TC) feel so much better, knowing how much hard work was put in to get it. Best of luck to everyone in this application cycle. I’m sure we will all hear back good news from our dreams firms someday soon. 🙂​

 

[applicant457]

for Spark VI, Clifford Chance asks that we complete it by the weekend, despite the deadline being Thursday. what do I do im confused!!

 

[BT0901]

Anyone still waiting to hear back from Milbank post application for the spring scheme? I have seen people receive offers/rejections but find it so strange that I haven't been contacted (rejected) at all.

 

[vstchunter]

Are maintenance grants for PgDL/SQE from firm where I hold a TC offer taxable?

 

[Chris Brown]

Are maintenance grants for PgDL/SQE from firm where I hold a TC offer taxable?

I saw a thread on this topic a while ago. I think grants, bursaries and scholarships are normally tax free because they aren’t classed as ‘income’, but I think @Jessica Booker will know more as I don’t know for sure. 🥲​

 

[Jessica Booker]

Are maintenance grants for PgDL/SQE from firm where I hold a TC offer taxable?

No - they are not taxable from a UK perspective. I have known them to be taxable for people still registered in their home country though (not always the case, but depends on your home country’s tax rules on income earned outside of their jurisdiction).

 

[trainee4u]

what are best resources for group exercise prep?

I got 12 months free from Assessment Day when applying to Taylor Wessing.

They provide four group exercise mark schemes, which note:

"much more important than the ideas themselves [they do provide ideas, but they are very scenario-specific and not worth discussing here] is how you interact with the group to reach agreement"

They list competencies:

• consideration
  • 👍
  • respond to others points by showing you have listened to them: focus on specific issues
  • bring up earlier speakers to show you have listened to what they said
  • provide space - don't interrupt
  • active listening - body language, summarise point just made, nod, eye contact
  • note-taking (but not at expense of not participating)
  • 👎
  • asking questions already answered: shows you weren't listening
  • failure to understand others points: ditto
  • ignore others' contributions and just make your own
• interpersonal skills:
  • 👍
  • helping those struggling
  • using team members' names
  • polite to others
  • resolve conflicts or tensions
  • encourage participation of others, no favouritism
  • gives feedback constructively, avoiding negative words
  • active listening, including body language to show agreement
  • diplomacy
  • 👎
  • rude/blunt/provocative/aggressive
  • focused on personal ambition, not that of the team
  • not considering human factors, e.g. where relevant to decision (e.g., firing staff) or feelings of discussion group
  • ignore signals from others (e.g., are you talking too long and people giving signs?)
• teamwork
  • 👍
  • show concern for group, not self-interest: example, you've been asked to debate in favour one side of an issue and then come to a conclusion collectively. Changing your mind where applicable is good.
  • benefit the group: where you have personal knowledge or experience
  • work with another person who has a good idea to build on that idea, ensuring that they retain credit for it
  • resolve points made by others: e.g., provide supporting evidence, or constructively explain why it's not relevant.
  • contribute: bring up your own points, don't just repeat other people's content, so that you are adding something
  • work to improve morale: e.g., make light-hearted comments or similar to defuse tensions
  • democratic: support a conclusion reached, even if you think it sucks
  • flexible: don't spend too long talking at the expense of coming to a conclusion
  • 👎
  • fail to contribute
  • cause dispute/conflict
  • rude/interrupt
• initiative
  • 👍
  • helping those struggling
  • using team members' names
  • polite to others
  • resolve conflicts or tensions
  • encourage participation of others, no favouritism
  • gives feedback constructively, avoiding negative words
  • active listening, including body language to show agreement
  • diplomacy
  • 👎
  • rude/blunt/provocative/aggressive
  • focused on personal ambition, not that of the team
  • not considering human factors, e.g. where relevant to decision (e.g., firing staff) or feelings of discussion group
  • ignore signals from others (e.g., are you talking too long and people giving signs?)
• decisiveness
  • 👍
  • help group come to a conclusion, e.g., combine your idea with that of another, or multiple team members ideas
  • find agreement, e.g., "that seems like the best idea, shall we go with that?"
  • quick to generate ideas
  • resolve conflicts between team members, avoiding wasting time
  • come up with practical steps from ideas, e.g., "so Sophie's idea to be more environmentally friendly is great, we could achieve it by switching our power supply"
  • conclude and move on from points: provide a summary so the discussion can continue
  • 👎
  • unable to choose between options
  • too long on one issue
  • hold group back by disagreeing
• problem solving
  • 👍
  • identify the relevant points from a mass of information
  • strategic thinking/long-term view
  • consider multiple POVs
  • consider side-effects & consequences
  • identify risks and barriers to success
  • find more information - ask team members, or seek clarification over some of the points in the scenario: typically issues will be raised that are deliberately ambiguous
  • objective & unbiased decision-making
  • 👎
  • identify irrelevant issues
  • fail to get others insights or suggest further research
  • fail to consider multiple POVs (e.g., competitors, staff, management)
  • cannot find causes of problems
  • provide useless/irrelevant solutions

It depends on your individual personality whether you are someone who naturally wants to make a lot of your own points, or not, but while it's a good idea to have points to make, it's much more about working with others than what you have to say, and your attention needs to be focused more on listening to others than just making your own brilliant points. In addition, the group exercise will usually need to come to a conclusion, and it's common that there's a lack of initiative to do this from group members, so you might want to focus on this throughout. You will want to be ready to both make responses to other people's points and graciously respond to any points that others might make about you.

You should have some time to write down some points in the prep, then during the actual group discussion you can continue to make notes on what other people are saying, which can help you with the group skills.

 

[Tintin06]

Just have to keep going mate, I was exactly in your position. After my 3rd VS that I didn't convert, I thought screw this. But it's true that if you can get a VS, you can get a TC, you just unfortunately have to keep applying and applying. All the struggle will be worth it in the end once you get that call - every now and then I look back at a memory from uni when I had to leave at 5am to get a 4.5 hour train to London to attend a whole day AC, commute back in the evening and get a rejection email right before I started a shift at my part-time job. The rejections are brutal, but experience is experience and you only need one to say yes.

This is obviously 100% correct - thanks.

 

[sapphireoreos]

Does anyone know when Withers are done with conducting their summer VS interviews? I want to know whether to assume a PFO

 

[sibs23]

Hello, I have an AC coming up and when asked about other applications I have made, do I tell them about other ACs with firms with a very different profile to the one I am interviewing with? I am aware they might asked me if I have other interviews. I know I don't have to tell them but I also think by telling them, it might help me to sound like a competitive candidate. Would it be ok to say "I have primarily focused on this type of firms including X, Y and Z firms, but of course, due to the competitive nature of the process, I have applied to firms outside of this criteria"?

 

[Tintin06]

I got 12 months free from Assessment Day when applying to Taylor Wessing.

They provide four group exercise mark schemes, which note:

"much more important than the ideas themselves [they do provide ideas, but they are very scenario-specific and not worth discussing here] is how you interact with the group to reach agreement"

They list competencies:

• consideration
  • 👍
  • respond to others points by showing you have listened to them: focus on specific issues
  • bring up earlier speakers to show you have listened to what they said
  • provide space - don't interrupt
  • active listening - body language, summarise point just made, nod, eye contact
  • note-taking (but not at expense of not participating)
  • 👎
  • asking questions already answered: shows you weren't listening
  • failure to understand others points: ditto
  • ignore others' contributions and just make your own
• interpersonal skills:
  • 👍
  • helping those struggling
  • using team members' names
  • polite to others
  • resolve conflicts or tensions
  • encourage participation of others, no favouritism
  • gives feedback constructively, avoiding negative words
  • active listening, including body language to show agreement
  • diplomacy
  • 👎
  • rude/blunt/provocative/aggressive
  • focused on personal ambition, not that of the team
  • not considering human factors, e.g. where relevant to decision (e.g., firing staff) or feelings of discussion group
  • ignore signals from others (e.g., are you talking too long and people giving signs?)
• teamwork
  • 👍
  • show concern for group, not self-interest: example, you've been asked to debate in favour one side of an issue and then come to a conclusion collectively. Changing your mind where applicable is good.
  • benefit the group: where you have personal knowledge or experience
  • work with another person who has a good idea to build on that idea, ensuring that they retain credit for it
  • resolve points made by others: e.g., provide supporting evidence, or constructively explain why it's not relevant.
  • contribute: bring up your own points, don't just repeat other people's content, so that you are adding something
  • work to improve morale: e.g., make light-hearted comments or similar to defuse tensions
  • democratic: support a conclusion reached, even if you think it sucks
  • flexible: don't spend too long talking at the expense of coming to a conclusion
  • 👎
  • fail to contribute
  • cause dispute/conflict
  • rude/interrupt
• initiative
  • 👍
  • helping those struggling
  • using team members' names
  • polite to others
  • resolve conflicts or tensions
  • encourage participation of others, no favouritism
  • gives feedback constructively, avoiding negative words
  • active listening, including body language to show agreement
  • diplomacy
  • 👎
  • rude/blunt/provocative/aggressive
  • focused on personal ambition, not that of the team
  • not considering human factors, e.g. where relevant to decision (e.g., firing staff) or feelings of discussion group
  • ignore signals from others (e.g., are you talking too long and people giving signs?)
• decisiveness
  • 👍
  • help group come to a conclusion, e.g., combine your idea with that of another, or multiple team members ideas
  • find agreement, e.g., "that seems like the best idea, shall we go with that?"
  • quick to generate ideas
  • resolve conflicts between team members, avoiding wasting time
  • come up with practical steps from ideas, e.g., "so Sophie's idea to be more environmentally friendly is great, we could achieve it by switching our power supply"
  • conclude and move on from points: provide a summary so the discussion can continue
  • 👎
  • unable to choose between options
  • too long on one issue
  • hold group back by disagreeing
• problem solving
  • 👍
  • identify the relevant points from a mass of information
  • strategic thinking/long-term view
  • consider multiple POVs
  • consider side-effects & consequences
  • identify risks and barriers to success
  • find more information - ask team members, or seek clarification over some of the points in the scenario: typically issues will be raised that are deliberately ambiguous
  • objective & unbiased decision-making
  • 👎
  • identify irrelevant issues
  • fail to get others insights or suggest further research
  • fail to consider multiple POVs (e.g., competitors, staff, management)
  • cannot find causes of problems
  • provide useless/irrelevant solutions

It depends on your individual personality whether you are someone who naturally wants to make a lot of your own points, or not, but while it's a good idea to have points to make, it's much more about working with others than what you have to say, and your attention needs to be focused more on listening to others than just making your own brilliant points. In addition, the group exercise will usually need to come to a conclusion, and it's common that there's a lack of initiative to do this from group members, so you might want to focus on this throughout. You will want to be ready to both make responses to other people's points and graciously respond to any points that others might make about you.

You should have some time to write down some points in the prep, then during the actual group discussion you can continue to make notes on what other people are saying, which can help you with the group skills.

This is excellent - thanks for sharing.

 

[trainee4u]

Hello, I have an AC coming up and when asked about other applications I have made, do I tell them about other ACs with firms with a very different profile to the one I am interviewing with? I am aware they might asked me if I have other interviews. I know I don't have to tell them but I also think by telling them, it might help me to sound like a competitive candidate. Would it be ok to say "I have primarily focused on this type of firms including X, Y and Z firms, but of course, due to the competitive nature of the process, I have applied to firms outside of this criteria"?

I personally would mention competing firms or firms of similar or greater prestige, and would avoid in particular implying that you've applied to 100 firms.

 

[sibs23]

I personally would mention competing firms or firms of similar or greater prestige, and would avoid in particular implying that you've applied to 100 firms.

If I get asked how my applications have progressed, do you think there's no point saying I have any other ACs then because they are very different firms? And just say that I am waiting to hear back from those firms that are similar? I haven't actually applied to that many firms (around 20-25 mark) but I could see how that would be implied!

 

[James Wakefield]

Does anyone know when Withers are done with conducting their summer VS interviews? I want to know whether to assume a PFO

I have one next week so interviews are still ongoing. I got the invite a couple weeks ago and I booked one of the last slots available to me. I'd say its unlikely if you haven't heard yet, but they do send out PFOs so its worth keeping your fingers crossed!