Of a certain age…

This week a gal at work had a birthday. It’s not unusual but as a special treat her colleagues decided to decorate her area with the standard balloons, glitter and not so typical pictures of Cliff Richard. Why you ask? Well because she hates him. It’s therefore very funny.

After I’d broken into a few lines of “congratulations” to groans all round I started to recount a story of life with my mother a die-hard Cliff Richard fan. How she would subject me to “treats” such as the Cliff Richard tour where he reunited with the Shadows. I got to travel on a bus all the way from Suffolk to Birmingham with at least 45 women of a certain age who all loved Cliff. Really loved Cliff. When the coach got to the stadium they decamped en masse to the souvenir stand. My mum got me a brochure. I was 12 and mortified.

As my colleagues laughed I shuddered from the memory turning to leave the room I stopped. Women of a certain age? A mother embarrassing her child? My mother would have been about 40.

As I dropped my son that morning local radio had played ‘Run DMC‘ and I’d sung along with the window down while he stared at me and sunk into his seat as we pulled into the school car park…..

Brief Chats

Towards the end of 2012 (together with my wonderful friends Felicity Gerry and Kim Evans) I started a series of podcasts through the University of Law’s Future Lawyers Network. The concept (thought up by Kim) was simple. Take the chats we had with our lawyer friends in the pub and reproduce in a more controlled alcohol free environment to let aspiring lawyers have a peek into the working lives of lawyers who’ve made it. Between the three of us we are really lucky to have access to a great ‘black book’ of potential guests. As the podcasts were limited to 5 or 6 we tried to get a flavour from as wide a scope as possible. Not easy given the places and roles that lawyers end up nowadays.

For posterity I thought I would add the podcasts to my blog posts. Maybe you will click on the links and have a listen..in fact I hope you will because the guests have been fabulous and the UOL’s production team have done a wonderful job dealing with a collective first for all of us: presenting a podcast.

First up we had Tom Kilroy, GC of Misys. Tom talked all about journey from science student to temporary stewardship of the CEO role at Misys via a work trip to the Star Wars ranch. Tom gives great advice on compiling your CV and covering letter that is relevant to us all! If you want to listen click here!

Next up was Francis Fitzgibbon QC of Doughty Street Chambers a podcast that covers a huge range of topics from how Francis fell into the law, his human rights work, working life within a chambers and whether there is a place in the courtroom for theatrics. If you want to listen click here.

After an inhouser and a barrister it was time for a Solicitor so where better to go than straight to Solicitor of the Year 2012, David Enright? David is a fabulous narrator and his route to the accolade has plenty of twists and turns from the man who started out his working life carrying bricks on a building site to the human rights issues surrounding ‘Bigger, Fatter, Gypsier’. If you want to listen click here.

First amongst equals, President of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives, Nick Hanning was the next guest. It was recorded the night before a Council meeting that he and I were attending. Nick speaks brilliantly about the role of the Chartered Legal Executive and his job as President whilst holding down a day job running a law firm. Nick also answers gives a forceful answer to my question “are Chartered Legal Executives second class legal/lawyer citizens?” If you want to liste click here.

All 4 podcasts published so far have one consistent theme that we didn’t realise when we started. All 4 interviewees did not start out intending to enter the law.

We’re waiting the final edit of the final podcast which I hope is going to finish the series brilliantly. It’s the turn of the ladies…

Guest Blog : You’ve Changed

From time to time people are kind enough to publish my musings on their own accounts.  Click here for the one that I wrote for Professor Richard Moorhead for his blog: Lawyer Watch.

It’s about lawyers, change and compliance.

 

Speaking Truth To Power

Here’s a blog I wrote for Legal Futures (published November 2012) which can be found here:

I regularly sit down with people from teams across the business to talk about the performance of law firms on our panel and firms that have made enquiries about membership. One of the agenda subjects is ‘quality’. It’s a hard thing to define but generally we are asking ourselves ‘does what we have learnt since the last meeting that may change our view of any of our panel firms, past or present?’. We talk about many things but pay a lot of attention to customer feedback, good and bad.

The customer and employee led feedback often raises small isolated issues but sometimes it’s possible to see patterns start to emerge. From time to time we see patterns developing that are difficult to categorise but are enough to form a general concern that attention to customers does not appear as high on a law firm’s agenda as we think that it should be.

So, I always take the stance that it’s appropriate to asked firms for their thoughts. Are there any patterns or particular circumstances that may inform our views? Many firms are happy to oblige but, from time to time, we will receive a response that, rather than allay our concerns, does more to confirm them. Reduced to soundbites, they can follow the ‘attack is the best form of defence’ methodology, including comments such as: it’s not them, it’s the clients, they (the client) have behaved unreasonably, the clients have misunderstood, the work they do is of high quality or our perception is incorrect because we have called at the wrong time or spoken to the wrong person.

When I receive this type of response I wonder whether I should break it down, explain it to them but I sometimes get the feeling that the firm or the individuals will not be listening – it’s a stance I’ve seen before and I suspect I will see again. There is nothing customer focused about this type of response, no desire to take a look at behaviour or to use the experience as a learning curve.

In approaching the firms I’m not looking for some ‘cap in hand’ response but an insight into whether the behaviours that we are seeing are part of a bigger pattern or had perhaps been simply an unhappy but unusual set of circumstances.

If it is the case that a request triggers some element of ‘the truth’ about the firm’s behaviour, where do they go from January 2013? That is the point at which the COLP and COFA roles become effective. Maybe this firm’s COLP (compliance officer for legal practice) nominee will be the person who responds to my request or maybe someone else is elected (!) to hold that responsibility. The COLP may act as guardian of compliance but cannot act alone or be the firm’s ‘moral compass’. To be effective and to thrive under outcomes-focused regulation (OFR), the business needs to develop the ability to look at its behaviour critically, to question practices and to seize the opportunity to use the not-so-pleasant experiences as a chance to develop.

OFR doesn’t mean accepting the blame when no wrong has been committed and it doesn’t mean conducting your work in an un-commercial fashion. But, for the customer-focused outcomes, it does mean being alive to the consequences of your actions. To use one of the responses given above, if your client is confused and doesn’t understand, then the explanation is not pitched at the right level. Take a moment, consider the information that has been given and ask whether it could be delivered differently.

I doubt the customer suspects the legal work is poor. It’s the method of delivery that has befuddled them. If you have a number of similar complaints, then you should be looking to influence change. It could be one person, a training style or a standard letter that needs a makeover but sometimes it goes deeper than that.

The challenge for any COLP is possessing the ability (and nerve) to speak truth to power. That power can come in many forms ranging from the senior partner to the fiery young paralegal to the family owned firm staffed by relatives. When I ask for feedback from firms, it is because I generally have negative views from customers or employees, although I recognise that the feedback may come from a small percentage of cases run by a firm and it’s possible that everybody can have an ‘off’ day that isn’t indicative of their general behaviour.

You don’t have to look far outside of the law for examples of the powerful not listening; Lance Armstrong is alleged to have had so much power within ‘Team Armstrong’ that he was able to influence the careers of fellow athletes. Reports suggest that if you weren’t onboard with what went on, you were overboard; a culture of fear influenced and drove unacceptable behaviours.

Then there is the BBC, an organisation filled with reporting lines and hierarchies that was virtually swimming in information. But despite the bottom-to-top reporting lines, information was not shared between divisions and it appears that sufficient weight was not placed on the information that they had; the culture of personality produced powerful individuals who appear to have been able to act without consequence or censure.

A culture of fear, the presence of strong and powerful individuals and of individuals or businesses ignoring or listening but not hearing – headline-grabbing and horrific stories but if you boil away the content and listen to the themes, there are lessons for the legal environment.

When I give feedback to law firms (those that I work with, instruct and those that I encounter on the way), the information is given not with the intention of damaging an individual’s career or attacking the virtues of a law firm. It’s given because it is information about the service the law firm is providing. I don’t know a single legal business that yet represents the ‘finished product’. We all continue to learn, to develop and to evolve and we do that through the receipt and assessment of information.

In 2013 the responsibility to act on information becomes that of the COLP and they, along with their law firms, must ensure they control the information and learn from it.

If they don’t, the COLP may possess the ability to speak, to hold to account and to challenge. But if the power is not listening, what then?

Hunger Games

Indulge me… 

It’s future and the anniversary of the apocalypse that crushed the revolution and wiped out District 13.  It’s time for the annual reaping of Tributes to be sent to the Capitol to participate in the annual Hunger Games.  As the Capitol languishes at the heart of the 12 Districts, its inhabitants molly coddled and overfed, anticipation rises for the games that are designed to produce one victor who will reap the spoils for their District for the coming year and establish a comfortable future for them and their family.  Income and activity in the Capitol has risen around the games as sponsors, designers, stylists and betting facilities compete for the right to be involved.  The fight to the death has spawned an industry.

Reading the Hunger Games I couldn’t help but think of the legal services market.  That thought was quickly followed by another one….maybe I need a hobby?

If you haven’t read the Hunger Games (book 1) (or watched the movie) here’s a bit of a plot spoiler.  If you don’t want to know look away now, I’ll tell you when it’s safe to come back:

• There was a revolution
• The revolutionaries were overthrown by the Capitol, their land destroyed
• North America is now a Capitol surrounded by 12 Districts
• Each year to remind districts of its power the Capitol holds the ‘Hunger Games’
• The Districts hold a lottery to produce 1 male and 1 female ‘Tribute’ from their young
• Tributes head to the Capitol are made over and appeal to the public through interviews for support; sponsors will go with the people’s vote
• Tributes compete for sponsors; more sponsors equals greater chance of support during the games
• The Games create an artificial environment which can be controlled by the game makers to serve their own ends
• 24 enter, 1 leaves.
• The Games are filmed Big Brother style, edited and viewing is mandatory for the citizens

Whilst this may not automatically make you think of legal services market I’ll leave you to pick through the bullet points and wonder.  What really pricked my attention were the strategies employed by the tributes once they entered the ring.

The games start and people die almost immediately.  Some because apathy takes them over; death is inevitable so they walk towards it and welcome it.  A few engage in brutal combat inevitably sustaining life threatening injuries which mean that they take out the competition but with fatal consequences for themselves.  Some of the stronger ‘career’ tributes who have been in training group together recognising shared qualities and strengths but these collaborations are flawed; at the end there can be only one and it’s not long before they start to destroy one another.  Some resourceful individuals identify a single piece of equipment that they need.  Something that is essential to their survival and retreat for a moment to form their own strategies in their own time and under their own control; they know their strengths and understand the territory that they suit.  These resourceful individuals fare well but in spite of this (or rather to spite them) the gamemakers meddle with the environment creating additional dangers and forcing tributes together for the delight of the Big Brotheresque audience.  These resourceful tributes may not have had years of training but they are agile and have lived a life where the ability to adapt is a deeply ingrained survival instinct.  Even within this resourceful group there are injuries and one tribute fails to evade an attack and is severely wounded.  Vulnerable, exposed and at significant risk he lies down and covers himself with a camouflage of mud and leaves.  Too weak to fight he waits things out in the hope that nobody steps on him. 

If you were looking away you can look back now; plot spoiler done.  I have no conclusions only observations but if you want to read something a little deeper on the subject of the Legal Services Act 2007 implementation one year on I’d direct you to the blog by Professor Stephen Mayson.

CILEx Council Newbie

A blog written for the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives after my first formal Council Meeting:

Council meetings for The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) can be busy. There’s plenty to discuss, agree on and get started. Last week however there was also a new addition to the council, so we asked Barbara Hamilton-Bruce, a new co-opted Council member, to write about her first meeting with other council members.

Over the last year or so I’ve become more actively involved in providing support of CILEx although it’s been in a very informal way; generally banging the drum in support of the route into law and the value of the qualification. I’d compare it to the role that Angelina Jolie plays for the UN…turn up or speak out, pose, pout and then back to the day job, looking after the kids and loading the dishwasher every night. I put myself forward as a co-opted member (somebody without a constituency representing an interest group) and was voted onto the Council this summer.

Formal notice of the meeting for 21 September was received together with a weighty agenda and supporting documents about four weeks ago. After the relative quiet of the summer it was a sharp reminder that there would actually be some hard work involved in this role. Work started as soon as I began reading the paperwork because there is no gentle roll in for a newbie; it’s straight in to the tough stuff; budgets, reports, consultation documents, papers for consideration, policies for approval, committee terms of reference. The list goes on.

The day before the Council meeting I attended my induction at Kempston Manor where I met Helen Whiteman the Chief Operating Officer. There was a file of information that we needed to work through. Helen was charming but the business of the CILEx group is complex. It was dawning on me just how; a membership group that serves the interests of students through to fellows, an examining body, a law school, a regulator, overseas interests and a benevolent fund.

The meeting was held in Council Chambers, housed within a building off to the side of the Manor House which includes a very large meeting room with all the usual gubbins you’d expect. Some of the Council members I’d met on previous occasions, some only the night before and some were rushing in through the door minutes in advance of the start time. Members had come from all corners of the country; Wales, the South Coast, Liverpool, Durham. I could go on. Some were attending with the grace of their employers and some were attending using part of their annual holiday entitlement. One member was attending 10 weeks into maternity leave.

The Council Meeting is led by the President with the support of Vice and Deputy Presidents and members of the CILEx divisions. Questions can be tabled in advance to allow any necessary research or figures to be collated and questions are tabled on the day. The aim is to push through the agenda swiftly but not so prescriptive as to stifle debate. The meeting was attended by representatives from Ilex Tutorial College (ITC) and ILEX Professional Standards (IPS) along with appearances from the Head of IT, the Director of Finance all under the watchful eye of the Chief Operating Officer. For much of the time I was bewildered but I think that was expected and I will be eternally grateful to Janine Wagstaff who was helping me with background information as we went through the agenda.

I don’t really know what I was expecting from the meeting but if you’re tempted to think along the lines of the Vicar of Dibley’s village meetings, then think again. Council members are directors of the company but do not run the business day-to-day so council meetings are effectively 2 months’ worth of business meetings rolled up into one; there is a huge amount of ground to cover in the allotted time. In a role that can be best described as ‘critical friend’ council members spent a lot of time challenging assumptions and asking forensic questions on the information that we had received. Whether the decisions represented the best interests of the membership was a common theme.

We broke for lunch behind on the agenda and I was already starting to flag and there were some big subjects on the agenda such as the Legal Education and Training Review and independent practice rights. Before we started the day I knew that the finish time of 3.00pm had been optimistic and we eventually finished an hour and a half later. Without wanting to sound indelicate I was knackered and I drove back home to Suffolk with the radio turned off relishing the quiet and the chance to put my thoughts in order. In the space of two days I have met 30 or so people and learnt so much that I didn’t even know what I didn’t know. As learning curves go this one is a 1:4. I’m told it gets easier and, looking from the optimistic side, I survived the first meeting (and they survived me).

School’s No Longer Out for Summer

Continuous Professional Development represents a mandatory and annual part of the lawyerly role. Some of us do it with enthusiasm; some with reluctance; some believe in its purpose and some see it as a necessary part of a form-filling, box-ticking process.  Over 3 days in September I was offered the opportunity to attend a CPD course that offered something a bit different, unique even: LBCambridge.  This course would not concentrate on one single area of law but instead would focus on the role of the in-house lawyer.  For two and a half days the focus would be on us…just us and this blog is written by me…just me.

Sunday Evening

Despite the appalling turn in the weather the welcome at Queens’ College was warm. Ferried by taxi from the car park or train station we were efficiently checked in to our accommodation and handed our name badge and ‘LBCompliment’ bag which was filled with chocolate goodies.  As somebody who pays attention to the quality of biscuits and coffee at events (it’s all about the customer experience) this was a good indication of things to come.  

As the course kicked off on the Sunday evening it was straight from dorms to supper in the Old Kitchens and the first chance to meet delegates.  After hearing the story of travels to the event (Italy, South Africa, Sweden, and the frozen north) I was starting to feel that my 50 minute trip didn’t show enough dedication.  People had come a long way to be here.  From the get-go the room was full of chatter, a continuous theme of this event.

Straight from dinner it was time to learn and, wow, what a venue.  The Old Hall is truly stunning but, no time to look, it was time to learn and Paul Gilbert opened the evening session which was focused on our homework: an in-house case study that many around my table related to.  Each table was asked to discuss and identify a learning objective which would be addressed by Paul the following day. To enable the discussion we were introduced to the role of the ‘Wise Owls’; individuals with a wide range of sound commercial and in-house experience from all walks of business life, who were there to help guide and prompt discussion.  The theme moulded by our group was ‘how to improve the dialogue with the business and in so doing embed legal within the business’.  Catchy I know but it had meaning to all of us sat around the table.

For the second part of the evening and to demonstrate the inclusive nature of the course Paul welcomed Nick Hardie (an experienced Financial Director) to the stage for a Q&A session on financial context for legal services.  Themes raised here were pulled through into a delegate’s discussion and we were given the chance to grill Nick more closely as he spent time with each group.  The session in the Old Hall closed with Paul’s invitation to join the team for a drink at the local pub.  There may have been a small rush…

Monday

The evening before we had heard talk of ‘input’ and ‘output’ and my day started with bacon sandwich input.  Not bad.  With an 8:15am start the theme for the morning was ‘strategic and operational imperatives’ kicked off by Paul’s presentation on the 6 learning objectives identified the night before.  Somebody had been up long past ‘time’ being called in the pub putting a presentation together. A blend of interactive sessions with the Wise Owls surrounded an interview with Tom Kilroy who was able to offer insight into both the General Counsel and CEO roles.  One of the sessions focused on the delegate’s interpretation of the in-house role.  Our table pushed forward with thoughts on a strap-line and I think it’s fair to say that the marketing teams of our respective companies may be missing a trick; there was definitely some untapped talent at the table.

The afternoon sessions concentrated on resource management themes including morale, creativity under pressure, outsourcing and coping with difficult choices. The group sessions were broken for a presentation by Colonel Bob Stewart who told the story of his work in the early 1990′s as UN Commander in Bosnia.  It was a story simply told with the aid of over 100 photographs giving a graphic illustration of a world so different from that which the majority of us occupy.  Colonel Bob spoke frankly about his challenges and the principles he maintained during difficult times.  This session generated what quickly became known as ‘the Bob effect’; a slightly overwhelming sense of perspective.  For the moment the chatter and good humour dipped a little; it would be hard not to be affected by the imagery and the impact of the decision making process in such an environment.  To get us back on ‘chatter course’ the Wise Owls (including Colonel Bob) worked with us to pull out development themes from his presentation focusing on subjects such as clarity of communication and the delivery of succinct messages.  The afternoon session finished on an upbeat note after a lively resourcing debate enabled through the contribution of the sponsors and Paul closed with an invitation to pre-dinner drinks and timings for the formal dinner in the Old Hall.

The whole event is well structured but informal yet the chatter over drinks lends a further dimension giving plenty of time for one-to-one sessions with the Wise Owls or the chance to seek out people working within other groups.  We moved on to dinner in the Old Hall and I was lucky enough to be sat between Colonel Bob and Tom Kilroy and had a very entertaining evening; the opportunities to learn from others simply did not stop.

Tuesday

A day of work on the boardroom perspective, soft skills and personal development kicked off with a Q&A session with David Amos who has oodles of boardroom experience and plenty of firmly held views to share on the expectations and role of the trusted adviser.  Themes raised in this session were pulled through to the personal development session where Wise Owls challenged us on our approach.  Are we taking control of our development?  If not what can we do? What do we take from our learning objectives set on day one and how do we apply them?  How does legal get closer to the business?  Is it us or them?

After a short break to refuel we were introduced to the work of Charles Grimes; time to focus on those soft skills that we lawyers may (at our peril) often under value.  We were up and down in our chairs, using colour cards, sharing views on personal characteristics and choosing a single statement that best represented ourselves.  I’ve read some of Carl Gustav Jung’s work on psychological types but this session was a full-on living and breathing example of those traits in action.  We were asked not just to focus on ourselves but the personality traits of those who are opposite to us.  We were introduced to our personal profiles and given a short while to read and absorb.  I’m not ready to share mine with the wider world but with my feet firmly set in the red camp it was very interesting to learn what I might be like to work with.  Obviously I’d like to believe that I’m a ‘one-stop fun-fest’ of direction and results but after 20 minutes with my opposite in the green camp I’m seeing things from a different point of view.  Oh.

We worked in our colour groups which gave me a chance to see some of my personality traits in others.  As I expressed shock at an example of extreme behaviour the Wise Owl just looked at me and raised her eyebrows.  Point taken.  The tasks we were set were short and sharp and gave plenty of scope for interpretation.  I don’t want to give the game away but cricket selectors DO NOT consider the yellow team. The after match party would be awesome but frankly their throwing needs work!

LBCambridge isn’t designed to deliver one ‘eureka’ moment when you can stop and declare that you have simply “got it”; it’s more subtle than that.  I found it to be a series of “oh’s” (dawning realisation) and a slight shaking of the head at the simplicity of some solutions and ideas.  My education came as much from the delegates as it did from the Wise Owls through the sharing of experiences.  It was also the opportunity to see, through the eyes of others, the skills and knowledge that I may already possess and the ones that may need some ‘TLC’.

I was really anticipating LBCambridge and was generally thrilled to be a part of it but I didn’t expect to enjoy it quite as much as I did.  The LBCambridge team have worked tirelessly to produce a supremely well organised event which is focused but driven by the learning objectives of the participants.  Paul and his team closed the event with a short photo montage of the delegates across the course; concentration, thoughtfulness, excitement, happiness and reflection are a few observations of the closing piece.  This was not a course for passive participation. 

This was not just CPD.  

This was LBCambridge CPD.

Time

Just recently at Casa Bruce we’ve been talking a lot about time. We’ve covered the general lack of it or our seeming inability to fit more things into the time we have available. It’s time relevant to work and play and the constant balancing act we perform as working parents.

After a recent visit from a friend who has decided not to return to work in the term that her children both attend school I’ve speculated on what life must be like with “that much time” but rapidly concluded that she would fill it. Easily.

We both talk about how much time challenges us within the workplace. Taking multi-tasking to another level I hear about hubby’s work. That big old custody clock tick-tocking down whilst other cases run to trial, victims need support, budgets need to be considered. We have an anti-work competition policy in this house. No “my day was harder than yours” type discussion. When you do the type of job my hubby does your time is filled with consequences of some of the worst types of behaviours. There isn’t much time for happiness in his workplace.

I’ve talked about how much more I want to learn (a fairly constant theme in our house), to read, to listen but simply don’t know where to squeeze it into the day. My commute to work ties in with listening to audiobooks, a relatively recent discovery which has allowed me to at least listen to some of my ‘wanted’ literature. But still there is not enough time. I want to be fitter, slimmer, stronger but where to fit in more time to exercise? I’m already combining the school run with dog walking and running or grabbing 30 minutes here and there for a spinning session. I like the idea of yoga but frankly an hour and a half to lie on the floor and stretch? I don’t have the time to give.

We want to travel more but opportunity is limited by time: school holidays and leave entitlement. Oh, and the money thing.

We’ve talked and moaned about the impact of the changes to Police pensions that may run roughshod over family retirement plans. Now hubby will have more time in the job but with increased life expectancy and decreased pension income who knows what the outcome will be? We’ve talked about what it will be like to work at the sharp end of the law at 60, what time will do to an individual’s ability to perform at the level his job requires. We’ve concluded nothing other than “it’s a bit shit” and started to look at what time is available to recoup or address pension concerns. Suddenly those years to retirement don’t seem like much at all.

And most of all we’ve talked about time with our kids. The ‘quality’ time, the ‘too much time’ (believe me, if you don’t have kids by the end of the summer holidays there can be such a thing) and the filled with parental guilt time spent lamenting whether we’re getting it right. As with most parents I know, I think we’re doing the best job we know how to do, some times right, some times not so. Coming off the back of a family weekend filled to the rafters with fun and experiences its easy to wish that our time was constantly occupied in this way but if it were I guess it would quickly become meaningless. It’s those special times when it all comes together and everybody is at their best.

And then there’s time for a quick chat with somebody. At the school gates. One of those “do you remember?” chats. About somebody I’d be over-egging to suggest was an acquaintance. He was somebody I knew by sight, father of three kids under 7. They’d had a tough time over the summer of 2011 because he had cancer. Of the nastiest kind. Well it turns out his time ran out last week.

Some things so perfectly act to put life into context. It’s such a shame that some times that context has to be provided by somebody else’s suffering and other people’s loss.

Kizzy-Schmoo

In 2001, after a year away travelling with hubby, we came back to the UK promising ourselves that we would not return to life before travels. This time it was going to be different.  Of course, that promise was short-lived and within 4 weeks we’d committed to jobs in London, rented a hideously expensive two up-two down in Buckhurst Hill and were, once again, on that treadmill called ‘working for a living’. 

In my book a home has never been complete without a pet so we found ourselves searching for the perfect rescue cat based on my theory that an ex-RSPCA Inspector and former Cat Protection League volunteer have a responsibility to source our cats from the neediest in cat society.  It’s a great aim although it has meant on a number of occasions in the past that we’ve adopted and then spent 3 or 4 months waiting to see the animal emerge in daylight.

After a short search we settled (alright, I settled) on a very small tabby cat who was allegedly “young” and had been found locked in a shed somewhere in East London.  She was a little bit disturbed and (probably as a result of her unintentional incarceration) spent the first few months throwing herself at the patio doors in a desperate attempt at liberation.   “Kizzy-Schmoo” spent many months getting used to us and eventually we were confident enough to let her back outside into the world.  Never a lap-cat she remained independent and steadfastly tolerated the arrival and departure of a cocker spaniel called Kira, a hamster called Billy No-Mates and an over indulged goldfish called Piggle.  Things didn’t improve for her as soon after the pitter-patter of tiny feet turned into tiny pudgy grasping hands; hair and tail pulling hands.  Baby gates designed to protect life and limb on the stairs heralded cat sanctuary offering safe harbour and protection.  Initially quick at avoiding the kids she’d started to slow down and the vet voiced the opinion that in 2001 there may have been a little misrepresentation.  That “young” cat was already mid-life when we first met her.

Visually we could see that she was going down-hill rapidly and one evening we both watched her struggle to come down the stairs.  Already booked into the vets for yearly vaccinations we knew this was probably going to be the last evening we would have with her and we settled her on a cushion between us before carrying her upstairs to bed.

There are a lot of things that I will deal with but attending the vets is one thing that sits firmly in the list of ‘blue’ responsibilities in this household and, after all, hubby used to have the shoulder pips to demonstrate competence in this area.  I left home that morning for work with a heavy heart but knowing that hubby would be the one to shoulder the burden of the visit to the vets and the giving of bad news to our six year old and some type of explanation to the two year old who would be searching for “my kitty”.

You may be wondering why I am blogging about this sad but probably far from uncommon family story.  Well, it’s because of the exceptional customer service my husband received from the veterinary practice.  With his work history he’s got a thing or two to say about the charges raised and the selling practices employed by veterinary practices but this time he had not a negative word to say.  The vet was empathetic, clear in his advice and talked through the options and the health and pain implications with associated costs.  There was space to think but when the decision had to be made he was supportive.  It was undeniably a bad experience but the surgery and the vet played the part of trusted advisor creating an environment that wasn’t intrusive or littered with difficulties.  And then, a week later a hand written letter was received:

Dear Mr Bruce,

On behalf of everyone at Orwell Vet Group I would like to say how sorry I was at having to put Kizzy to sleep last week.  It was clearly an upsetting decision but I think we did the kindest thing.

She was obviously a much loved family member who will be sadly missed.

Yours sincerely…

What an exceptional customer experience.  We have already told so many people.

Call Me Maybe

Leaving messages with requests for return calls I’ve had a little earworm and may, from time to time even break into song so I’m sharing it.  My reputation may suffer for choice of music but that’s the thing about an earworm…

Me client; you lawyer with a H/T to Carly Rae Jepsen for her fine lyrics and tune which I’ve tailored for my purposes.  If you want to listen to the original click here.

 

I sent a request by e-mail,

It’s easy, how could you fail?

I have an evidence trail,

And now you’re in my way.

 

Simple answers my wish,

Nothing fancy or swish,

I wasn’t looking for this

And now you’re in my way.

 

Your phone was holdin’,

voice message, new recordin’,

Hot day, tempers risin’

Who’d you think you’re fooling baby?

 

Hey, advice is needed!

But this is crazy.

So here’s my number,

So call me, maybe?

 

I can’t look right,

At you baby,

You’ve got my number,

So call me, maybe?

 

Hey, advice is needed!

But this is crazy.

So here’s my number,

So call me, maybe?

 

All the other law boys,

Try to chase me,

You’ve got my number,

So call me, maybe?

 

You took no time with my call,

How quickly your rep will fall,

You gave me nothing at all,

You’re no longer in my way.

 

I won’t beg, borrow or steal,

We’re over, it’s real,

I guess you don’t feel it but you’re

No longer in my way.

 

Loyalty no longer holdin’,

My respect is goin’,

My time, my money’s rollin’,

I’ll tell you where I’m going baby.

 

Hey, I just left you.

You must be crazy.

You had my number

Crazy, crazy.