A London law firm has advertised a trainee job paying a salary of £10,000 a year.
Ilford-based SS Basi & Co placed adverts for a trainee or paralegal with at least one year's legal experience to work full-time "typing, taking telephone calls, dealing with client enquiries, managing files and making applications". Assuming a 35 hour working week, the £10,000 pay breaks down to a pathetic £5.92 an hour. That is three pounds beneath the £9.75 London Living wage. And more than a pound beneath the £7.05 UK minimum wage for 21-to-24-year-olds.
![]() |
SS Basic. |
SS Basi would not be the first firm to take the michael after the SRA scrapped minimum pay levels for trainees. But it appears to have gone the lowest. The Law Society recommends that "as a matter of good practice", providers of training contracts should pay trainees £18,547 outside of London and £20,913 within it. SS Basi's advertised pay is less than half that amount. If its successful candidate took a flatshare in Ilford for £500 a month, their wage would leave them with under £79 a week to splash out on luxury items, such as food. That's a motivating £6 a week more than they would receive on jobseeker's allowance.
![]() |
If they borrow £2 for postage and eat from bins, SS Basi trainees can afford one a month. |
SS Basi pulled its adverts after being approached by RollOnFriday. A spokeswoman said that the inclusion of a £10,000 salary was "obviously a typo done by our admin assistant". She said that the correct amount "is the minimum wage and then it goes up from there according to the qualifications and everything". Offering desperate law graduates the minimum wage is still appalling. But what appear to be cached job adverts for SS Basi dating from 2016 and 2015 also cite the same £10,000 salary. The firm's spokeswoman said "that's not possible from our firm, we never advertise for staff normally".
![]() |
According to the firm, it actually pays trainees £11,844 a year. |
A woman purporting to be a reputation consultant for SS Basi subsequently telephoned RollOnFriday claiming that the old adverts were genuine, but that the salary was also wrong in them. In an odd conversation, she told RollOnFriday, "don't give up the day job", and hung up after promising to sue.
Bryan Scant, chairman of the Law Society's Junior Lawyers Division, told RollOnFriday, "I'm really surprised that a firm is offering such a low salary for a trainee solicitor role, it means that you can only realistically take a training contract offer if you have sufficient independent means to survive in London, which goes against the JLD's attempts to increase access to the profession for those from less affluent backgrounds. Alternatively, the trainees are going to have to work 2 jobs to be able to survive, which doesn't lead to a productive trainee".
Comments
Hi Jess!
Don't forget it wasn't that long ago that articled clerks had to be pay for their training, rather than scooping up £50k a year for photocopying services.
Anyway, they said it was an error, so there we go.
Very nice use of a gradient in the background, and I like that it constantly reminds me that "Your site title" goes at the top, next to the title of the site. Bold font on the logo too. Not actually bold, but you know. Brave. Brave and almost unreadable.
Luckily I'll only have an 18 hour day and commuting through Waterloo is a breeze, and I only need a £7,000 a year season ticket.
And someone representing your firm confirmed the existence of the ads to RoF.
If I were you I'd just shut up and go away now. But then I wasn't founded in 1998, so I guess that gives you the trump card.
11/08/2017 07:56
I do hope someone takes formal action over what appear to be blatant lies and intimidation.
Indeed. Jess's comments to Jamie were out of order
"your letterhead, website and e-mails show the words "authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority" and either the firm's registered name and number if it is an LLP or company or, if the firm is a partnership or a recognised sole practice, the name under which it is licensed/authorised by the SRA and the number allocated to it by the SRA."
I speak to so many fresh face enthusiastic LPCs who are desperate for a TC who have been lied to by the LPC providers and now find themselves without a chance of a TC. I would advise each and every one of them to accept a TC for this low salary and then move to a decent paying firm on qualification. That is a significantly better option than paralegalling for a few years before jacking in all hope of a TC.