I have read how the Law Society is continuing its fight against legal aid cuts. I do not recall the Society asking whether they should spend money on a campaign with which I may not agree.

I speak only in respect of civil legal aid. My clients are all fee paying and not in the ‘individually rich’ bracket or large companies with a litigation budget. They have to take a commercial decision whether or not to litigate, bearing in mind their own costs and whether the opposition has the benefit of legal aid.

I wonder whether such a consideration is taken when granting a legal aid certificate. Sometimes, cynical me thinks that certificates are given on the basis of ‘let’s say the chances are 50/50 or less but then they will be much greater when the opposition know that we have a certificate’.

Perhaps a test should be: ‘If this was my money would I spend it on this litigation?’ Perhaps the legal aid budget would not have increased had a more stringent financial test been considered and hence such proposed cuts would not now be proposed.

I await the inevitable response that I am: (i) out of touch with those who need legal representation; (ii) some sort of right-wing reactionary; and (iii) should be grateful to have fee-paying clients.

Martin Comport,Dale & Dale, Kingham, Oxfordshire