TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[DoNotRedeem]

Has anyone heard from K&S DTC?

 

[Harvey Specter - Presiding Partner]

Has anyone heard from Bakers or SH post app for DTC? Idk if I can assume they’re PFOs yet…​

 

[gayathri28]

Has anyone heard from Bakers or SH post app for DTC? Idk if to assume if they’re PFOs yet…​

Haven't heard anything from baker yet :/

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Has anyone done a VS AC before and also done a TC AC before? Was there a substantial difference in your experience/ what you feel they're looking for? Any advice on how to do well for DTC ACs despite having failed VS ACs?

Feel free to DM too - happy to hear from different perspectives and experiences!

(because I assume at VS ACs, they're more willing to take a risk on a candidate because there is a 2 week "interview" (VS) afterwards right? is the DTC AC higher standards?)

Hey!

I have done both, and I would say that DTC AC's typically do have a higher benchmark as the firm isn't able to assess you over an extended period of time like a VS. This can sometimes mean that the standard of performance is higher, and I have found that they usually include additional tasks as well (to assess you across more competencies).

With a vacation scheme AC, as you mentioned, the firm knows that they'll have a couple of weeks to get to know you, so there is sometimes a bit more room for potential. They can see how you work in practice, how you take feedback, and how you develop over time. With a DTC AC, they don't have that follow-up period, so they are usually looking for things to come across more clearly on the day.

In practical terms, I found that this means your answers need to be more polished and well-formed. Your motivations should feel really clear and backed up with evidence (e.g. why commercial law, why this firm, why you), your competency examples should be a bit more developed and structured, and your commercial awareness should come across in a more practical and applied way - instead of just showing that you know what is going on, you need to be able to explain why it matters for clients or the firm. They aren't expecting lots of legal experience, but they are expecting you to show how your experiences have made you suited to the role of a trainee solicitor at this specific firm.

On the VS vs DTC point, I do think it is fair to say that firms can take slightly more of a "wait and see" approach with vac schemes, whereas with DTC they need to be a bit more confident upfront. However, I don't think that means that the bar is wildly different, and plenty of people who don't convert a VS AC go on to succeed at a DTC AC (myself included - and I don't think of myself as particularly confident in those sorts of assessments!).

If you have had a VS AC that didn't go your way, I always found that these were really valuable in shaping how I prepared for the next one. Things such as being more structured, more concise, and a bit more deliberate in how you link your answers back to the firm and its work are all little things that can make a huge difference. There is absolutely no reason why you would fail to convert a DTC AC just because you might not have converted a VS AC in the past - different firms have different benchmarks, and it might just be that you weren't the right fit at the time (+ you might be for this firm!).

I hope that offers an alternative perspective, but happy to chat about it further if you have any other questions!

 

[Bah Bah Pink Sheep]

Hey!

I have done both, and I would say that DTC AC's typically do have a higher benchmark as the firm isn't able to assess you over an extended period of time like a VS. This can sometimes mean that the standard of performance is higher, and I have found that they usually include additional tasks as well (to assess you across more competencies).

With a vacation scheme AC, as you mentioned, the firm knows that they'll have a couple of weeks to get to know you, so there is sometimes a bit more room for potential. They can see how you work in practice, how you take feedback, and how you develop over time. With a DTC AC, they don't have that follow-up period, so they are usually looking for things to come across more clearly on the day.

In practical terms, I found that this means your answers need to be more polished and well-formed. Your motivations should feel really clear and backed up with evidence (e.g. why commercial law, why this firm, why you), your competency examples should be a bit more developed and structured, and your commercial awareness should come across in a more practical and applied way - instead of just showing that you know what is going on, you need to be able to explain why it matters for clients or the firm. They aren't expecting lots of legal experience, but they are expecting you to show how your experiences have made you suited to the role of a trainee solicitor at this specific firm.

On the VS vs DTC point, I do think it is fair to say that firms can take slightly more of a "wait and see" approach with vac schemes, whereas with DTC they need to be a bit more confident upfront. However, I don't think that means that the bar is wildly different, and plenty of people who don't convert a VS AC go on to succeed at a DTC AC (myself included - and I don't think of myself as particularly confident in those sorts of assessments!).

If you have had a VS AC that didn't go your way, I always found that these were really valuable in shaping how I prepared for the next one. Things such as being more structured, more concise, and a bit more deliberate in how you link your answers back to the firm and its work are all little things that can make a huge difference. There is absolutely no reason why you would fail to convert a DTC AC just because you might not have converted a VS AC in the past - different firms have different benchmarks, and it might just be that you weren't the right fit at the time (+ you might be for this firm!).

I hope that offers an alternative perspective, but happy to chat about it further if you have any other questions!

Thank you sooo much Abbie! That makes sense - I think it's just difficult for me to see what I need to improve on and where the bar is at (so that I can try hit it aha) and whether my current approach is enough... or if I need a complete rehaul etc.

(How I wish the firm could let me do a test run hahaha like how you can do practice driving tests or smth aha)

I guess the best I can do is try my best and just keep building upwards. Do you think my age + inexperience can work against me? Do they look for more mature personalities (less adolescent-like or naive ish? not sure how to put it) as they cannot assess you for longer and because most of the other DTC candidates will be older and more experienced? I'm scared I (or my personality) might stick out like a sore thumb haha...

Especially for group exercises - I've only worked with seniors at a 'hierarchy level' - as in, them as the leader/ manager/ exec committee, and never at a 'peer level'. I'm a bit scared I'll default to the "respect your elders/seniors" narrative or just not be able to contribute as I won't have enough experience to follow what they are saying or recommend something on par with their level. I might be overthinking this but I'm just not sure what the group dynamic will be like if I'm with people a good few years older than me!

---> I've only completed one group exercise this cycle (didn't pass that AC) and there was 1 paralegal and 1 graduate in our group - even that was difficult because I found that us students (3 or 4 of us) struggled to assert ourselves or contribute insightfully (the graduates did very well, spoke a lot, had very deep insights etc.) - the difference in levels of experience was very visible! I suppose this is something I need to build, but I'm not too sure how to go about it! I wish there were an "in-person group exercise practice club" somewhere haha.

Sorry for the long post! Any perspective would help greatly - thank you againn