-
Hey Guest, Reed Smith’s graduate recruitment team and future trainees are now live in the forum. Ask your questions about the firm or application process here.
TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26
- Thread starter Ram Sabaratnam
- Start date
Hi! For Macfarlanes’ Direct TC:
Can I talk about Macfarlanes without talking about private client? I’m interested in their corporate and litigation seats. I genuinely have nothing to say about private client.
Can I talk about Macfarlanes without talking about private client? I’m interested in their corporate and litigation seats. I genuinely have nothing to say about private client.
Absolutely. Many candidates write about private client for Macfarlanes, so I suspect this will be refreshing for graduate recruitment to read.
Hey!Mayer brown pfo. Ngl, I'm a bit disheartened. This was my highest-scoring amberjack, so I genuinely thought I had the best shot there.
I've been having a tough time with DTC applications this cycle. I've basically been rejected post-application across the board, which has surprised me because I was progressing well with VS applications. My drafting hasn't really changed, and I still tailor each application, so I'm struggling to pinpoint what's going wrong.
For context, I'm an international student who did my LLB in the UK. Most of my work experience (internships and paralegal role) has been abroad, and my UK experience is mostly just extracurriculars during my degree. Maybe the issue is that I don't have enough UK work experience, or the fact that I don't have a 2.1 across all modules (still have a 2.1 overall)?
Does anyone have any insight into why I might be hitting this wall with DTCs specifically? And what I could do to improve next cycle? Would really appreciate any honest feedback or tips.
Thanks in advance.
also hoping @Abbie Whitlock has any advice?
I am really sorry to hear about Mayer Brown - particularly as it was your strongest Amberjack result. I can completely understand why that feels frustrating and confusing.
I've shared a few thoughts below (although with the caveat that none of us can know for sure).
Firstly, I wouldn't jump to concluding that this is a UK work experience issue, as plenty of firms value international experience and I think that internships + paralegal experience abroad can be a real strength to your application if framed well. Equally, I probably wouldn't fixate too much on not having a 2:1 in every module if you still achieved a 2:1 overall (unless a firm specifically says otherwise, as I know some are slightly stricter).
Personally, I found that DTCs and VSs can sometimes reward/value slightly different things. VS processes often give you more opportunities to demonstrate potential over multiple stages, whereas DTC applications can sometimes be much more compressed and competitive at the application stage as firms are trying to assess whether someone is TC-level immediately.
You also mention that your drafting hasn't changed, which actually might be worth revisiting slightly. If your VS style worked as it focused more on potential, curiosity, and exploration, DTC answers sometimes need a slightly different emphasis - i.e. more evidence on readiness, clearer commercial judgement, stronger examples of ownership, and more direct articulation of why you'd succeed as a trainee.
I also wouldn't discount things like timing and cohort effects too much. If you have previously been progressing well in VS processes, this would suggest that your underlying application skills are stronger than it currently feels, and it might be things out of your control that are causing the outcome.
If I were you, I would perhaps treat this more as a diagnostic exercise than evidence that something is fundamentally wrong. It might be helpful to compare a couple of your strongest VS applications against your DTC ones and see whether there are any differences in positioning - for example, whether your DTC answers lean more towards listing achievements rather than showing impact, or whether your answers have become a bit too polished and lost some of the specificity that made them stand out.
From your post, you come across as reflective and thoughtful rather than someone who is completely missing the mark - therefore, I wouldn't assume there's an obvious issue causing all of this! Sometimes an application cycle is just more competitive or the timing is off, and the best thing you can do is just tweak a few things rather than trying to overhaul everything.
Resilience and continuous improvement are really key traits that are essential to succeed in this process - based on what you've written, I'm sure you are more than capable of receiving an offer. Wishing you the best of luck with whatever you apply for next
Hi, Could someone please help with this. I'd really appreciate any info. TIA!
Thank you!If you can do it once, you can get another one again! Don't lose confidence
RPC test invite! weird. They sent it at 3AM
BCLP DTC PFO. I sent the app 17 May and took the test 18 May. Think this is now PFO number 33…
I’ve seen somewhere in this thread that firms are more picky with DTCs than Vac Schemers - bcuz for DTCs, I’m told that firms want trainee ready people, not just students looking to explore. But please do correct me if I’m wrong!
As a person’s finished the Barrister’s Training Course, may I know if this gives me any advantage? If so, what are the advantages? (E.g, stronger advocacy skills??).
Thank you very much!
As a person’s finished the Barrister’s Training Course, may I know if this gives me any advantage? If so, what are the advantages? (E.g, stronger advocacy skills??).
Thank you very much!
Hey!
I think there is some truth to that, but I would be careful not to overstate the VS vs DTC distinction. Firms do generally expect DTC applicants to show a bit more certainty around wanting a career in law and understanding the trainee role, but DTC offers are still ultimately made on potential as well as readiness (rather than whether someone already feels like a trainee!). I was successful through the DTC route, and I didn't have a substantial amount of legal experience to show I was ready for the role of a trainee (apart from a paralegal placement year and some VS').
On the BTC specifically, I do think there can be advantages if you frame it well rather than assuming the qualification speaks for itself. Advocacy is absolutely one (especially communicating clearly under pressure), but I would also highlight things like handling complex information quickly, responding to challenge, structured analysis, and confidence interacting with clients. Additionally, depending on the firm, experience with drafting and managing competing arguments can also transfer really well to the role of a solicitor/trainee.
One thing I would add though is that if you have completed the BTC, firms may probe a bit more into your reasons for pursuing a TC rather than pupillage. This isn't necessarily in a negative way, but they'll want to understand whether this has been a recent shift, what changed, and why commercial law is now the better fit for your long-term goals. So I'd make sure that you have a clear and positive narrative around that transition - focusing less on why you moved away from the bar, and more on what draws you towards the solicitor route and that firm specifically
Hi Abbie! Thank you for the helpful answer - yes, during the BTC were made to learn practical skills like conference (talking to clients, draw out more info to help them present their case, be nice and empathetic etc). So not everything is identical to the SQE, but it’s not entirely useless - there are transferable skills.Hey!
I think there is some truth to that, but I would be careful not to overstate the VS vs DTC distinction. Firms do generally expect DTC applicants to show a bit more certainty around wanting a career in law and understanding the trainee role, but DTC offers are still ultimately made on potential as well as readiness (rather than whether someone already feels like a trainee!). I was successful through the DTC route, and I didn't have a substantial amount of legal experience to show I was ready for the role of a trainee (apart from a paralegal placement year and some VS').
On the BTC specifically, I do think there can be advantages if you frame it well rather than assuming the qualification speaks for itself. Advocacy is absolutely one (especially communicating clearly under pressure), but I would also highlight things like handling complex information quickly, responding to challenge, structured analysis, and confidence interacting with clients. Additionally, depending on the firm, experience with drafting and managing competing arguments can also transfer really well to the role of a solicitor/trainee.
One thing I would add though is that if you have completed the BTC, firms may probe a bit more into your reasons for pursuing a TC rather than pupillage. This isn't necessarily in a negative way, but they'll want to understand whether this has been a recent shift, what changed, and why commercial law is now the better fit for your long-term goals. So I'd make sure that you have a clear and positive narrative around that transition - focusing less on why you moved away from the bar, and more on what draws you towards the solicitor route and that firm specifically
And actually I’ve always wanted to be a solicitor, because my uni focuses a lot on commercial awareness and asking bigger law firms to come to career fairs. It’s more like the people around me and my education so far? It’s something like this: I got influences by my surroundings / peers.
During my applications this round, I have tried to explain that I prefer being a solicitor over a barrister because barristers do a lot of law, whereas for solicitors they handle their work while considering issues in that sector / industry - like sanctions, war, or just increasing gov regulation. It just gives a lot more variety to my work life?? Is this a valid reason?
Last edited:
Hi everyone,
Recently received a PFO and in the general feedback (wasn't specific to my application), they said that students should not focus on one practice area when answering why the firm since they are a full-service firm, this pretty much contradicts what I have seen from many successful candidates who pinpoint a specifc practice area, a deal within that practice area etc, citing this as a reason for why the firm?
Thoughts?
Recently received a PFO and in the general feedback (wasn't specific to my application), they said that students should not focus on one practice area when answering why the firm since they are a full-service firm, this pretty much contradicts what I have seen from many successful candidates who pinpoint a specifc practice area, a deal within that practice area etc, citing this as a reason for why the firm?
Thoughts?
Are you talking about Reed Smith’s recent general feedback? It sounds like the general feedback I got after getting rejected from their DTC. I was surprised by this feedback for the same reasons as you are. But then apparently theres another way to do this - e.g u could talk about a second practice that’s related - like PE and M&A? For example I did PE and Football for the Reed Smith’s q on “a news that interests u and whats the impact on RS?”. Anyway, I got rejected - but I’m not sure if it’s bcuz of this q.
Yeah i'm referencing RS's feedback, i specifically spoke about Shipping (generic ik) but i have a very close connection with that type of work so I thought it would be fine as it links to me very specifically. I referenced PE and Restructuring and Insolvency as practice areas for the issues affecting one of RS industry groups with the main issue being rising gilt yields affecting the financial services industy group.
I scored 22 on the Amberjack and i also have a low 2:1 (62%) supplemented by a master's degree at a RG with multiple first class marks (4), my written answers were strong having been reviewed by trainees, so im just going to put it down to my academics not being competitive enough.
I’m not tooooo sure about the academics bit - a Masters degree@RG and a 2:1 undergrad should place u in a much better position than most applicants tho …
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
MFT Europe Innovative Lawyers Awards 2026: the winners
- Latest: myFT following
Top Members
Posts
-
Jaysen
- +0
- 48
Antoni Trochimowicz
- +0
- 29
RikPalmer-ReedSmith
-
New
- 22
jamsparkle
- +11
- 17
Novaa
- +8
- 11
-
Jaysen
- +139
- 328
Antoni Trochimowicz
-
New
- 148
user55998384
- +138
- 63
anon78365222111
- +147
- 48
alanshore
- +344
- 46
-
Abbie Whitlock
- +427
- 1081
Harvey Specter - Presiding Partner
- +423
- 652
Jaysen
- +460
- 564
Novaa
- +711
- 471
Jessica Pearson - Managing Partner
- +972
- 371