TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[lolololol]

Anyone have any insight into the macfarlanes job sim?

 

[at1234]

anyone done the macfarlanes job sim? happy to trade for other firms

 

[DaemonBlackFyre]

Hey!

Firstly, I'm sorry to hear about the PFO.

I don't think this feedback necessarily contradicts what you have seen from successful candidates, and I think there is a bit of nuance in what firms mean here.

I'd say it is definitely good to express an interest in a specific area of law (for example, one of my own main motivations for applying to Reed Smith was their Transportation practice), especially if that firm is known for strength in that area. Mentioning a particular practice area, sector or deal can be a really effective way of showing research and explaining why that firm stands out to you.

The thing I would be careful of is sounding too fixed or exclusionary. For a full-service firm, graduate recruitment knows that trainees rotate through multiple seats and may end up enjoying something completely different from what they expected. They also might not be able to do a seat in their preferred area of choice, simply due to business needs or the interests of the rest of their cohort. So if an answer reads as "I only want to do PE" or "I'm applying because of your litigation team and nothing else", it can sometimes raise concerns around openness to the broader training experience (not that I'm saying you did this in your application, just some general thoughts!).

I think the strongest approach is usually to combine:

• A specific interest (practice area / sector / deal)
• A broader reason for choosing the firm

For example, in my Reed Smith application, I discussed the Transportation sector and why I was interested in it. However, I also highlighted that their sector approach would allow me to experience a wide range of practice areas, and their pro bono work was another area I was interested in too.

This shows conviction and research without sounding like you have chosen your NQ seat before you have even started. Overall, I wouldn't take that feedback as "don't mention a practice area you are interested in", as you should definitely do that! To me, it sounds a bit more like they are expecting people to come across a bit more open-minded and interested in the wider platform the firm offers.



Whilst I wouldn't be able to say definitively either way, I thought I'd share my thoughts on this point as I sat in the Early Careers team at Reed Smith during my SQE placement this year.

From conversations I had with the team and more generally, my impression was that there was a lot of emphasis placed on the application answers and the wider assessment process rather than purely academics.

The application process has changed slightly since I applied via DTC, and I'll also caveat that my placement was during the VS process which I believe was also different. Generally speaking, my understanding is that academics are still an important factor and are considered throughout the process. However, once you have met the required academic standard and progressed through the initial stages, other factors often start to carry more weight in differentiating candidates.

Because of that, if you progressed to the second stage and already met the minimum academic requirements, I personally wouldn't immediately assume that academics were the deciding factor. It could be things like application answers, VI performance, communication style, or sometimes the wider cohort is just stronger than usual. I would also try not to get too hung up on the general feedback if you feel it doesn't apply to you. I appreciate it can be frustrating to not know where you could improve (+ I've definitely felt a similar way multiple times in the past), but generic feedback has to be quite broad and doesn't necessarily reflect the deciding factor in an individual application - particularly if you generally feel confident in your written applications and are consistently progressing through those stages.

I also wouldn't discount your point about the VI earlier - I think that they can be surprisingly difficult to judge from the candidate side as it is tricky to know what the assessors are looking for. In the past I've felt confident in VI's and not progressed, but also felt I'd completely failed it and then received an offer.

If you are consistently passing written stages though, I would try to see that as quite an encouraging sign as it suggests your application writing and underlying motivations are landing well! I know it probably doesn't feel like that after a rejection, but getting through those stages repeatedly is still evidence that you are doing a lot of things right - sometimes it genuinely can just come down to fit, relative performance in that batch, or what that particular cohort looked like rather than there being a fundamental issue with your application.

Thanks for your detailed response Abbie! - do you think firms in general have higher standards for their DTC since they have limited data to go off as to whether you would be a good trainee compared to a VS where they can judge your performance more clearly as a potential trainee doing trainee tasks.

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Thanks for your detailed response Abbie! - do you think firms in general have higher standards for their DTC since they have limited data to go off as to whether you would be a good trainee compared to a VS where they can judge your performance more clearly as a potential trainee doing trainee tasks.

Hey!

Of course, no problem at all!

I think that is an interesting question, and my view is that there is some truth to it (although maybe not in such a strict way). My sense is that DTCs don't necessarily have higher standards, but firms are evaluating on a different basis as they have less evidence. With a VS, the firm gets to observe things that are difficult to test in an application or AC alone - things like how you work with others, whether people enjoy working with you, curiosity, resilience, commercial judgement, attention to detail, how you respond to feedback, etc.

As they will have more data to work with, they can sometimes be more comfortable taking a chance on someone who isn't the most polished interviewer on paper but has potential to perform well in practice.

For DTCs, there isn't usually this luxury, so the process can feel stricter and more risk-managed. Your written application, motivations, interview performance, assessed tasks and overall consistency carry more weight as that is all they have to predict your potential as a trainee. This generally means that benchmarks are higher at AC-stage, whether that is in the assessed tasks or in how you express your motivations.

I wouldn't necessarily interpret that as DTC candidates need to be stronger than VS candidates. From personal experience, I wasn't able to convert my vacation schemes but I ended up receiving a TC offer through the DTC route. Sometimes it is just about which format lets you show your strengths best, your performance on that specific day, or which firm is overall the best fit.

There might be people who look average at AC but are exceptional once firms see them on a scheme, and equally people who interview brilliantly but struggle in the day-to-day environment.

Generally speaking, I would say there is less room for error in the DTC process (given the risk the firm has to take) which usually translates to higher standards, but I'm sure firms have specific criteria that they use that could assess more than we think

 

[Gioiabwear Yong]

I’m not tooo sure, I just assumed that they’d be interested / impacted by this development - that’s why it’s the first insight I saw when I opened their webpage.

pretty much because of your essay, i knew ppl who got rejected because apart from shipping/transportation practice, they mentioned life science. For example, at an insight day, grad rec told the life science sector in London office is so small, not like in the US so they expect candidates to mention other sectors like energy, finance and media/entertainment.



For finance, i don't think their sector has advised many PE restructuring or sport sponsorship, instead they advised institutions and regulatory side like crypto, fintech, etc.

 

[Gioiabwear Yong]

I did it last year, happy to help if you want!

Hi! May I know when they usually get back to u if u get a phone interview?

 

[lolololol]

morgan lewis pfo

 

[AryanAgg]

RPC, Macfarlanes assessment invites.

 

[Ancika]

Is anyone willing to share their insights for the Reed Smith DTC AC? I have insights from NRF, HSFK.

 

[RS Sanjanaa]

Is the RPC test automatic?

 

[roo4]

hi all, not sure this is the right forum to ask but wondered if anyone had any insights into how long the process for applying for paralegal roles typically is - ie if i was hoping for a september start when should i start applying? thanks!

 

[spamelinazoid]

hi all, not sure this is the right forum to ask but wondered if anyone had any insights into how long the process for applying for paralegal roles typically is - ie if i was hoping for a september start when should i start applying? thanks!

1.5 months was mine. Started applying in October and got job offers mid November for a January start.

 

[Alaa]

hi all, not sure this is the right forum to ask but wondered if anyone had any insights into how long the process for applying for paralegal roles typically is - ie if i was hoping for a september start when should i start applying? thanks!

It really depends on the paralegal role and how you're applying. Direct applications to bigger firms tend to be slower. Once you accept an offer, there's usually a built-in delay of around a month before you start, and background checks or right to work checks can add further time. Recruitment agencies generally move faster, since they're often filling roles that need someone soon. "Immediate start" roles obviously skip most of the lead time, but those are the exception.

Given it's already July, if you're aiming for September, I'd start applying now rather than wait. Even a quick process needs buffer for interviews, an offer, and the notice/checks period before you start.

A couple of other things worth factoring in:

• If you're currently employed, don't forget your own notice period.
• Smaller firms / boutiques can sometimes turn things around in a couple of weeks if they need someone urgently.
• Worth asking recruiters directly what their average time to offer has been recently.

Good luck with the search!

 

[roo4]

It really depends on the paralegal role and how you're applying. Direct applications to bigger firms tend to be slower. Once you accept an offer, there's usually a built-in delay of around a month before you start, and background checks or right to work checks can add further time. Recruitment agencies generally move faster, since they're often filling roles that need someone soon. "Immediate start" roles obviously skip most of the lead time, but those are the exception.

Given it's already July, if you're aiming for September, I'd start applying now rather than wait. Even a quick process needs buffer for interviews, an offer, and the notice/checks period before you start.

A couple of other things worth factoring in:

• If you're currently employed, don't forget your own notice period.
• Smaller firms / boutiques can sometimes turn things around in a couple of weeks if they need someone urgently.
• Worth asking recruiters directly what their average time to offer has been recently.

Good luck with the search!

1.5 months was mine. Started applying in October and got job offers mid November for a January start.

thank you both so much i really appreciate!!

 

[shays]

for me, it took around 10 months, actually, and I was applying with two degrees and experience. That was a year ago. I was applying in London though, which tends to be a really competitive process and I was applying only for salaries above 28k pa, so definitely start applying sooner rather than later.

 

[radssss]

have u heard back from foot anstey yet??

Hey, I don’t know if you still want a response to this - I did a vacation scheme with them and we were the last lot to do ACs.

 

[theduckytie]

Hey, I don’t know if you still want a response to this - I did a vacation scheme with them and we were the last lot to do ACs.

I got an email on 24/05 saying "We have recently begun reviewing applications and are working our way through them carefully. We will be in touch over the next couple of weeks to confirm the outcome of your application". I haven't heard anything since...

 

[at1234]

heyy i need macfarlanes VI help. i am willing to trade for hogan lovells VI qs, RPC and a bunch of others! pls help xx

 

[Deleted member 33582]

Has anyone not heard from ML with pfo or ti?

 

[TCapplicant1005]

Morgan Lewis PFO DTC