TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[amb303]

Congrats! Nothing for me, assuming PFO I’m gutted I was hopeful for that one

If you do get PFO they will give you fairly specific feedback in a month or two, which is useful if you end up applying to them again—this is cycle 2 for me and cycle 1 I got rejected this round

 

[lcerys]

If you do get PFO they will give you fairly specific feedback in a month or two, which is useful if you end up applying to them again—this is cycle 2 for me and cycle 1 I got rejected this round

Will the PFO not come for another month or so then?

 

[amb303]

Will the PFO not come for another month or so then?

No I think everyone will hear back this week, but I remember the feedback coming about a month or 6 weeks after the PFO!

 

[Maddy]

It’s untimed and there’s no numerical questions. It is just SJT and a lot of verbal reasoning.

I just did mine and I got 6-6-6-5 in the pillars and high in verbal reasoning. Idk if this is good…​

Should we turn on our camera? I am travelling so need to adjust based on that.

 

[rain2801]

It’s untimed and there’s no numerical questions. It is just SJT and a lot of verbal reasoning.

I just did mine and I got 6-6-6-5 in the pillars and high in verbal reasoning. Idk if this is good…​

How long will it take to complete it approx?

 

[amb303]

Does anyone have any advice on prepping for written exercises? I really struggled with the one written exercise I've had and would really appreciate any tips on how to approach something like this one that I have coming up (also if anyone has done the KN written exercise in a previous cycle and has any tips)! Thank you!:

"The next step is a written case study, designed to be completed within 1 hour and 15 minutes. You will receive the case study via email at your selected time slot and will be required to type your responses and return them within the allocated timeframe.

The exercise focuses on Regulatory Law and will require you to provide written advice to a client. All necessary materials and resources will be provided to support you in completing the task. Just to reassure you, the written case study does not require any previous legal experience in Regulatory Law to complete."

 

[Harvey Specter - Presiding Partner]

Should we turn on our camera? I am travelling so need to adjust based on that.

There was no need to turn the camera on so you should be good to go tbh esp with travelling.​

How long will it take to complete it approx?

It took me about 45 mins cos there wasn’t maths at all. So it’s doable within an hour honestly.​

 

[Prudentia]

Yeesh, the Baker SJT was horrid.

 

[Barakat]

Yeesh, the Baker SJT was horrid.

Please do you care to explain

 

[HMajesty]

Yeesh, the Baker SJT was horrid.

Why lol

 

[tozziesss]

Yeesh, the Baker SJT was horrid.

whyyy omg

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Does anyone have any advice on prepping for written exercises? I really struggled with the one written exercise I've had and would really appreciate any tips on how to approach something like this one that I have coming up (also if anyone has done the KN written exercise in a previous cycle and has any tips)! Thank you!:

"The next step is a written case study, designed to be completed within 1 hour and 15 minutes. You will receive the case study via email at your selected time slot and will be required to type your responses and return them within the allocated timeframe.

The exercise focuses on Regulatory Law and will require you to provide written advice to a client. All necessary materials and resources will be provided to support you in completing the task. Just to reassure you, the written case study does not require any previous legal experience in Regulatory Law to complete."

Hi!

Written exercises can definitely feel difficult because of the amount of information and the time pressure, but firms are usually much more interested in your reasoning and communication than whether you know the law perfectly - especially if they have said no prior regulatory law experience is required.

One thing that really helped me was to resist the urge to start typing immediately. I'd spend the first 10-15 minutes properly reading through the materials you have been given and working out:

• What the client is actually asking
• The main risks/issues
• What your overall recommendation is likely to be

I also found that ensuring I had a clear structure was really important and helped improve my performance overall. Even using simple headings and incorporating bullet points (if appropriate) can make your answer feel much clearer and more organised. When approaching the exercise, I'd usually think in terms of:

• Relevant facts/background
• Key issues
• Analysis
• Practical recommendations/next steps

I'd also try to stay practical and client-focused, rather than drifting into an overly academic style. A lot of people fall into the trap of trying to sound very "legal", but firms will often prefer concise and commercially sensible advice.

Additionally, if they provide source materials, the answer is usually in there somewhere and you generally are not expected to have any outside legal knowledge. Therefore, they're testing how well you can digest information, prioritise conflicting points, and communicate these under time pressure.

I haven't done KN's written exercise personally, but from the description you have provided, it sounds like they are intentionally making it accessible to those without any background knowledge in the area. I'd focus much more on clarity and logical reasoning, rather than trying to demonstrate technical regulatory law knowledge. I'd also make sure that you leave at least 5-10 minutes at the end to proofread, as under timed conditions it is very easy to miss small errors or forget to answer a part of the task.

I've also written a few previous posts on written exercises more generally - I have quoted those below in case they are useful as well.

Wishing you the best of luck - I'm sure you'll do great!!

Hello!

Congratulations on getting the invite! Whilst I haven't completed the Ashurst written exercise, they will usually test your ability to communicate clearly and structure your arguments logically - similar to what you'd do as a trainee when drafting emails or internal notes.

I've outlined some previous tips that I always used when preparing for written exercises below:

• Practice timed writing - pick a 30-45 minute slot, read a short business or news article, and summarise the key points in a structured 1-2 page memo with a clear conclusion summarising your findings.
• Work on prioritisation - pick an article with a lot of information, and practice picking out the 3-4 most important issues rather than trying to summarise and include everything.
• Use a clear structure - this was the main thing that I implemented that helped me score higher on written assessments! Follow a clear structure in your answer, and practice what this would be for each type of document.
• Check clarity - after writing (potentially one of the above), ask yourself if someone with no context to the facts could follow along with the information and your reasoning.
• Proofread under pressure - I would get used to quickly checking grammar and flow, as this is really important in a written exercise! I sometimes struggled with this, as the pressure made me skip parts of my writing, but I found that literally following along with a pen or your finger can make sure you don't miss anything.
• Review sample case studies - I would have a look online and see if there are any free resources that you can have a go at. A true lifesaver during my last cycle was this forum post by Jacob Miller, and I would definitely give it a read!

The main thing that assisted me in written exercises is following a clear structure! I would go through and read all of the materials first, and then go back to pick out the key details. You should be looking for key issues, areas that you will require more information, and anything that you think is important for the client to know.

I would then follow a clear structure in your answer. There are a a few different types of documents that they could test you on - e.g. an email, memo, report, note, etc. I would have a look beforehand at the formatting of each, and have a go at writing them! If you are writing a letter / email to a client, make sure that you aren't including technical terms and writing in way that is easy for them to understand.

I would also try and find ways to showcase that you have the skills that they are looking for in trainees. For example, in one of my previous ACs I was asked to write an email to a supervisor. In this email, I outlined my arguments and recommendation, but I ended it by offering to draft the email / document for the client (e.g. proactivity). This will be dependant on each exercise, but if you can incorporate this in some way, I think it's a great way of standing out!

I hope that assists - best of luck with the written exercise, I'm sure you'll smash it!

Of course, no problem at all!!

Since client emails are such a common format in written exercises, it's definitely worth getting comfortable with how to approach them! A few things that I kept in mind when preparing:

Understand the Purpose and Audience

Before you start writing, clarify who you are writing to (e.g. a client, supervisor, or a colleague) and what information they need from you. The tone, level of formality, and structure will vary depending on whether it's an internal email or an email to an external client.

For example, if you are emailing a client, you want to ensure that they are able to understand any legal principles that you are outlining in your email. As such, it's important to make sure you write it in layman's terms and don't just recite the information given in the materials. However, if you are emailing a supervisor, I would focus on highlighting the most important pieces of information as you are effectively trying to save them time in going through the materials themselves. I would always aim to write in a professional way, and frame it like you would an actual email - such as a subject line and a closing sentence.

Use a Clear and Logical Structure

The main thing that I changed when approaching written exercises was making sure that I had a clear and logical structure. A good client email should be easy to follow. A simple structure could look like:

1. Opening: A brief, polite greeting and context for why you're writing (and what you'll be discussing in the email). If you're emailing a supervisor, it might be useful to include a short summary of your findings at the top (i.e. an early conclusion), and then go into more detail below.
2. Main Body: Summarise the key points or advice clearly and concisely, using short paragraphs. It might be appropriate to use headings and subtitles, especially if there is a lot of information. The goal is to make sure that the client can follow along, and that it isn't just a massive wall of text that is difficult to read.
3. Closing: End with next steps, an offer of assistance, or a polite sign-off (e.g. "Please let me know if you'd like to discuss further"). These elements distinguish an email exercise from a general report or memo, and shows that you are following the brief exactly! If you are emailing a supervisor, I would try to show some proactivity in the closing parts - such as offering to write a first draft of a document or client email.

Keep your tone professional and approachable

I would aim for clear, confident language without being overly formal (but still professional). This can be tricky, but phrases such as "I'd recommend..." or "It may be helpful..." strike a nice balance. Avoid overly technical language or long-winded phrasing - simplicity often conveys professionalism! As stated above, I would definitely avoid legal jargon if you are writing to a client, unless you are certain that a client would understand it.

Also remember that tone can shift slightly depending on the client's relationship with the firm. If you are told this information, a longstanding client might suit a warmer tone, whilst a first-time contact may call for a more formal approach. However, if in doubt, I would always go for a more formal approach - especially in a professional context!

Be precise and client-focused

Remember the purpose for why you are actually writing to the client, and tailor your response to the client's actual issue. I would avoid copying large chunks of background information from the brief (as the client will already have this information!) - instead, demonstrate understanding of their issue by reframing the key points in your own words and applying them directly to the client's situation. Make sure to keep your advice practical - clients care more about what they should do next than about the legal theory behind it. You might find it useful to use signposting phrases such as "In summary..." or "Based on the information provided..." to make your reasoning easy to follow. If there are uncertainties, I would make sure to address them but be reassuring - e.g. "Further details would be needed to confirm this position, but at this stage...".

Check for clarity and tone at the end

Before your time runs out, take a moment to review your email. I always found it helpful to read it aloud (if possible) or follow along with my finger - this helps you catch sentences that are too long, unclear, or sound abrupt. Look for opportunities to simplify, and if a sentence takes more than one breath to read, it's probably too long! Make sure your sign-off fits the context (things such as "Kind regards" or "Best wishes" usually work best). The graduate recruitment team / assessors will be looking for professionalism in formatting and presentation - consistent spacing, clear paragraphing, and correct spelling and grammar will all make a strong impression.

As a practical tip to practice: You could start by taking short case studies and draft sample emails that summarise your advice in 200-300 words. This helps you get used to organising your thoughts quickly and writing in a professional, accessible way.

I hope that helps!

Hello!

A few resources below that I used / might be useful:

• Definitive Guide to Law Firm Case Studies (whilst this is a case study, instead of a written exercise, I found it super useful last cycle!)
• TCLA Written Exercises (a good way to practice if you are able to pay to access resources)
• Some law firms upload example written exercises online - I believe DWF has one available!

Hopefully they help as a starting point - best of luck!

 

[give.me.a.tc]

If this helps Bakers people, did a search on TCLA and the following scores have proceeded to VI in the past: 7763, 4766, 6479 and 6449.

So on the average, seems 4/9 is the required minimum for each of the skills.

 

[Harvey Specter - Presiding Partner]

Please do you care to explain

Why lol

whyyy omg

Just gna add my two cents the verbal reasoning Qs were horrid lmao. There’s at least 12 of them…

But the test overall is okay. If you get c22/36, 4 min per pillar and high verbal = likely to get VI tbh.​