TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[DiploSha361]

Hello!

My overall approach to the work experience section has been pretty simple and consistent across all of the applications I made - I would aim to discuss:

1. What the role was
2. What you actually did
3. The skills and insights that you gained (ideally linked back to commercial law or the role of a trainee solicitor, if it fits naturally)

On your first point, I do think it is worth briefly mentioning how the experience developed your skills (e.g. your example on prioritisation and time management). The key is to just make sure that it is concise and relevant - a sentence or two that shows the impact the experience had is usually enough, and I'd avoid going into lots of reflective detail.

In terms of length, it really depends on the experience that you are talking about. If there is no word limit, I would use those three elements above as a guide and keep things concise where you can. Realistically, entries will vary quite a bit and shorter roles might be somewhere around 50 words, whereas more substantial entries could be closer to 250-300 words. The main thing is to avoid waffling and make sure that everything you include adds value to your application.

For your last question, I personally wouldn't go into very specific anecdotes (like a difficult customer situation) in the written application. I would keep it more high-level and focused on the overall role, as those kinds of detailed examples are much better saved for video interviews or ACs, where you can properly explain your actions and reflect on them

Hi @Abbie Whitlock

Thanks for this useful - I wondered whether for these types of Work Ex Sections (e.g. White & Case's), where there is a 250 word space for each section, should we use prose or stick to bullets. I for example have done a range of jobs in the Foreign Office, from sanctions to working in Somalia so I question if i should do 250 word paragraph for 7+ roles!

 

[johnjoh199]

Has anyone received a July vac scheme offer from SH? Haven't heard anything from them

 

[Señora Abogada]

I just applied to Haynes and Boone and realised I wouldn't even be able to do the VS because it's from 1 - 26th June, and I have exams

 

[Mikeross750]

@Abbie Whitlock thank you for all your insights on the vac scheme process!

I had one quick question to ask. Should men wear a tie to the vac scheme at all? I have heard that is likely to be considered too formal and may appear out of place, so wanted to check in and confirm that no tie is the most appropriate way to go, or if one should still be worn on the first day at least.


Thank you in advance!

 

[Bah Bah Pink Sheep]

@Abbie Whitlock thank you for all your insights on the vac scheme process!

I had one quick question to ask. Should men wear a tie to the vac scheme at all? I have heard that is likely to be considered too formal and may appear out of place, so wanted to check in and confirm that no tie is the most appropriate way to go, or if one should still be worn on the first day at least.


Thank you in advance!

I'm not Abbie, but I wanted to chip in haha.

I have seen most men wear ties to vac schemes - and especially on the first day (and also whenever they have the final interview). What I like to do is check out the firm's social media page and take a look at what previous vac schemer's did if the firm posts pictures of their trainees/vac schemers.

So to answer your question, yes, you can wear a tie to the VS - and in fact, many do - but many also go without, especially during the 'normal' days.

 

[Harvey Specter - Presiding Partner]

I'm not Abbie, but I wanted to chip in haha.

I have seen most men wear ties to vac schemes - and especially on the first day (and also whenever they have the final interview). What I like to do is check out the firm's social media page and take a look at what previous vac schemer's did if the firm posts pictures of their trainees/vac schemers.

So to answer your question, yes, you can wear a tie to the VS - and in fact, many do - but many also go without, especially during the 'normal' days.

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

@Abbie Whitlock thank you for all your insights on the vac scheme process!

I had one quick question to ask. Should men wear a tie to the vac scheme at all? I have heard that is likely to be considered too formal and may appear out of place, so wanted to check in and confirm that no tie is the most appropriate way to go, or if one should still be worn on the first day at least.


Thank you in advance!

Hey!

No problem at all!!

I would agree with @Bah Bah Pink Sheep! I don't think it would look out of place, and it could be a good idea to wear one on the first day so that you can get a better idea of what the 'norm' is in the firm. On most of the vacation schemes I have been on, most of the men on the scheme didn't wear ties beyond the first day, but I would always dress as professional as you can on the first day just in case.

However, if you don't wear one, I don't think that'll be a problem either - as long as you look smart and professional, I think it is a matter of personal preference!

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Hi @Abbie Whitlock

Thanks for this useful - I wondered whether for these types of Work Ex Sections (e.g. White & Case's), where there is a 250 word space for each section, should we use prose or stick to bullets. I for example have done a range of jobs in the Foreign Office, from sanctions to working in Somalia so I question if i should do 250 word paragraph for 7+ roles!

Hey!

I would probably still lean towards prose overall, as it tends to flow better and lets you show a bit more reflection. However, bullet points can work well too - I would just make sure that they are not too brief! You still need to go into enough depth and clearly outline your role, responsibilities, and the skills/insights you gained, rather than just listing tasks.

In relation to writing about lots of roles, I think this is fine to do them in paragraphs as not every experience will need to hit the full 250 words. As long as you cover the key points and everything you include adds value to your application, it is better to be concise even if you don't hit the full word limit

 

[DiploSha361]

Thank you @Abbie Whitlock - very much appreciated!

 

[ztas]

has anyone heard back from SPB post-AC yet?

 

[legal world]

has anyone heard back for Stephenson Harwood's dubai summer vac scheme post-vi?

 

[use537228q991]

hey everyone! I recently received an interview invite for CMS' insight scheme. If anyone has any advice or insights that would be amazing!

 

[Jessica Pearson - Managing Partner]

Urgent help please! I accidentally locked myself out of the allhires portal after too many password attempts. Does anyone know what I can do?

 

[aliiiisonxooox]

Hi everyone happy Easter!

I have a few questions.

How does everyone make sure that they stay concise and be specific when doing competency interviews? That’s a feedback I keep getting.. I need to be concise and specific.

Also, one more question. In a competency interview, when they ask about a time you made a mistake- I was going to bring up how I relied on assumption in work that a document has been submitted for a file.. instead of verifying.. and that is a mistake as we didn’t have the document etc.. and what actions I took from and how I solved it.. is this a good mistake or does it have to be a GRAVE mistake? Thank you everyone

 

[TCComingSoon]

Hi!

This is a good question, and you are right to be mindful of sounding repetitive - however, I'd say that these two questions are asking for slightly different things.

For the vacation scheme question, I'd think of it more in terms of exploration. You don't need to be set on these areas long-term - instead, I'd focus on what you are curious about and why you'd like exposure to them during the scheme. It is completely fine to say that you are still exploring your interests, and you can frame your answer around wanting to gain insight into a couple different areas to better understand where your strengths and interests lie.

You can also broaden this beyond just practice areas. For example, you might mention an interest in learning more about the pro bono work the firm does, client or international secondments, or business development at the firm. The graduate recruitment team might use these answers to help shape sessions during the scheme, so it is a good opportunity to show curiosity about the wider workings of the firm, not just the legal work itself.

For the training contract / specialisation question, the expectation is slightly different and I'd say you should try to show a more considered and developed interest. That doesn't mean you have to be 100% decided (+ I would avoid sounding completely set on an area), but you should be able to explain why certain areas appeal to you and how that ties into your past experiences, skills, interests, and longer-term career goals.

It is absolutely fine if there is some overlap in the areas you mention, but the angle of your answer should be different - one is about what you want to learn, and the other is more about where you think you'll fit long-term

Thank you Abbie this is helpful and insightful. These are really good points you mentioned and it will help with my application a lot. I never thought about mentioning the bit about pro bono that is a good point to discuss.

 

[TCComingSoon]

Hi! was this for the dubai or london scheme?

No London spring/summer

 

[Florencejones]

How would people go about answering:

1. Tell us everything you know about the firm

 

[Lawlawland]

Hi all!
I hope y'all are doing well and this cycle is being kind to you! Happy Easter too!

I have to get my Dentons VI done by tomorrow, and I would really appreciate any insights you could offer.

Goes without saying, I am happy to help you in all the ways I can!

Thanks in advance.

 

[georgianprincessmwuah]

PMC/Penningtons is meant to get back to us by the end of this week (10th of April) when the AC itself was Feb 25th ... 40 days!! Potentially 44...

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

Hi everyone happy Easter!

I have a few questions.

How does everyone make sure that they stay concise and be specific when doing competency interviews? That’s a feedback I keep getting.. I need to be concise and specific.

Also, one more question. In a competency interview, when they ask about a time you made a mistake- I was going to bring up how I relied on assumption in work that a document has been submitted for a file.. instead of verifying.. and that is a mistake as we didn’t have the document etc.. and what actions I took from and how I solved it.. is this a good mistake or does it have to be a GRAVE mistake? Thank you everyone

Hey!

Happy Easter!

I would say that being "more concise and specific" usually comes down to tightening your structure, rather than saying less overall. A good way to approach competency answers is to try to keep the situation and task explanation quite brief, and then focus most of your time on your actions and the overall result. Essentially, you only want to discuss the situation/task in enough detail to provide context of the actions you took and the reflections you can make as a result. Therefore, I would try to only include details that directly demonstrate the skill that they are assessing - if something doesn't add clear evidence or relate to that skill, I'd say it is probably okay to cut it! It can also help to check whether someone else could easily summarise your example in a few lines, and if not, then you may be including too much background. I definitely used to do this too, as I always wanted to give as much context as possible, but the interviewers will usually be assessing the actions you took and the reflections you make, rather than the way you describe the situation itself.

In relation to your second question, I'd say your example sounds absolutely fine! It doesn't need to be a serious or grave mistake to work well, and it is often better when it is a realistic and professional one like this. What matters is that you can clearly explain what went wrong, take ownership, and show what you learned from the situation (+ what you would do differently if the situation arose again). Your example works well as it shows awareness of attention to detail and the importance of verification, which are both really relevant traits in the legal context.

I would say that the key part is how you frame your answer - briefly explain the mistake (without overemphasising it), focus on the steps that you took to fix the issue, and then highlight what you changed going forward (for example, implementing a habit or system to double-check documents). The interviewers will be much more interested in your judgment and ability to learn from the situation, rathe than the severity of the mistake itself.

I hope that assists!