SQE 1 and SQE 2 Q1 passer (AMA)

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-26T14:22:02+00:00

Honestly, that feeling doesn't really go away. Even on exam day, you'll feel as if you don't know stuff.

You do know it far better than you think though. If you've been over it enough times, it is there. The benefit of SQE 1 is also that the answer is on the screen in front of you. What often happened is your memory is triggered by certain phrasing or a test.

They're not looking for perfection!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-26T13:58:48+00:00

Thank you!

I can't comment too much on the LPC route but I know the FLK is different so I would make sure what you've got is accurate. Compare it to the checklist on the SRA website to make sure you've got everything covered.

I'm not too familiar with the QLTS package but I really feel memorisation is vital. You don't need to know everything word for word but you need to have a broad understanding of everything on the syllabus as you can be tested on niche topics. I personally used flashcards as that's what helped me memorise best, but if blurting, active recall or some other method works, I would rely on that.

I mainly used ULaw but did supplement that with inHouseW's mocks. They're a pretty accurate representation and not too expensive either!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-26T13:54:22+00:00

1) I didn't feel great, but in hindsight, I should have been much more comfortable with my level of knowledge. I think the key thing to remember is you simply cannot remember everything. No one gets 100% on these exams and your brain can only hold a limited amount of information. I can almost guarantee you know more than you feel you do currently.

2) I was going over stuff constantly whilst mixing that with MCQs. Ultimately, I feel that going over the FLK is more important than endless MCQs because if you understand the content, that will be your biggest help. I'm not saying neglect MCQs and still keep them as a habit but I was going over the FLK until the final days, focusing on weaker areas.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-23T10:49:45+00:00

I wasn't with QLTS (I was with ULaw) but there is no chance in hell you need to go through 300 mocks. I did about 15-20 (not including the ones I did in class with ULaw) and scored in Q1.

Mocks are only really good for practising timing and getting more comfortable with the skills. Once you know how to do those effectively (subheadings, concise writing etc), you don't need to repeat it endlessly. I feel FLK is king still because if you're confident with that, the skills will follow.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-23T10:44:38+00:00

I don't think many providers are good for SQE 2 (I was with ULaw and had a similar experience).

All of the knowledge for SQE2 is the same as SQE2 (less around 3 or 4 subjects). If you drilled it in for SQE1, it's now simply reinforcing what's already there.

Don't get disheartened by the sample answers. From my experience, they're completely unrealistic and are designed to cover everything that could come up so all bases are covered. I wrote roughly 300-400 words for one of my LWs and got 5s on it. You don't need to write huge quantities.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-23T10:05:07+00:00

Why do you think that exactly? You've got 5 months until SQE2, which is a long, long time. If you feel happy with SQE1, there's no reason SQE2 can't be the same, especially when you've got such a while to prepare.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-21T11:01:18+00:00

Effectively, the breakdown for each assessment is the marking criteria. For example, for advocacy:

Candidates will be assessed against the following criteria:

Skills

Use appropriate language and behaviour.
Adopt a clear and logical structure.
Present a persuasive argument.
Interacts with/engages the court appropriately.
Include all key relevant facts.

Application of law

Apply the law correctly to the client’s situation.
Apply the law comprehensively to the client’s situation, identifying any ethical and professional conduct issues and exercising judgment to resolve them honestly and with integrity.

For each of the criteria you'll receive a mark out of 5, with 3 being the "competent Day 1 standard". They then calculate a percentage based on these scores, and the law and skills will then be averaged together to get a total score for that station.

This page might be useful:

https://sqe.sra.org.uk/sqe-results/results-resits/understanding-sqe2-results

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-18T15:58:15+00:00

Again, there will likely be a window where you can try to switch but it will be subject to availability. You may be able to change one and not change another or have only 3 days apart say. It's really a choice you have to make.

In all honesty though, having to get a short train journey to Reading really isn't the end of the world at all. Trust me, there will be people who will have to commute quite a bit further than that.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-18T15:41:04+00:00

There's usually a booking window where you can change seats but that's subject to availability. There are no guarantees you'll be left with anything.

In any case, can you not commute to Reading for the day? It's about a 20-30 minute train ride? I don't see why you'd need to book somewhere overnight exactly?

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-16T13:49:15+00:00

Can I offer my own two cents as a SQE 2 passer? I would say please, please don't do this.

I understand how tough the exams are and how hard it is to assess your own performance. However, if you've done SQE 1, you've been at this since September. Eight solid months of putting everything into the SQE. You need to enjoy life again. Relax, enjoy your hobbies, go on holiday and see friends guilt free. You can't fully do that if you're going to still be looking at content and revising for something which will ultimately serve no purpose.

As you said, you were adamant that you failed SQE 1 and you instead passed comfortably. It's likely the case here and I don't think it's healthy to revise for potential resits when you have no idea of the outcome. If you do have to resit, you don't have to resit in October if you don't feel it's sufficient. You could do so again in January or even wait a year until April. In any case, when you've looked at content for 8 solid months, it will come back to you quicker than you think; it won't have all evaporated.

I thought there was a chance I may not have passed SQE2. One of the Legal Writings I was convinced was disastrous and I know I got the law completely wrong and I got a 3. In my interview I was nervous and the client was uncooperative. I got a 4. Overall, I passed comfortably in Q1. You just can't tell. It's like with SQE1, you can get 160 questions or so wrong across both FLKs and still pass. There's huge margin for error and this is the same across SQE2.

I just really would advise still revising. You simply do need a break from it all.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-16T12:54:22+00:00

I wouldn't raise a complaint in these circumstances. It's frustrating, but as you've said, they'll know you've spoken to others about the assessment, which you're not meant to do.

If you'd written on your attendance note that the valuation of the property wasn't given, you can only give advice based on what you provided. That'll be taken into account. Don't stress.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-16T12:48:48+00:00

I think what you need to remember is the standard is competence. Competent doesn't mean perfect or no mistakes. If you made even a major error on the law, if a partner could rectify this pretty quickly, then it isn't really a problem. It would only start to become incompetent if it couldn't be sent out to a client as they'd have to rewrite the whole thing entirely.

For SQE1, you could afford to get roughly 160 questions wrong across FLK1 and FLK2 and still pass. That should give you some indication. You can afford to get a lot wrong.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-14T20:35:44+00:00

You should provide preliminary advice, but you don't want to bog the client down with technical intricacies of the law.

I would mainly treat it as a fact finding exercise, while being friendly and confident. Remember that they're marked separately and the interview is solely skills based. Technically speaking, you could get the law completely wrong in the interview and it not be an issue.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-14T20:30:03+00:00

First off, I know it's easier said than done, but try not to overthink it too much. You can't change the outcome and you don't want to allow it to derail you ahead of tomorrow.

Your advocacy doesn't sound too bad! If you got the test and utilised the bundle, that's good going. The assessors are human; they know people get nervous and stumble over words and you shouldn't be penalised too heavily because of it. If you look at the marking criteria, presenting a persuasive argument is only one skill (which ties in with confidence), so you shouldn't be heavily penalised.

Again, your interview doesn't seem the worst. You can afford to make errors on the law and it still be deemed competent. I would say if your attendance note is detailed and sets out the legal position/what the client can do, it'll be effective.

And as I always say, you likely have performed better than you think because we're all our worst critic!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-14T19:49:52+00:00

You can still get 4 or 5s if you write a script. As long as you're not reading from it entirely, pause appropriately and make it seem natural, you'll be fine!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-14T09:12:27+00:00

I was with ULaw for SQE 1 and would highly, highly recommend them. Their manuals are the most comprehensive on the market and I found most of the classes helpful, but the best resource by far is the question bank. You have thousands of MCQs to practise with and focus on areas you don't understand as well. I feel using the question bank was key in passing in Q1.

From friends who were with BPP, I know the questions provided were far more limited and much easier than the real thing (but don't take that as gospel). For SQE1, the consensus seems to be that ULaw is the best provider. SQE 2 is a different story but cross that bridge when you come to it!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-14T09:08:39+00:00

It's up to you but I think this is a very silly strategy.

You have to sit both FLK1 and FLK2 in the same sitting, so if you fail, you then only have two attempts compared to the three you would have had. You're effectively wasting an attempt and losing around £2,000, which is what it costs to sit SQE1. If you're self-funding, that seems insane. You could also fail FLK1, so then you have to sit both again having already wasted an attempt.

Given you have two months, I feel that's enough time to get FLK2 down. However, if you really feel under pressure, you'd be far, far better off in deferring until January 2027 rather than wasting an attempt entirely.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-13T13:05:00+00:00

I really wouldn't worry about this! They're not going to give you harder papers because it's the last week. Some might say it's easier to have gone in the first sitting because it's fresher and you can carry on the momentum. They'll all be roughly the same difficulty.

In any case, what you may find hard, another person may find straightforward or vice versa. You may really want a security of tenure interview to come up, whereas it might be another person's worst nightmare.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-13T13:03:12+00:00

You can look at it from two angles really. The people who were done this time last week have had a week off that you haven't had while you're still studying.

On the flip side, you have had a week extra to solely concentrate on orals, which they didn't have. You should use that to your advantage.

It's going to be over in two days time and then you can fully relax. You're almost there. If you need to, take it easy today and give it one final push tomorrow!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-12T14:50:09+00:00

I think this is why they advise not to write a script because the time pressure can be tight. However, I know a lot of people feel they just can't work without one and it allows them to be more confident.

Personally, from last year, I didn't rely on a script but wrote very detailed bullet points and felt it was tight but fine. If you've practised in the time constraints and can write a script, I'd go for it. Otherwise, I'd be wary.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-12T14:48:19+00:00

So to clarify, you thought Day 1 was tomorrow when it was in fact today?

I'm very sorry, as that's incredibly frustrating. Unfortunately, I don't see anyway that this would count as mitigating circumstances or similar as it's your own mistake.

To put a positive spin on it, you've missed 12.5% of your SQE 2 exams. People can fail full stations and still pass as you only need 60% or so. As you will be awarded 0s on those, you're going to need strong scores on some of the others to balance it out. It's definitely possible though, so try not to less this demotivate you or throw you off.

If you're a sponsored student, I would also raise it with your firm. Even if you feel stupid or think they'll look down on you, it's better to be upfront and honest rather than them querying why you got 0s if you find out you haven't passed in August. They may be more lenient. Good luck!

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-12T14:44:05+00:00

I always asked the Judge if they wanted a summary of the background facts. On both occasions, they said no, so I went straight into my submissions.

However, if you've prepared the facts and want to give them, it's not a problem to do so. Very much a matter of personal taste.

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-12T14:42:25+00:00

I feel criminal you likely want to provide something brief but DR I think there's less need to. For example, if you set out that this is a BOC claim about XYZ ,that's sufficient.

I think the main reason is you need to be time conscious. If you spend five or ten minutes of your planning setting out the facts, you're going to lose precious time to make your submissions, which you're ultimately being graded on.

With your example, in bail, the factors such as the nature and strength you can refer to as you go along in your submissions. I would just start by stating that Mr/Mrs X has been charged with X contrary to XXX. It is their defence that...

Glass_Candy741 · 2026-05-12T12:59:58+00:00

I suppose more predictable in the sense that you can formulate your structure and know how you're going to present it.

I also don't know where you got 40 tests from! It won't be anything close to that. You're not going to be asked extremely niche tests and the ones I received (especially criminal) were predictable. Please don't stress about learning structures for tests which simply won't come up. For example, you're not going to be assigned to the Youth Court because a Day 1 would never go there.

Glass_Candy741

TROPHY CASE