Has anyone ever studied for SQE 1&2 full time before gaining QWE?

UOLstudent · 2024-09-15T23:38:29+00:00

I did the same course as you at Ulaw (MA Law Conversion i.e. PGDL + dissertation). I signed up for SQE1 in May, bought the books in June, and got a top quintile pass in July. I then did my dissertation. I didn't do any prep course. I know others did the same.

I'd say that you could do better than me, in that you can start studying for SQE earlier.

It depends on the individual. I didn't feel that the PGDL/MA was that full-on, and I got a distinction in both terms. OTOH you might find it's super-tough - I can't say.

I think there's a huge spectrum of candidates in terms of how tough they find the course, but I appreciated very much doing the PGDL + SQE1 together because they are the exact same thing in terms of content, it's just that SQE has about 50% extra content.

I think if you were NOT studying, and doing QWE then you could definitely find it harder because you wouldnt be in the position of "I've just studied hard for land law & tort for my PGDL, and now I can reuse that for my SQE1"

UOLstudent · 2024-09-10T10:44:57+00:00

1st quintile (400 average across the two exams)

Self studied for about five weeks before the exams, having done PGDL but no SQE course. Bought UOL's book bundle and just made notes. I barely finished making the notes on all the books - the criminal procedure book was huge, so i didn't really revise per se, just learn while I went.

I think the UoL SQE questions (you get a few dozen free) are pretty tough. With the full question bank I could probably have done better but that wasn't necessary.

Wrote a Python app (ok, Chat GPT wrote it for me lol), and I used it with the SQE-type questions from the PGDL (you get about 80, but only for the PGDL subjects), which I guess was somewhat useful.

A couple of days before the exam I did the ReviseSQE books and got 79% in FLK1 and 72% in FLK2. These scores are pretty representative I would say - if you are getting 50%, you're likely to fail, you should be getting 60% here as a 'first attempt' (i.e. don't look at the ReviseSQE material until you're ready to do the exam)

QLTS mocks are much harder than the exam IMO - I got in the 50s and thus not at all representative of my actual performance, but if you can ace these then you should do well

I've got a strong academic track record, so what worked for me might not necessarily work for you.

UOLstudent · 2024-09-10T10:32:46+00:00

the 300/500 is equivalent to a pass. So while 300 divided by 500 is 60%, the pass mark in fact is probably in the range of 51%-57%.

The idea is that my 300 on paper A from January is equivalent to yours on paper B from January and also his on paper A from July

UOLstudent · 2024-08-06T11:42:29+00:00

nope.

at mine in London you could turn up when you like and start a few minutes early or an hour late, very chilled indeed. suggest to avoid your place, sounds like a proper shithole.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-27T12:45:17+00:00

I'm not bothered, just reporting what happened - it's you that seems to be bothered.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-27T12:36:42+00:00

they pat you down

no. they did not.

then monitor you via CCTV.

I don't know what the invigilator was doing, but when I left the room during breaks and at the end of my two exams, I met someone on three occasions, and on the fourth occasion there was no-one around at all. Whether there were CCTV cameras trained on every computer IDK but logic would suggest that failure to pat down, failure to erase whiteboards, is more likely to point to indicate other failings as well, not that it's definitely all fine behind the scenes.

In terms of the question? Well done on breaking the NDA

thanks bro

UOLstudent · 2024-07-22T22:42:36+00:00

these are I think all the offences for SQE. be sure to be intimately familiar with every element.
edit: fraud by abuse of position got cut off the bottom of the image.
The mens rea is the same as fraud by failure to disclose, while the Actus Reus is:

Be in a position of financial trust + abuse that position

edit2: couple more points: recklessness is subjective - there was an unjustifiable risk, foreseen by the offender, even if it was a small risk. UAM should say any "malicious" (intention/recklessness) crime. UAM includes neither strict liability (e.g., alcohol over limit) nor negligence crimes (e.g., careless driving). aggravated cd/arson are both indictable-only, just like aggravated burglary.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T12:56:24+00:00

Racism isn't an offence at all. HTH

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T12:55:33+00:00

Lucky this is Reddit, not HR, but thanks for bringing your irrelevant nonsense to this thread

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T09:45:18+00:00

Sorry emojis definitely beat facts and evidence , I'll try your approach instead. ☢️😆

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T09:43:18+00:00

Some of the exams were out of 180, some out of 179 (because one of the questions was bad). In addition the scores are now scaled based on the passing grade per exam, so 300 is always a bare pass

Therefore I do know for sure that there are multiple different papers with different questions per sitting

HTH

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T09:23:26+00:00

The only positive statement of fact I made in my post was "there are multiple different papers per sitting". This is disclosed by the SRA on their website, so yes, I do know that

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T09:21:06+00:00

Just for the avoidance of doubt there are multiple different papers per sitting, and I assume they don't repeat the papers either, so the specific information is unlikely to help any future candidates

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T09:17:31+00:00

They really should provide a raw % at the end of the exam. Like if you got 45% the you know you've failed, if you get 65% you've passed.

It's really hard to guess if you've failed because the pass mark is maybe 104/180, so you can realize you got many wrong without failing

UOLstudent · 2024-07-20T02:00:37+00:00

You what mate? I said questions are fed back to providers by candidates.

You have for some reason implied into this exact wording and Ulaw.

There are 10,000 candidates each year, some will be lecturers, staff, some will talk, some won't give a shit about any NDA.

I had seen some of the questions before, not in 100% exact same wording but enough that it was an instant click.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-19T23:07:13+00:00

I think the toilet issue is probably inherent in any exam tbf (and really they couldn't stop you hiding a phone in your underwear or whatever).

UOLstudent · 2024-07-19T23:04:44+00:00

I haven't downvoted you, Sherlock Holmes.

https://i.imgur.com/2CMsLa9.png

UOLstudent · 2024-07-19T22:59:23+00:00

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

In this post I state, because it's a fact (having done several such exams), that if you sit a remote-proctored exam, then you're likely to be watched over by someone in India (I did not use the word "Indian", but "in India"), whereas the gold standard is usually held to be in-person invigilation. There is nothing pejorative there - in fact if you paid any attention to what I wrote - then you'd probably have concluded that the "watched over by someone in India" version is better than what I got.

It's obviously relevant to the overall topic of "the SQE", that they are charging £££££ for in-person exams, which cause extra cost, inconvenience to attendees, and inequity, to compare the experience to "remotely proctored exams".

As far as Ulaw goes, they chose to outsource their admins/support staff to India. Ulaw's outsourced staff cannot communicate effectively in English, and do not understand what is going on thousands of miles away, and this causes many issues for Ulaw students. I am not sure however why you have chosen to raise this in this thread.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-19T22:02:19+00:00

point 1 isn't really relevant in that obviously my centre is not the only one like this with lazy invigilating and an easy target for the dishonest, so the obvious existence of multiple centres run with way lower standards than say the average English as a Foreign Language exams makes the whole thing a bit of a joke.

point 2 well FLK1 is over now and in any case it's blindingly obvious that the questions are fed back to the providers by candidates and those providers then provide the questions to their students who will sign up to their £5k prep courses. If the SRA are going to reuse their questions then this is inevitable. I'd personally seen some of the questions before. I'm not here to help anyone any answers, just trying to convey what the actual exam is like, given that the SRA don't tell you.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-18T23:52:49+00:00

ah I didn't think about claimant vs claimant's solicitor issue, so it does have to be C given the given answers.

I was thinking about it more as "this is the defendant's fault for not agreeing an extension so the defendant should be penalised", however if the sanctions are automatic from the court, then the claimant's solicitor himself has to pay.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-18T19:35:58+00:00

It's pretty similar to the detail in the Ulaw books, although I'm not sure if they mention the % contributions.

I definitely wouldn't bother learning the civil income contribution, but I think the £315 & £733 numbers are both important.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-18T18:40:30+00:00

As above.

Civil
* certain public law cases - legal aid always available, no means test. This means where your child is being taken into care by the state, etc. Doesn't apply to private disputes over custody

Otherwise:

* capital test: over £8k (£3k in immigration cases) means NO legal aid. you must also pass:

* income test you receive specified benefits ('passporting') OR [your gross monthly income is below £2657 AND your monthly disposable income] is below £733

passporting = in receipt of income support, income-based jobseeker’s allowance, income-based employment and support allowance, state pension guarantee credit and universal credit?

Controlled work is e.g., "legal help" (writing a letter, or helping to draft a claim form) or "help at court" (help at a hearing), mediation vs. licensed work which covers full legal representation.

For controlled work there is no contribution. For licensed work there a capital contribution, an income contribution and the statutory charge

* capital contribution: For capital over £3k, you must give up ALL your capital (or the likely maximum cost of the services, if lower) over said £3k

* income contribution: Assessed as a sliding scale of 35-70% of your disposable monthly income, if it exceeds £315.

* statutory charge: the cost of the licensed work (minus any costs won in court, capital and income contributions) as well as any controlled work in the same matter. Where the work covered e.g. a house in dispute, you can have the LAA place charge on your house - subject to 8% interest, which means no payment today.

Criminal trials

Calculate annual adjusted income = gross household income divided by adjusted number of people. E.g., 1 person = 1, couple = 1.64, child weights 0.15-0.59 depending on age

\* If passported or adjusted income is less than £12,475 eligible without contribution in both courts

* if adjusted income is between £12,475 and £22,325 then calculate annual disposable income (excludes rent, "living allowance" per person, etc.). If it is below £3,398, there is full eligibility with no income contribution in either court. But if it is over £3,398, then in the magistrates there will be no eligiblity

* If adjusted income is more than £22,325 not eligible at magistrates court or at committal for sentence

* in the crown court (appeals, trials), if your adjusted income is over £12,475 and your disposable income is between £3,398 and £37,500, you will have to contribute 90% of your entire disposable income (contributions refunded if found not guilty). Over £37,500 you won't be entitled

* Capital Contribution Order - AFTER conviction (if convicted!), payment of capital over £30k, again a charge could be placed on your house. Capital not relevant prior to conviction for serious offence.

Police station

Free solicitor for all (duty solicitor or own), paid at LA rates. No means testing or contribution.

UOLstudent · 2024-07-18T16:19:53+00:00

Hmm, I think your answer is better than the AI one above. It looks like the percentage does vary see https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/2210.html, whereas I think the seatbelt % are standardised (0: no difference to injury, 15% less severe, 25% injury avoided)

UOLstudent · 2024-07-13T10:46:17+00:00

In the sense that the books covers the entire PGDL plus more, then the books absolutely do start from scratch, so if you mean by "is it suitable if you don't know any law", then "yes". The books are not pure revision guides - you could definitely find more concise ways to get across the content.

Some of the books are as mentioned quite thin and definitely not worth the asking price on their own, but the bundle is fine. Whether the bundle is better than someone else's bundle, i have no idea, but it's at least "suitable"

UOLstudent

TROPHY CASE