Is Garfield the ‘1st AI-Driven Law Firm’ A Big Deal?

Is Garfield, which can guide you through a small claims process using a genAI-based workflow and has lawyers in the loop, a big deal? Yes and no.

The UK’s Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has said it has ‘authorised the first law firm providing legal services through AI’. But, many law firms use AI to develop their work product, sign it off with human lawyer oversight, and then send it to the client. So, that aspect is not really new.

Also, several commercial law firms have outward-facing AI-driven applications that provide legal outputs for clients. The difference is firms such as Macfarlanes (which provides doc review on a subscription via Harvey to clients) are already regulated by the SRA.

The idea of an affordable and ‘light touch’ legal service that operates primarily online and is accessible by everyone is also not new. For example, Farewill is now one of the largest will providers in the UK. It engages with customers via digital forms and also provides a ‘lawyer in the loop’ where needed before things are finalised.

Moreover, Joshua Browder’s DoNotPay, as far back as 2018, sought to support small claims for the general public at a very low cost using a digital interface and form-filling capabilities. Of course, DoNotPay ran into some issues in the US, but the basic idea of helping you through a legal process – including dealing with the courts – with an online portal open to all, is not new.

And there are companies such as Contend, which uses AI to provide legal help to people on a range of issues at a very affordable price, including writing legal letters, although it is not yet regulated by the SRA – (and this site would guess that’s because it doesn’t use lawyers-in-the-loop.)

In this case, Garfield provides legal help that is backed by AI, with a lawyer as part of the process. It’s online and open to all – for claims in England & Wales up to £10,000.

So we have to be a bit careful about thinking of Tunbridge Wells-based Garfield as something entirely new and never seen before. That said, it looks to be a great initiative and is very welcome.

Its co-founders are Daniel Young, a data scientist, and Philip Young, a lawyer who has worked at some smaller law firms, but also had an eight-year stint at Baker McKenzie.

The way it operates is as follows:

‘Invoices, contracts, correspondence: Drop information about the debt into our platform, Garfield will put together a case for you.
Companies House Search: If the debtor is a company, Garfield will search Companies House for its accounts and tell you if the debtor appears solvent.
Polite Chaser: Garfield optionally generates and sends a letter that politely asks the debtor to pay the debt. Garfield will also help you deal with any response from the debtor
Letter Before Action: Garfield generates a formal Letter Before Action that complies with the Court’s Civil Procedure Rules
Claim Form & Particulars of Claim: Garfield drafts a Claim Form and Particulars of Claim. When approved, it will submit them to the Court and calculate interest under either the relevant statute or the contract
If you are not paid, the process diverges depending on the debtor’s response.
Default Judgement: If the debtor does not respond, Garfield will apply for a judgment in your favour. When a judgment is received, Garfield prepares a letter notifying the debtor and requests payment.
Admission: If the debtor responds by filing an Admission form admitting the case in whole or in part, Garfield will guide the user through deciding whether to accept that admission.
Defence through to Trial: Garfield will help you respond to the Defence and help you through the subsequent stages of taking a small claim to trial. Note that this step has been summarized for brevity.
And finally get your money back.’

In short, it’s a guided workflow with checkpoints and human oversight, with affordable fees for the various steps along the way.

However, and as noted above, it’s really essential that people understand that, as the SRA explained: ‘Garfield is not autonomous and will only take a step where the client has approved it, and furthermore there are supervision and monitoring processes in place.’

And, most importantly of all:

‘Under the SRA’s rules, named regulated solicitors will still ultimately be accountable for the firm delivering high professional standards. This means they will also be responsible for all the system outputs and for anything that goes wrong.’

This site looked Garfield up in the SRA solicitors list and found one lawyer there, co-founder Philip Young. He, and whoever else is hired to help, are going to be very busy if this takes off as they will need to check each and every document before it goes out.

Is This A Big Deal?

Although it’s important to see Garfield in a wider context and also not get carried away with the idea that you ‘just press a button and get your money back’ with no lawyers involved…..as it’s really not that simple…..this is indeed an important step forward.

It’s addressing an area of need that is usually very slow, expensive to engage with lawyers on, and often leads to an access to justice issue because most people just give up given the lack of affordable support.

It’s also showing that legal processes, with some well-designed workflows and some genAI to drive things, plus some ‘light touch’ legal oversight, can be formed into affordable product offerings. And that’s a great thing.

Garfield may also inspire others to explore different parts of the law that can be handled in the same way.

As to the regulation issue, as mentioned above, Contend and others provide AI-driven legal help already. What’s different here, is that Garfield has a lawyer taking responsibility for the output – and it’s most likely this that meant it received official approval from the SRA….because, at its most essential level it’s still ‘a law firm’.

So, we are still in a position where a lawyer has to be part of things, and also may take the fall if things go wrong, (see previous AL think piece about the need for someone to blame and why outsourcing risk is key to the legal world).

But, this is a very positive step forward and perhaps other lawyers will seek to do the same kind of thing, i.e. find a workflow they understand, add in AI to absorb the process work, then add a lawyer on top to gain SRA approval? Let’s hope other markets see similar developments as well.

Overall, this site congratulates Garfield’s founders and also the SRA for supporting this type of legal business. Because, if legal tech doesn’t improve the lives of all the people, and not just a relatively small group of commercial lawyers, then what is it all for?

Last word goes to Paul Philip, SRA Chief Executive, who said: ‘We cannot afford to pull up the drawbridge on innovations that could have big public benefits. ….. this is likely to be the first of many AI-driven law firms, we will be monitoring progress of this new model closely, so we can both manage the risks and realise the benefits to consumers.’

You can find more about Garfield here.

—

Legal Innovators California Conference, San Francisco, June 11 + 12

If you’re interested in the cutting edge of legal AI and innovation – and where we are all heading – then come along to Legal Innovators California, in San Francisco, June 11 and 12, where speakers from the leading law firms, inhouse teams, and tech companies will be sharing their insights and experiences as to what is really happening and where we are all heading.

We already have an incredible roster of companies to hear from. This includes: Legora, Harvey, StructureFlow, Ivo, Flatiron Law Group, PointOne, Centari, eBrevia, Legatics, Knowable, Draftwise, newcode.AI, Riskaway, SimpleClosure and more.

And if you are a startup and would like to get involved, then please contact:

robins@cosmonauts.biz