Hello everyone,

Since I am new to this forum I thought I should provide a brief introduction: I am a Bulgarian law graduate. I came to the UK straight out of high school and studied law for 3 years at an anonymous polly. I made applications for LLMs at King's, UCL, LSE, Cambridge and Oxford.

Given the rank of the university I attended some might think I am aiming too high. However, I did manage to graduate with a first (one of only two people in the class) and have some pretty good experience.

I just recently received offers from KCL and UCL. KCL have given me until 10 January to decide whether to accept or reject the offer, whilst UCL have not given a specific time frame, but it is generally understood that one should respond to their offer within 4 weeks (asked the law faculty).

It is unlikely that I shall hear back from the other places where I applied before the expiry of my two offers. Thus, I am not sure what to do. King's made me a conditional offer as I applied for the part time LLM. The condition was to submit a letter from my employer stating that I work at least 22 hours pw. This should be submitted by late August. I was thinking of accepting the offer, and then if I decide not to go for it, I would simply not submit the document within the deadline and the offer will lapse. Any thoughts on this? Not sure whether it is too doggy or disrespectful. Anyone who has had experience with this sort of thing, I would really appreciate your advice.

Realistically speaking, I don't think I could study at LSE, Oxford or Cambridge for the following reasons:
Ox and Cam - the LLM is full time and I will not be allowed to work. I probably will not be able to afford paying for all of this without going with a bank loan and I certainly don't want to go there. LSE is a great school, but I don't really see myself in it. What attracted me to it was the wide variety of modules available and the fact that it was the only top LLM where one could study Financial Crime.

Realistically, I think it was always down to between UCL and KCL so here is my list of pros for each one:

KCL pros

1. Best location of any London uni @the Strand
2. The name and the brand sounds very good. I know this is quite a trivial detail but the uni is actually better recognised in my country (not that I plan to go back there after finishing my studies)
3. the LLM is cheaper (500 pounds saved)
4. The careers network appears to be very strong. I have been following the King's Law Career Network on Facebook and there always seems to be something happening. Strong career service is very important to me as I would like to work at a big law firm and need all the support I can get.
5. King's law school is actually rated higher (at least in one international ranking) 18th worldwide compared to UCL 22nd worldwide.
6. Great potential for expansion and reputation is likely to improve after the investment by Dickson Poon in the law school.

UCL - pros
1. The law faculty is very highly regarded. I have read that some say it is better than Oxbridge
2. UCL is ranked higher overall than KCL and the difference is considerable: UCL best ranking: 4th in the world; KCL best ranking around 30th (I believe)
3. The LLM offered at UCL looks more appealing than the one at KCL. I would like to study a specialised LLM but I want it to be quite diverse as well. King's LLM in international finance is very specialised as the choice of modules is limited to corporate finance; M&A and banking. On the other hand, at UCL you can study a specialised LLM and still do modules outside the specialism. I always wanted to study competition law. If I do this at King's I will have to undertake either a general LLM or LLM in Competition Law. At UCL, I can do a competition module and still get an LLM in Corporate Law even if competition law is not a core module. To get a specialist LLM at UCL you have to do: 60 credits of core modules (each module is 15 or 30 credits) dissertation and 60 credits of any LLM subjects you like. It is this wide choice that is particularly appealing to me. However, I am not sure whether employers will favour a very specialised LLM or a specialised-general LLM.
5. UCL faculty of laws has a lot more famous alumni than King's
6. the LLM at UCL is taught by some of the very best at the legal profession. It is the fact that these people have/have had marvellous professional backgrounds that is particularly appealing to me as I want to study a practical LLM rather than a more academic one.

Feel free to challenge any of my views and lines of reasoning on this. I want to hear your opinion on whichever school you think is better and also on the situation with dealing with early offers.

UCL by all means

UCL by all means

I got my admission offer from King's about a week ago, but the deadline made me worry A LOT. I am still waiting for some of my applications to be complete, so having to accept the first offer simply did not make any sense to me.

I did, however, speak with an admission officer at King's who told me to accept the offer and feel free to decline later on (no deposit or payment of the fees in advance needed). As yours is indeed a peculiar case (part time LLM) you might want to double check. Simply use the "messages" tab on your King's applicant page and you will receive an answer soon.

As to suggestions, I don't really know what to tell you: frankly, I believe it mostly depends on what your main interests are. I might consider an offer from UCL more appealing as my main focus is public international law, but, AFAIK, if your goal is the bar (or "raising the bar" -- horrible pun intended -- if you are already practicing), you might be better of with an LLM from King's (network, activities, close ties with firms and stuff).

Congrats on your admissions and rest assured that your "safety lifeboat" is a top notch school!

thank you for your detailed and resourceful response.

My interest at this point is international corporate law. I know both schools are pretty big on this hence why applied to both of them. I am leaning towards UCL for now based on a wider variety of modules and the impressive resumes of their academics and alumni.

You said ''might be better of with King's because of network activities, close ties with firms''. Do you think that King's is better connected than UCL? This is one of the most important aspects for me. At my old uni there was limited career support for law students (they tried at least) and 0 links with any decent firms, which contributed to me not getting a training contract so far (amongst other factors).

I had certain suspicions that King's may be better connected but my foundation for these suspicions is insufficient to be honest. Hence why I am very interested to hear from people before I take any offers.

I had written a kinda lengthy post, but I accidentally deleted it. Anyhow, what I wanted to tell you can be summarized as follows.

First of all: I know it sounds dull, redundant and paternalistic, but you shouldn't really get advice on the internet on these matters.

I elected to apply to King's because a well-known barrister, a queen's counsel working in a magic circle chamber who happens to be friends with my family, advised me to do so for the reasons I mentioned. He is a person I trust and I decided to follow his advice, but rest assured that I know very little about the legal profession there. I am Italian and I graduated from an Italian university. I wish to be as helpful as possible, but I am not really the right person to provide answers to these issues.

Anyhow, King's was always portrayed to me as the City's law school, so plenty of connections and opportunities if you do wish going that direction. I frankly do not wish to work as a practicing lawyer, therefore I believe other schools might be better, especially for future academic endeavours (read: PhD).

I think that in your case contacting some King's alumni (even many of them could have some bias) would be a good idea. LinkedIn and Facebook both provide an excellent starting point for finding a few names.

Hope this helps!

By the way, and speaking of interned advice... :) Can I ask you when did you apply to UCL? My references reached their offices yesterday, and i was wondering if they will really take "approximately six weeks" for a response.

Thanks a lot!

I applied beginning of November and received a response mid December - 6 weeks almost on the dot.

My referees were fairly quick in submitting their references but that's because I made 5 applications and all they did was copy and pasted the references.

Still awaiting on Cambridge on Oxford so I may just accept my both current offers, or at least one, and then if need be I will withdraw.

I applied beginning of November and received a response mid December - 6 weeks almost on the dot.

My referees were fairly quick in submitting their references but that's because I made 5 applications and all they did was copy and pasted the references.

Still awaiting on Cambridge on Oxford so I may just accept my both current offers, or at least one, and then if need be I will withdraw.

you should think about starting it soon as the deadline is 18 January. I submitted mine but realistically I don't see myself doing this. Too much reading, too academic, too expensive....

you should think about starting it soon as the deadline is 18 January. I submitted mine but realistically I don't see myself doing this. Too much reading, too academic, too expensive....

Is there anybody on this forum who applied to both UCL and King's and was rejected by either of them? It'll maybe help us know which of these two had more stringent entry requirements. Thanks a ton in advance.