How much are Court fees?

gemmaking

If you take a financial company to court, over mus consumer use
(insurance)

and you take them to court, and you lose the case, you have to end up paying for their court fees.

What is the price min-max approximate of these court fees?

roughly ??

Valli

google moneyclaimonline.

I believe (but stand to be corrected) that the court fees are relevant to the claim you are filing; so the more you are claiming for the higher the fees. I also believe (but again...) that the online claim is less costly than filing in person.

So how much are you claiming for?

and. more pertinently what exactly are you claiming?

if it's insurance and you have submitted an insurance claim and it's been rejected you *might* be better running through their complaints sytem then escalaing to the relevant ombudsman, for instance.

But the question you have asked in the format you have asked it is, to all intents and purposes, unanswerablewithout more information.

gemmaking

Valli wrote: »

google moneyclaimonline.

I believe (but stand to be corrected) that the court fees are relevant to the claim you are filing; so the more you are claiming for the higher the fees. I also believe (but again...) that the online claim is less costly than filing in person.

So how much are you claiming for?

and. more pertinently what exactly are you claiming?

if it's insurance and you have submitted an insurance claim and it's been rejected you *might* be better running through their complaints sytem then escalaing to the relevant ombudsman, for instance.

But the question you have asked in the format you have asked it is, to all intents and purposes, unanswerablewithout more information.

does the ombudsman have more authority than the courts?

or they are the court, and use more force ?

browneyedbazzi

The ombudsman is not the same as the courts. They are an independent body that can review cases and make an objective judgement. Unlike going to court, there are no fees involved (as far as I am aware). Have a look at their website, it explains the steps you should take to settle a dispute with the company involved and then what the ombudsman can do if you are not satisfied with the resolution offered by the company.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/

arcon5

I believe the ombudsmens decision is legally binding also
As for court fees you pay a filing fee starting from £25 upwards then a hearing fee of £60 upwards.. Depending on the value of the claim. These fees can be found online but for a £400 claim for example you'd be looking at about £95 in fees.

If you loose then they cannot reclaim any legal fees or anything, I believe at most they can claim travel expenses

dalesrider

browneyedbazzi wrote: »

The ombudsman is not the same as the courts. They are an independent body that can review cases and make an objective judgement. Unlike going to court, there are no fees involved (as far as I am aware).

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/

There is a major fee for going to the ombudsman £750..... Which the company pays no matter what. No cost to the OP.
So as you can imagine the threat of them and the fee, can swing a lot of cases to a result.
Of course should the OP lose, then it would have a major effect on taking it to court.

Remember if the ins co do not contest and you win by default. You have to go back and get a order to allow baliffs to recover the funds.

But perhaps the OP would be better giving some info as to exactly what the issue is.
Either here or in the Insurance board. Where might get better advice.

Crazy_Jamie

gemmaking wrote: »

If you take a financial company to court, over mus consumer use
(insurance)

and you take them to court, and you lose the case, you have to end up paying for their court fees.

What is the price min-max approximate of these court fees?

roughly ??

It's not clear what exactly you will be claiming for, but for these purposes I'm going to assume it is for an amount of money, which is the situation in which court proceedings would be appropriate providing you have exhausted other routes, such as actually trying to sort the situation out between yourself and the company.

If the value of the case is under £5,000 it will be allocated to the small claims track. That means that you would have to pay an issue fee (which is scaled depending on the value of your claim), potentially an allocation fee (which is usually about £40), and a hearing fee before your case came to trial. However, if the case is on the small claims track you would not have to pay any costs to the other side if you lose. Obviously you would lose the court fees that you have paid, but you would have to pay an fees to them. The only potential cost, which has already been mentioned, is that you may have to pay witness expenses. Though in reality these are likely to be very modest if the witness is an employee of the company, as they wouldn't be losing any wages to attend court. Travel expenses will be the worst you have to contend with in all likelihood.

If the value of your case is £5,000 and over, then your case will be allocated to the fast track. This is where things potentially get more costly, because if you lose a fast track trial you will become liable for the legal costs of the other side. These can easily run to thousands of pounds.

macman

As above, if it's not via the small claims process, your liability is potentially unlimited should you lose. A barrister and his junior (plus a retinue of accompanying solicitors) will be charged out at several thousand per day.

Valli

gemmaking wrote: »

does the ombudsman have more authority than the courts?

or they are the court, and use more force ?

Like I said; tell us what the issue is and the advice you get will be more relevant and more accurate for your situation. Even from what has already been posted by others you can see there is a wealth of sensible advice to be had here - if you ask forwhat you want as opposed to posting 'general' questions.

Crazy_Jamie

macman wrote: »

As above, if it's not via the small claims process, your liability is potentially unlimited should you lose. A barrister and his junior (plus a retinue of accompanying solicitors) will be charged out at several thousand per day.

Well, just so we don't stray into the realm of scaremongering, a junior would not be required in any except the most complex of cases. I highly doubt the OP has a case that would be that significant. Even if the value is above £5,000, it is likely that it would still fall within the fast track limit (£25,000) or be allocated to the fast track even if it were slightly above that. As such whilst in theory the other side's costs could be any number, if the event that he lost the OP would only be required to pay the reasonable costs, which in a basic fast track case would probably be in the region of a few thousand base costs for the solicitors, plus barrister fee (which is set and scaled) plus disbursements. It's still a significant amount, and no doubt an amount that will put the OP off, but it is a little more restricted and predictable than simply saying 'potentially unlimited'.

InsideInsurance

dalesrider wrote: »

There is a major fee for going to the ombudsman £750..... Which the company pays no matter what. No cost to the OP.
So as you can imagine the threat of them and the fee, can swing a lot of cases to a result.

The fee from the ombudsman varies by the company in question. Effectively companies, on a wholesale basis, can get a discount if they have a good complaints process and actively promote the services of the ombudsman. They still have to pay the case by case fee win or lose the complaint but it isnt a universal fixed price as you suggest.

As others have pointed out:

Small Track - court fees alone apply except in exceptional circumstances

Fast Track - legal fees start to become payable but are fairly strictly controlled in terms of "appropriateness" for the case in question. Normally a few thousand at most

Multi Track - fees are payable and whilst there is still an element of appropriateness applied the fact that the case is of the size/ complexity to fall into this track automatically means it is going to warrant senior staff (and their rates) working on it etc


Whilst the amount being claimed is the primary indication of which track the claim will fall into there can be a consideration also of the complexity and if a case is particularly complex it can be forced into a higher track despite its value (this most commonly happens with small track cases being pushed up into fast track)

The OP needs therefore to be slightly careful if their case is of small track value that they automatically assume that it is where it will end up.

The ombudsman may be a better option as it is legally binding on the insurer but leaves the OP free to go to court afterwards if they arent happy with the ombudsman's judgement (that said, the courts normally do agree with the ombudsman - I dont know of a case where they didnt but I am guessing there have been some simply due to different evidence being presented etc)