Letter Before Claim - SCS Law & UKPC - Please Advise

CVKTA

What do you think?

I think yes!

Umkomaas

Do you mean you will withdraw all the claim for costs for unreasonable behaviour, settling just for £60, or just withdrawing the reasons behind the claim?

You know, there's no hard and fast rules on this, but in almost all of the hundreds of court cases I've read on this forum, only a tiny number get anything other than standard costs. Where they have been awarded, the degree of unreasonableness varies, to the point where it's likely that a different Judge wouldn't award them and where they have been turned down, a different Judge would award them because the height of the 'high bar' isn't specifically defined.  In quite a number of cases Judges have even (erroneously) denied standard costs, for no reason other than they won't award them. 

But if you're going to push for the additional costs, you do need to present good reasons for doing so. Not just put forward a figure. 

If you wanted - and I've seen it happen in a small number of cases - you could simply tag a small number of L-i-P hours (say 3 - 5) and (say) a tenner towards printing and stationery costs at the end of your Costs Assessment.

Which brings me to my final point (and as I was on autopilot earlier in spellchecking mode), the document should now be titled 'Summary Costs Assessment', not 'Schedule of Costs'. 

CVKTA

Umkomaas said:

Do you mean you will withdraw all the claim for costs for unreasonable behaviour, settling just for £60, or just withdrawing the reasons behind the claim?

You know, there's no hard and fast rules on this, but in almost all of the hundreds of court cases I've read on this forum, only a tiny number get anything other than standard costs. Where they have been awarded, the degree of unreasonableness varies, to the point where it's likely that a different Judge wouldn't award them and where they have been turned down, a different Judge would award them because the height of the 'high bar' isn't specifically defined.  In quite a number of cases Judges have even (erroneously) denied standard costs, for no reason other than they won't award them. 

But if you're going to push for the additional costs, you do need to present good reasons for doing so. Not just put forward a figure. 

If you wanted - and I've seen it happen in a small number of cases - you could simply tag a small number of L-i-P hours (say 3 - 5) and (say) a tenner towards printing and stationery costs at the end of your Costs Assessment.

Which brings me to my final point (and as I was on autopilot earlier in spellchecking mode), the document should now be titled 'Summary Costs Assessment', not 'Schedule of Costs'. 

Right understood, maybe I won’t go for the full figure and just put it down as a learning experience! Thanks for the advice as always

CVKTA

Their full and final bundle with their costs has just dropped though the door.

£628.00 costs on top of their £930.00 claim

nosferatu1001

Theyre never, ever getting those costs. Like you, to get those costs they would have to prove you have behaved unreasonably, AND they have to win.
They use it as a really, really obvious pressure tactic. 

Umkomaas

Wow £628.

You know they can only claim the following:

£50 capped legal costs 
£60 court filing fee (as the claim is between £500.01 and £1,000)
£60 court hearing fee (I think this is also 'weighted' as above). 

None of it near £628. 

In hindsight, I'd consider leaving in your 'unreasonable costs' claim - just remove the 'dishonest' accusation, but try to itemise the elements of unreasonableness. See if others have a view on it. 

DoaM

Unfortunately my head doesn't angle 90° to the left (or right).  

CVKTA

In hindsight, I'd consider leaving in your 'unreasonable costs' claim - just remove the 'dishonest' accusation, but try to itemise the elements of unreasonableness. See if others have a view on it. 

Great thanks! 

Any ideas on how to itemise from anyone would be great.

nosferatu1001

Accusations of dishonesty are a good way to get this moved to the fast track. You dont want that. (From my reading of the CPR SCT isnt to be used where one side calls the other dishonest)
Why not do what people are told to do, and state more than just a single line item?
X hours to write defence
X hours to obtain evidence for WS
X hours to write WS
makes it more justifiable. 

Umkomaas

CVKTA said:

In hindsight, I'd consider leaving in your 'unreasonable costs' claim - just remove the 'dishonest' accusation, but try to itemise the elements of unreasonableness. See if others have a view on it. 

Great thanks! 

Any ideas on how to itemise from anyone would be great.

Things like:

Number of letters sent and frequency
Unsolicited phone calls (if true) and frequency
Refusal to answer questions (if true) - type and frequency
Late delivery of WS (if true)

The above list isn't exhaustive, it simply gives you a flavour of the kinds of issues which might be argued to be 'unreasonable', and hopefully kick-starts your own thinking on it.