solicitors fees.

mufctony1959

Heres a question for yer.

in october last year i was awarded a considerable sum in compensation for a back injury i sufferd in 2002.
i took out a no-win-no-fee agreement with a firm of solicitors in the essex area.
i am in the process of taking these people to court via Money-claim-on-line.
These people had my compensation for nearly a year before they paid me, they then paid me interest of 2.8% which they consider to be 'fare and reasonable'
at the same time charged me interest of 8.3% on money the paid at the begining of the contract. 'fare and reasonable'????
i am also claiming for the money they deucted from my award (25%) which is a charge i was aware of but i am questioning the 'morality' of.
Don't suppose there is anybody out there in similar postion or any experience of this kind of thing, think i really need help and support on this one.

dmg24

These people had my compensation for nearly a year before they paid me, they then paid me interest of 2.8% which they consider to be 'fare and reasonable'

2.8% is pretty reasonable for a client account.

at the same time charged me interest of 8.3% on money the paid at the begining of the contract. 'fare and reasonable'????

Who did they pay this money to? Was this detailed in your agreement with them? Was the money paid on your behalf under some sort of credit agreement?

i am also claiming for the money they deucted from my award (25%) which is a charge i was aware of but i am questioning the 'morality' of.

Morals and the law do not always work together. If you agreed to this at the beginning of the contract then you are liable for the payment.

PS Welcome to MSE! x

dunstonh

You also need to remember that a no win, no fee solicitor is likely to be more expensive on a winning case than a conventional solicitor as they have to cover the costs of those that dont win.

Cases that are "dead certs" of winning are usually best using a conventional solicitor firm and not a no win no fee firm.

mufctony1959

Thanks for the input,
There is something i may have in my favour.
when the defendants disputed my solicitors costs they took it all the way to court even though my solicitors were telling me constantly that 'this is standard' and 'it will be sorted before court' and we expextc to receive 90% of our costs' blah blah blah.
Well they didn't they only received 60% of there costs as awarded by the costing judge.
So my point is this... if the defendents were orderd to pay 'reasonable costs' then why should i be penalised for costs which were obviously 'unreasonable'.
The other thing that i may have on myside is....Do they really want the whole world to know how mercenary and blood thirsty their practice is.
There is a massive amount of media spotlight at the moment concerning Welsh Miners and he way they are ripped off in a similar way, i am also going to mention this in my court bundle..i have noticed that the word 'morals' is being used more and more in relation to this subject.
At the end of the day..what the hell..£210 to get it to court, i think its money well spent

dmg24

mufctony1959 wrote: »

Thanks for the input,
There is something i may have in my favour.
when the defendants disputed my solicitors costs they took it all the way to court even though my solicitors were telling me constantly that 'this is standard' and 'it will be sorted before court' and we expextc to receive 90% of our costs' blah blah blah.
Well they didn't they only received 60% of there costs as awarded by the costing judge. Are they asking you for a fee for their work, or a fee for professional witnesses, or something else?
So my point is this... if the defendents were orderd to pay 'reasonable costs' then why should i be penalised for costs which were obviously 'unreasonable'. Why are they unreasonable?
The other thing that i may have on myside is....Do they really want the whole world to know how mercenary and blood thirsty their practice is. They are solicitors, they really will not care.
There is a massive amount of media spotlight at the moment concerning Welsh Miners and he way they are ripped off in a similar way, i am also going to mention this in my court bundle..i have noticed that the word 'morals' is being used more and more in relation to this subject. Don't mention this, it has no relevance to your case. It will make you look very unprofessional.
At the end of the day..what the hell..£210 to get it to court, i think its money well spent

You really need to take independent legal advice on this, or at least answer the questions asked in my earlier post to give us more information.

No offence, but at the moment your case is looking like sour grapes, as opposed to being based on solid legal argument.

dunstonh

So my point is this... if the defendents were orderd to pay 'reasonable costs' then why should i be penalised for costs which were obviously 'unreasonable'.

Thats they way it works. Sometimes you can win a case but have to pay all your costs. Sometimes the other party pays all the costs.

mrsS_2

hi- are you saying that they have charged you for the costs that they could not recover in court- or is this 25% the risk premium that they would have charged you anyway because you took out a no win no fee agreement?

Did you borrow money from them in order to take out an insurance bond to cover the costs if you had in fact lost your case?

these tend to be done through third parties- not the solicitor and an interest rate of 8% would be quite usual if this was the case.

No win or conditional fee agreements usually come with the proviso that they will charge you more because of the risk of not getting paid, and that if the court does not agree the amount of risk premium they have calculated then you are responsible for settling the balance.

you will only have to pay what the court thinks is reasonable in relation to costs, but you have to pay the difference if the risk premium for taking on the case is higher than the court thinks is fair- you should have signed an agreement stating this.

so there are two types of "cost"- cost of doing the work and a charge for taking on a case they might lose-"risk premium"- hope this makes sense.


From personal experience, the paper work for one of these policies and agreements is absolutely incomprehensible and it is only worth entering into if you can guarantee that your opponent is going to settle out of court.

once it gets to court- it costs you money. The "no win- no fee" title is false-this is why it is now called a conditional fee agreement.

Perhaps you could let us know what they were charging you 8% interest on?

pardon

Whether you opt for fee or no win no fee solicitor, make sure that you read the agreement throughly including the small prints.

Iamthesmartestmanalive

The fact is your being penalised for the fact the firm took far more risk than someone who was paying up front

If you'd lost they'd have got nothing or far less

If you didnt want that you should have payed for a solicitor

If you couldnt or didnt want to then you cant moan afterwards

dmg24

pardon has started up this thread to advertise. Reported.