Losing no win, no fee & having to pay

Lukegarner

My mother in law was contacted by a no win, no fee place following a bump.  It went to court yesterday and she lost the case with the judge citing fundamental dishonesty.  The result is a £13k bill and her solicitor saying they're not liable for the costs. 

This surely cant be correct considering it was no win no fee?

BoGoF

I'm assuming this is the other sides costs?

No win no fee relates to your Solicitors costs not the other side  Who do you think should pay them? Clearly a vexatious claim if the judge is citing dishonesty. Why should the other side be out of pocket?

Lukegarner

It was a genuine claim, there was a bump.  The case came down to he said, she said and the judge just believed the other side.  

My understanding is shes being charged for both parties costs

It's not my case, but surely no win no fee means the solicitor is liable for all costs, hence why they're selective of which  cases they take? 

Manxman_in_exile

Do you think the judge would be "citing fundamental dishonesty" (your quote) if it was a simple he said/she said?

I'm not an expert but my understanding is that all NWNF agreements should include an offer of "after the event" insurance which is designed to cover costs awarded if the plaintiff loses and has costs awarded against them.  Assuming this was offered to your MiL, did she not take it up?

Also note it's "no win, no fee".  The client can still be liable for expenses and disbursements incurred by their NWNF firm if they lose.

Never a good idea to follow the advice of ambulance chasers.

Manxman_in_exile

(Don't know how to edit previous post.)

See this thread, especially the post from steampowered.  I know it's an employment tribunal but principle should be the same.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6099173/no-win-no-fee-solicitors#latest

If insurance was not offered(?) complain to the NWNF firm through their complaints procedure and than to the SRA.

Aylesbury_Duck

Could it be the case that OP's MIL was fundamentally dishonest, that it emerged during the court appearance and her solicitor is basically saying they're not liable because she lied to them?

Caz3121

Lukegarner said:

It was a genuine claim, there was a bump.  

was the accident not dealt with by the insurance companies?
why the need for a court case?

KatrinaWaves

A bump... why wasn’t that dealt with through insurance?

Was it a vexatious injury claim? There can be a genuine ‘bump’ doesn’t mean there was a genuine injury. Judges don’t cite ‘fundamental dishonesty’ in a simple ‘your word against his, no proof either way sorry’ she lost the case because in his opinion she was lying through her teeth. Why should the people who were honest have to pay 13k. The ambulance chasers won’t pay the other sides fees. An expensive lesson in integrity... 

eddddy

If a 'no win, no fee' company was involved, it was probably a personal injury claim - and the judge believes your mother in law exaggerated the impact of her injuries.

(e.g. She may have said she was in constant pain for a month, unable to get out of bed, unable to do housework etc, etc. When this wasn't really the case.)

The scandalous thing  about this is that the 'no win, no fee' companies often encourage people to lie and exaggerate claims, suggesting that it's almost a way of getting 'free money'. And then, when it all goes wrong, they use the lies and exaggeration as an excuse not to pay their costs.

tacpot12

I would say that the firm might have behaved improperly if they did not tell your MiL about the possibility of costs being awarded against her. She could complain to the firm and ask when and how she was told about the possibility.

If they provide evidence that she was told, then she will have to pay. She will need to take out a personal loan for the money. If she wasn’t told, she can ask them to share the bill, say 50/50. If they don’t agree, she can complain to the Legal Ombudsman. There is a template for a formal letter of complaint she can use to complain to the solicitor on the Ombudsman’s website. 

KatrinaWaves

eddddy said:

The scandalous thing  about this is that the 'no win, no fee' companies often encourage people to lie and exaggerate claims, suggesting that it's almost a way of getting 'free money'. And then, when it all goes wrong, they use the lies and exaggeration as an excuse not to pay their costs.

Whilst I do agree these companies are 'scandalous' I have zero sympathy with people who choose to lie to extort money form someone else, regardless of whether they were encouraged to do so by an unscrupulous firm.