reclaiming solicitors fees

goth_girl

I received compensation following a Road Traffic Accident. The claim was handled by PMN Law, who took over 25% out of my compensation to cover their fees. I've now (years later - the accident happened in 2014) been contacted by another solicitors, offering to claim back this 25% for me (subject to their fee!). This would be a pretty big amount of money, which I definitely want to reclaim if possible. I was just wondering if it was possible to claim it back myself (and how to do it) - so that I could get 100% back for myself, rather than paying a solicitor (who will charge me 25%) to do it for me. Was hoping someone might be able to help?

[Deleted User]

No!!!!

You're just stuck in a loop of paying people for nothing.  Break it now and walk away.  You agreed the fee, you paid the fee, there's no need to pay any more companies.

[Deleted User]

The whole model of no win no fee gives you a clue that if you win there is a fee. Solicitors generally do not work for free on personal injury claims, if you tried to claim back their fee they would laugh you out of the door. More likely your name is on a list of people the industry consider suckers and think they can get you into another little scheme to make cash

sourcrates

They won`t charge you 25%, that has been ruled as too high by the recent ruling by the Court of Appeal in Herbert v HH Law Ltd, which upheld a decision to reduce the success fee`s in a low value road traffic accident case from 100% to 15%, and has set alarm bells ringing in the personal injury sector and is also been hailed as a milestone for consumer rights.

A lot of ambulance chasers are jumping on this bandwagon now the PPI ship has sailed.

Basically you can instruct them to act on your behalf, and if succesful, you would receive the 10% of your initial fee back, (the difference between 15 & 25%) plus statutory interest @ 8% per annum.

Obviously the new solicitor would take their cut from that 10% as well, its not something you can do yourself as its a point of case law which would require arguing in court.

If we are talking a lot of money, depending on the fee they charge you, it may be worth it, it may not.

[Deleted User]

A milestone for consumer rights by ensuring fewer firms take on cases because of the lower fees, meaning less access to justice lol. Some firms may even drop no win no fee and take on cases only on the basis of the client paying the full hourly rate, win or lose - another success for customer rights?!

Predictably, No. 5 Barrister Chambers show that the statement by sourcrates is wrong on several levels. Firstly, it was only talking about PI claims, it doesn't say that cases involving suing to try and get back some of the original fee can't involve fees of 25%. Further it's not as simple as 25% is too high and that it must be 15% - the argument made in Herbert was that a straightforward case like a rear end shunt had a lower risk so shouldn't have the full cost (capped at 25%) as the fee. Even further, the case only covered cases where the client was not given informed consent that the level of success fee was not based on an assessment of the risks - any case where a risk assessment was undertaken would also be exempt. A fee of 25% would still be perfectly legitimate if it was agreed with the client in an informed manner. Furthermore, per s70(4) Solicitors Act 1974, a bill paid more than 12 months ago cannot be challenged, so a 2014 PI claim wouldn't be considered anyway.

The case, therefore, means in a specific set of circumstances, it may be the case that the fee should have been lower and the firm might have to refund the difference but this doesn't mean you can start claiming back loads of fees from ancient cases