Small Claims Court costs

Equaliser12345

Hi

I seem to recall that there was a SRA guidance about legal representatives making unjustified threats of legal costs in Small Claims Costs pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(1)(g).

Basically a situation where a very clear claim has arisen but the solicitors are threatening costs.   Any thoughts?

MattMattMattUK

Equaliser12345 said:

Hi

I seem to recall that there was a SRA guidance about legal representatives making unjustified threats of legal costs in Small Claims Costs pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(1)(g).

Basically a situation where a very clear claim has arisen but the solicitors are threatening costs.   Any thoughts?

Costs for a Small Claims Court claim are limited, exactly to what depends on the track and the value of the claim. Either party could always attempt to get the claim transferred but unless the claim is very large that is unlikely. 

A solicitor making "threats" is a breach of their professional code and possibly the law, but I suspect that they are not making threats". If you explained what you the actual issue is then people may be able to offer advice, in an non-professional capacity. 

Sandtree

MattMattMattUK said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Hi

I seem to recall that there was a SRA guidance about legal representatives making unjustified threats of legal costs in Small Claims Costs pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(1)(g).

Basically a situation where a very clear claim has arisen but the solicitors are threatening costs.   Any thoughts?

Costs for a Small Claims Court claim are limited, exactly to what depends on the track and the value of the claim. Either party could always attempt to get the claim transferred but unless the claim is very large that is unlikely. 

A solicitor making "threats" is a breach of their professional code and possibly the law, but I suspect that they are not making threats". If you explained what you the actual issue is then people may be able to offer advice, in an non-professional capacity. 

Just to be pedantic... the "small claims court" is the small track of the court process and therefore there are no other tracks within small claims court. If the claim is allocated or transferred to fast track or multi-track then its no longer small claims.  If the claim involves personal injury it doesn't have to be very significant at all for it to be allocated above the remit of small track (though non-injury cases I agree is a fairly high limit)

Equaliser12345

MattMattMattUK said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Hi

I seem to recall that there was a SRA guidance about legal representatives making unjustified threats of legal costs in Small Claims Costs pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 27.14(1)(g).

Basically a situation where a very clear claim has arisen but the solicitors are threatening costs.   Any thoughts?

Costs for a Small Claims Court claim are limited, exactly to what depends on the track and the value of the claim. Either party could always attempt to get the claim transferred but unless the claim is very large that is unlikely. 

A solicitor making "threats" is a breach of their professional code and possibly the law, but I suspect that they are not making threats". If you explained what you the actual issue is then people may be able to offer advice, in an non-professional capacity. 

Thanks - it's the specific breach of the SRA code that I'm looking for.

Equaliser12345

Found it::

1. You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

Undervalued

Equaliser12345 said:

Found it::

1. You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

Yes, but you haven't said exactly what the "unjustified threats of legal costs" was.

Often this is skirted round by "threatening" to apply for costs, which they may do with little expectation of actually getting them awarded. Happens a lot in employment tribunal proceedings!

Equaliser12345

Undervalued said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Found it::

1. You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

Yes, but you haven't said exactly what the "unjustified threats of legal costs" was.

Often this is skirted round by "threatening" to apply for costs, which they may do with little expectation of actually getting them awarded. Happens a lot in employment tribunal proceedings!

The unjustified threats are that if proceedings are issued, they will get costs against me.  The claim will be in the small claims track and liability has already been admitted.  The issue relates to quantum.

lincroft1710

Equaliser12345 said:

Undervalued said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Found it::

1. You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

Yes, but you haven't said exactly what the "unjustified threats of legal costs" was.

Often this is skirted round by "threatening" to apply for costs, which they may do with little expectation of actually getting them awarded. Happens a lot in employment tribunal proceedings!

The unjustified threats are that if proceedings are issued, they will get costs against me.  

What are the exact words they used?

Undervalued

Equaliser12345 said:

Undervalued said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Found it::

1. You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

Yes, but you haven't said exactly what the "unjustified threats of legal costs" was.

Often this is skirted round by "threatening" to apply for costs, which they may do with little expectation of actually getting them awarded. Happens a lot in employment tribunal proceedings!

The unjustified threats are that if proceedings are issued, they will get costs against me.  The claim will be in the small claims track and liability has already been admitted.  The issue relates to quantum.

Yes, but are they threatening that they will actually get costs or is it cleverly worded that they will apply for costs. If the latter then that could be argued to be a simple statement of intent.

Equaliser12345

Undervalued said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Undervalued said:

Equaliser12345 said:

Found it::

1. You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).

Yes, but you haven't said exactly what the "unjustified threats of legal costs" was.

Often this is skirted round by "threatening" to apply for costs, which they may do with little expectation of actually getting them awarded. Happens a lot in employment tribunal proceedings!

The unjustified threats are that if proceedings are issued, they will get costs against me.  The claim will be in the small claims track and liability has already been admitted.  The issue relates to quantum.

Yes, but are they threatening that they will actually get costs or is it cleverly worded that they will apply for costs. If the latter then that could be argued to be a simple statement of intent.

That "costs will be awarded against you".  I've never known a costs order in the small claims track.

lincroft1710

Can you quote the full sentence they used please?