Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • kuepper
    • By kuepper 14th Jul 13, 9:24 PM
    • 698Posts
    • 112Thanks
    kuepper
    Anyone used EU Claim/Bott & Co?
    • #1
    • 14th Jul 13, 9:24 PM
    Anyone used EU Claim/Bott & Co? 14th Jul 13 at 9:24 PM
    these were highlighted in an article in the Guardian as someone to use to claim on your behalf in exchange for a 25 euro fee plus 27% of the compensation but when you're asked to sign up it's not that straightforward and could end up out of pocket whatever the outcome. here's their explanation:.

    1. What do I pay if I win?

    If you win your claim you pay us an administration fee of 25 euros and our charges. You pay our disbursements

    in any event and on our request and the payment of disbursements is not conditional on success and is not

    deferred to the end of the case. You may be able to claim from your opponent part or all of our charges and our

    disbursements.

    If you win overall but on the way lose an interim hearing you may be required to pay your opponents charges of

    that hearing. If on the way to winning or losing you are awarded any costs by agreement or Court Order then

    we are entitled to payment of those costs immediately.

    2. What do I pay if I lose?

    If you lose you pay your opponents charges and disbursements. You may be able to take out an insurance

    policy against this risk. If you lose you do not pay our charges but you may be required to pay our

    disbursements.

    Ending This Agreement

    3. If you end this Agreement before you win or lose you pay our charges and disbursements. We may end this

    Agreement before you win or lose.

    Charges

    4. These are for work done from the date specified in the Agreement until the end of the Agreement. This

    Agreement includes within its scope a retrospective claim for work done prior to when the Agreement is signed.

    These charges are subject to annual review.

    5. How we calculate our basic charges.

    These are calculated for each hour engaged on your claim. Routine letters and telephone calls will be charged

    as units of one tenth of an hour. Other letters and telephone calls will be charged on a time basis. The hourly

    rate which applies is £220 per hour plus VAT. We review the hourly rate on the 1

    st April of each year and we

    will notify you of any change in the rate in writing.

    Value Added Tax

    6. We add VAT at the rate (now 20%) that applies when the work is done to the total of the charges.

    Law Society Conditions

    7. The Law Society Conditions below are part of this Agreement. Any amendments or additions to them will apply

    to you. You should read the conditions carefully and ask us about anything you find unclear.

    Our Responsibilities

    8. We must:

    (i) Always act in your best interest subject to our duty to the Court;

    (ii) Explain to you the risk and benefits of taking legal action;

    (iii) Give you our best advice about whether to accept any offer of settlement;

    (iv) Give you the best information possible about the likely costs of your claim.

    Your Responsibilities

    9. You must:

    (i) Give us instructions that allow us to do our work properly;

    (ii) Not ask us to work in an improper or unreasonable way;

    (iii) Not deliberately mislead us;

    (iv) Co-operate with us.

    Dealing with Costs if You Win

    10. If you win you are liable to pay our charges and our disbursements.

    We will waive the right to enforce our claim for charges and disbursements against you to the extent that those

    charges and disbursements including VAT exceed the total sum of (i) and (ii) and (iii):

    (i) 27% of damages recovered;

    (ii) An administration fee of €25;

    (iii) Any sums recovered from the opponent by way of costs.

    You may be able to claim our charges and disbursements from your opponent.

    If we and your opponent cannot agree the amount, the Court will decide how much you can recover.

    You agree to pay into a designated account any cheque received by you or by use from your opponent and made

    payable to you. Out of the money you agree to let us take the balance of the charges, administration fee, disbursements

    and any VAT. You take the rest.

    We are allowed to keep any interest your opponent is ordered or agrees to pay on the costs.

    If your Opponent Fails to Pay

    11. If your opponent does not pay any damages or costs owed to you we have the right to take recovery action in

    your name to enforce a judgment order or agreement. The charges of this action become part of the charges

    under this agreement.

    Payment for Advocacy

    12. The costs of advocacy and other work by us or by any solicitor or agent on our behalf forms part of our basic

    charges. We shall discuss with you the identity of any barrister instructed in the arrangements made for

    payment.

    Barristers who have a Conditional Fee with Us

    13. You may be entitled to recover their fee from your opponent. We will discuss the barrister’s fee with you before

    we instruct him or her. If you lose you pay the barrister nothing.

    Barristers who do not have a Conditional Fee Agreement with Us

    14. If you win, then you may be entitled to recover all or part of their fee from your opponent. If you lose then you

    must pay their fee.

    What Happens when this Agreement Ends before your Claim for Damages End

    15. (a) Paying us if you end this agreement.

    You can end this agreement at any time. You then have the right to decide whether you must pay our

    basic or pay our charges and our disbursements including barrister’s fees immediately or pay them if

    you go on to win your claim.

    (b) Paying us if we end this agreement.

    We can end this agreement if you do not keep to your responsibilities. You then have the right to

    decide whether you must:



    Pay our charges and our disbursements when we as for them; or



    Pay our basic charges and our disbursements if you go on to win your claim.

    16. We can end this agreement if we believe you are unlikely to win. If this happens you will only have to pay our

    disbursements.

    17. We can end this agreement if you reject our opinion about making a settlement with our opponent and you must

    then pay our charges and our disbursements. If you ask us to get a second opinion from a solicitor or counsel

    outside our firm we will do so but you must pay the cost of that opinion.

    18. We can end this agreement if you become insolvent by reason of bankruptcy, entering into a voluntary

    arrangement or howsoever. You must then pay the basic charges and our disbursements.

    19. This agreement automatically ends if you die before your claim is concluded and we will be entitled to recover

    our charges up to the date of your death from your estate. If your personal representatives wish to continue

    your claim for damages we may offer then a new conditional fee agreement.

    What Happens after this Agreement Ends

    20. After this agreement ends we may apply to have our name removed from the record of any court proceedings in

    which we are acting unless you have another form of funding and have asked us to work for you. We will have

    the right to preserve our lien unless another solicitor working for you undertakes to pay us what we are owed if

    you win.

    Explanations of Words Used

    (a)


    Administration Fee - The sum of €25.

    (b)


    Advocacy - Appearing for you at Court hearings.

    (c)


    Charges - Our charges for the legal work we do as solicitors on your claim.

    (d)


    Claim - Your claim or the defence of any counterclaim brought against you whether or not court proceedings are

    offered.

    (e)


    Costs - Charges, administration fees, disbursements, and any applicable tax including VAT.

    (f)


    Counterclaim - A claim which your opponent makes against you in response to your claim.

    (g)


    Disbursements - Payments we make on your behalf including but not limited to court fees, expert fees, travelling

    expenses and barrister’s fees.

    (h)


    Interim Damages - Money that the court says your opponent must pay or your opponent agrees to pay or

    waiting for a settlement or a court’s final decision.

    (i)


    Interim Hearing - A court hearing that is not final.

    (j)


    Lien - Our right to keep all papers, documents, money or other property held on your behalf until all money due

    to us is paid. Lien may be applied after this agreement ends.

    (k)


    Lose - The court has dismissed your claim or you have stopped it on our advice.

    (l)


    Part 36 offers - An offer to settle your claim made in accordance with Part 36 of the Civil Procedural Rules.

    (m)


    Trial - The final contested hearing or the contested hearing of any issue to be tried separately and a reference to

    a claim concluding at trial includes a claim settled after the trial has commenced or a judgment.

    (n)


    Win - “Win” means that you recover damages or compensation or obtain other relief or succeed on any issue

    and/or on an order for costs is made in your favour or an agreement is reached to pay costs in your favour stage

    in your claim.

    (o)


    Finally - Finally means that your opponent is not allowed to appeal against the court decision or has not

    appealed in time or has lost any appeal.
    Last edited by kuepper; 14-07-2013 at 9:43 PM.
Page 20
    • Eagle998
    • By Eagle998 6th Apr 18, 2:31 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Eagle998
    I have a claim which has been rejected initially by the airline, however the flight calculator on the Bott and Co websites suggests I have a valid claim (although I know this isn't guaranteed).

    I'm considering letting Bott and Co take it on, however as the airline has signed up for CEDR I believe I need to go through that before I can even consider court proceedings/MCOL. Is it worth getting Bott and Co to take it now, or should I go through CEDR first? I can't see any mention of how CEDR on the Bott and Co website FAQ.
    • Caz3121
    • By Caz3121 6th Apr 18, 2:40 PM
    • 11,595 Posts
    • 7,571 Thanks
    Caz3121
    have you checked on EUClaim checker also? (have seen a few incorrect 'yes' on Bott.) what was the flight number and date and what was the reason for your claim being declined?
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 6th Apr 18, 3:01 PM
    • 1,752 Posts
    • 755 Thanks
    Tyzap
    I wouldn't recommend using CEDR unless you have a very straightforward case.

    Anything contentious or complicated and they seem to side with the airline.

    Putting your case before a judge gains a more considered and balanced result imo. Plus, if a judge errs in law there is some recourse available, thats not the case with CEDR.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide. To find it Google and then download 'vaubans guide'.
    • Eagle998
    • By Eagle998 6th Apr 18, 3:05 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Eagle998
    It was adverse weather, however the delay was actually longer than the adverse weather. I was delayed an additional 5 hours after the adverse weather had cleared up (all other flights were taking off and landing during this time). The EU check suggests I can't claim, however if Bott and Co is no win no fee, then I may aswell give them a try. Worst that happens is they say their calculator is wrong and they can't take the case on in which case I'm no worse off.
    • Eagle998
    • By Eagle998 6th Apr 18, 3:10 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Eagle998
    I wouldn't recommend using CEDR unless you have a very straightforward case.

    Anything contentious or complicated and they seem to side with the airline.

    Putting your case before a judge gains a more considered and balanced result imo. Plus, if a judge errs in law there is some recourse available, thats not the case with CEDR.
    Originally posted by Tyzap
    Thanks, I was under the impression that if the airline is signed up to CEDR you had to go through the CEDr first (although you could still go to court if ADR side with the airline). If the airline uses the Aviation ADR (and not CEDR) then you can chose to not use it and issue court proceedings instead.
    • legal magpie
    • By legal magpie 6th Apr 18, 5:17 PM
    • 973 Posts
    • 416 Thanks
    legal magpie
    You certainly do not have to go via CEDR but it often makes sense as you stand to lose little if you lose and you keep all your compensation if you win. If you aren't happy with the CEDR decision, you can sue anyway.
    • Eagle998
    • By Eagle998 6th Apr 18, 6:32 PM
    • 4 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Eagle998
    The flight delay page on MSE suggests you must use an adjudicator if the airline is signed up to one. Unfortunately I'm not able to post a link as I'm a new user, but a quote directly from the page states:

    "If you flew to or from the UK and your airline's with an adjudicator, you MUST use it"

    Have things changed since that page was written?
    • JPears
    • By JPears 6th Apr 18, 6:37 PM
    • 4,410 Posts
    • 1,203 Thanks
    JPears
    Alas, many inaccuracies on MSE regarding flight delays. They are told but never amend...
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • glocal
    • By glocal 14th Apr 18, 2:09 PM
    • 99 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    glocal
    I asked Bott & Co too to clarify what they mean by: 'If you lose you may be liable for the other side's costs'. For the £210 I may get out of 400 euro compensation, I am not too keen to risk paying substantial costs. They went peculiarly quiet.

    What I found really disillusioning though is that they explain the process in great detail so many times, but it was only later they told me they would reassess my case every time there was an obstacle. So, if they wanted, they could cherry-pick the easy cases, get their computer to send template letters, and drop cases that take more work. When I asked them to explain what that '99% success rate' meant (ie is that 99% of cases initially taken on?), they didn't reply. But they still send me automated reminders to sign their T&Cs.

    I am not saying they don't pursue and win many cases through the courts to the satisfaction of clients who don't want the hassle of doing it themselves. I am not saying they actually practise cherry-picking either. It's just that you expect your solicitors to be transparent and inspire trust, not use car sales methods to get business in. The fact that they must be super-efficient to make this service worthwhile or viable is not good enough IMV.
    Last edited by glocal; 14-04-2018 at 2:17 PM.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 14th Apr 18, 2:30 PM
    • 4,410 Posts
    • 1,203 Thanks
    JPears
    Every legal firm will assess predictability of success at every stage and back off if the risks become too great for any return.
    At the end of the day, they are a business, operating to make profit. End of.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 14th Apr 18, 2:38 PM
    • 3,618 Posts
    • 2,285 Thanks
    jpsartre
    So, if they wanted, they could cherry-pick the easy cases, get their computer to send template letters, and drop cases that take more work.
    Originally posted by glocal
    If they wanted? I always assumed that's how they operate since it's common sense. I wouldn't expect them to do a lot of work for little or no return.
    • glocal
    • By glocal 14th Apr 18, 3:37 PM
    • 99 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    glocal
    Their business is regulated for accuracy, transparency, ethics etc. Eg lets see what the ASA thinks about that '99% success rate'. In fact, to achieve 99% you must be extremely selective, which doesn't sound like great advertising.

    Extreme cherry picking could mean a low paid office assistant spending five minutes to submit an initial claim (it really takes that long), and if the airline resists then only consider pursuing straightforward cases involving four or more passengers who claim the max (600 euro) each. It's really about transperency and trust. I wouldn't mind if they explained their approach in advance. Again, all this is hypothetical because they won't share the stats.
    • NoviceAngel
    • By NoviceAngel 14th Apr 18, 4:17 PM
    • 2,150 Posts
    • 639 Thanks
    NoviceAngel
    When you think of what Solicitors normally charge per hour, I don’t know how Botts make a profit, abviously the number of cases and the throughput make it worth their while.

    The DIY route is preferable, but for difficult or complicated cases I see a need for them and I wouldn’t begrudge 27% - remember the Huzar case, Dawson and then Allen, they’ve spent a few £££ in Legal costs.
    After reading PtL Vaubans Guide , please don't desert us, hang around and help others!

    Hi, we’ve had to remove part of your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
    • legal magpie
    • By legal magpie 14th Apr 18, 4:25 PM
    • 973 Posts
    • 416 Thanks
    legal magpie
    The DIY route is preferable, but for difficult or complicated cases I see a need for them and I wouldn!!!8217;t begrudge 27% - remember the Huzar case, Dawson and then Allen, they!!!8217;ve spent a few £££ in Legal costs.
    Originally posted by NoviceAngel
    And they have also done the travelling public a HUGE service by taking cases to the highest courts, winning them and setting a binding precedent. My own claim against Thomson was due to be tried a week after Huzar was decided. Result. Thomson caved in at the door of the Court.
    • Tyzap
    • By Tyzap 14th Apr 18, 8:41 PM
    • 1,752 Posts
    • 755 Thanks
    Tyzap
    I completely agree with Legal Magpies sentiment.

    Whan everyone who uses a NWNF solicitor should remember is that they are a commercial enterprise. If they recklessly fight every case they will lose money. If they cannot make money, they will stop trading.

    It's why none of these companies would be willing to take on a case where there are just a couple of claimants, from a complicated delay, on an obscure foreign based airline, with no legal presence in this country. It would not be economically worth while.

    Critical mass and picking your legal cases carefully is the key to success for such companies.
    Please read Vaubans superb guide. To find it Google and then download 'vaubans guide'.
    • glocal
    • By glocal 14th Apr 18, 9:14 PM
    • 99 Posts
    • 8 Thanks
    glocal
    To be clear, no one expects a NWNF firm to take every case on. But they must be transparent in what they promise and honest in their publicity. Serving the travelling public is not enough to justify all business practices.
    • jpsartre
    • By jpsartre 14th Apr 18, 11:22 PM
    • 3,618 Posts
    • 2,285 Thanks
    jpsartre
    But they must be transparent in what they promise and honest in their publicity.
    Originally posted by glocal
    Why? They work on a no-win/no-fee basis so if they drop your case you've lost nothing.
    • NoviceAngel
    • By NoviceAngel 20th Aug 18, 2:47 PM
    • 2,150 Posts
    • 639 Thanks
    NoviceAngel
    Little did I know when I posted above that I would require the services of Bott & Co.

    It feels strange - almost disingenuous for me to be using the professional services of Bott & Co when the whole ethos of these forums is DIY help, and certainly not free advertising space for Botts.

    I am probably the only one person on here to be able to say that I've started legal proceedings against Jet2 on four separate flights. So I can give you my honest opinion on Bott & Co. I've done the DIY route on my first flight delay, and let Botts deal with the last three. Eventually gaining us compensation for the last two of our three cancelled flights,

    Botts are quite open in that they take a chunk of your compensation typically 25% plus admin fee and disbursements.

    As an example I know I was entitled to 250 Euro in compensation and received £130.59 from Botts. I think Botts roughly took £92.41 for their effort.

    So the question is was it worth me paying £92.41 for Botts help ? Given that I seem to have acquired the status of a 'regular' on here? and should now know the very basics of EC261/2004. I think in my case it was certainly worth my while in using Botts. My last three cancellations were not straight forward and would have been exceptionally difficult to tackle as a LIP (litigant in person). The fees I feel are more than reasonable most Solicitors charge £20 just to answer the phone. Details about my cancelled flight are Here :-
    https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=74583444&postcount=3424http://

    I first met Coby (basically the head of flight delay at Botts), with Tyzap, at Liverpool when we were overseeing the flight delay case from Kimberley Allen, which we had first given Kimberley advice on the forum. My first impression of Coby, is that he is a genuine guy, just wanting to uphold the law and help his clients get what they deserve under the law. It did indeed, take me some time to understand this, because I thought Solicitors charged £20 to answer the phone, let alone take time out to meet NovieAngel (an unprofessional forum guy!)

    Unfortunately I've had the displeasure of meeting a number of Solicitors over the years, but I felt a genuine, caring nature from Coby and although I wasn't a client of his at the time, he took time out to ask me about my case against Jet2 and did take his time to offer guidance and his professional advice.

    Certainly using Bott & Co is much easier than the DIY route, the effort needed to raise a claim is minimal and they are very professional. No complaints whatsoever. In fact for someone like me, A little too professional, I mean they take over completely, you never get to see the letters between Botts and the airline, they completely take over, but I guess that's what you're paying them to do.I would have liked more more info and to have seen the correspondence about my claim, but appreciate other clients would not.

    Would I use their services again ?

    YES without hesitation, but I will always give my help to anybody brave enough to take on Jet2 via the DIY route. I think an excellent NWNF solicitor such as Botts should be used for difficult cases and for easier cases, when you don't have the time to read the forums and gain knowledge.

    No complaints from me!

    Cheers,

    NoviceAngel

    EDIT - Just received this

    Our fees at 25% plus VAT come to £66.68 per passenger.
    The admin fee is £25 (Including VAT) per passenger.
    Our total charges per passenger are £91.68.



    Your compensation per passenger £222.27 Our total charges per passenger £91.68 Amount due to you per passenger £130.59
    In addition Bott and Co paid out a total of £100.00 in legal costs during the claim process that we have recovered from the airline along with interest charges that we have retained as agreed in your signed terms and conditions. The legal costs are not part of your flight delay compensation but we are obliged to inform you of these costs.
    by Bott & Co
    Fine by me
    Last edited by NoviceAngel; 20-08-2018 at 3:47 PM.
    After reading PtL Vaubans Guide , please don't desert us, hang around and help others!

    Hi, we’ve had to remove part of your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam
    • legal magpie
    • By legal magpie 20th Aug 18, 3:34 PM
    • 973 Posts
    • 416 Thanks
    legal magpie
    I have always said that litigation is horses for courses. In a difficult case, it is better to get 75% of something than 100% of nothing. By taking difficult cases up to the Court of Appeal, at great potential loss to themselves if the cases failed, they have enabled numerous litigants to pursue cases against airlines where they would previously have failed. This especially applies to Tyzap's case on technical problems which was decided a week before the trial of my own case against Thomson.
    Incidentally I have no connection with Bott and Co.
    • JPears
    • By JPears 20th Aug 18, 4:21 PM
    • 4,410 Posts
    • 1,203 Thanks
    JPears
    Agreed Coby is a top bloke and has helped me in the past. I think his initial interest in the whole flight delay issue and why Botts took up the challenge, is due to his own run in with Jet2 over a perfectly valid claim many years ago...


    I'm in half a mind to hand over the compensation element of my easyJet claim to Botts as its an odd one where there was effectively an EC ATC strike 36 hours before flight, which EJ cancelled.
    Then the EC ATC strike was called of at least 24 hours before the flight was scheduled. But EJ didn't re-instate the flight or any alternative.


    The other half of me thinks it would be interesting to see if I got the same judge at Leeds CC, who made such a fundamental error in declaring a tech fault as an EC (pre Huzar days)....
    Last edited by JPears; 20-08-2018 at 4:26 PM.
    If you're new. read The FAQ and Vauban's Guide

    The alleged Ringleader.........
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,158Posts Today

7,128Users online

Martin's Twitter