Refund on hearing fees

Comments

18 responses to “Refund on hearing fees”

1. 

   Anonymous

   January 12, 2012

   Simon

   I have read your blog always with interest at its informative and often jocular prose

   Making proposed allegations of fraud, is plainly beyond a joke

   I know from experience, many (most?) solicitors do not know about, or fail to request, the refund fee. A draftsman must properly claim that which their client has disbursed, which is the full fee. It may be remiss of the draftsman not to point out to the solicitor concerned there a possible refund available, but nothing in this is “fraud”!

   Furthermore, many Courts when contacted will not return a fee which should be refunded, and there is much “interpretation” over when the Court “is notified” – very often a case settles verbally or in correspondence subject to formal terms being agreed in the form of an Order, the terms of which are to be agreed. Often, getting written confirmation from a Defendant, or the Order back agreed , adds days, sometimes weeks, onto an agreed settlement date. Courts do not accept being “notified” in a call, and need paper evidence.

   I would caution you to be certain of the full facts, before alleging fraudulent activity

   Reply
2. 

   Richard

   January 12, 2012

   I think Simon’s comment was clearly very much in jest and there is no reason whatsoever to be offended.

   I agree though that sometimes it is better to include the full fee in the bill until you are sure you can actually get the refund, for the reasons you state. The item in the bill can then be conceded.

   Reply
3. 

   Truly Eminent Costs Professional

   January 12, 2012

   I have been informed by ‘Benson’ at the SCCO that it is not now possible to obtain any refund for a DA fee once the Notice of Hearing has been fixed!

   Reply
4. 

   Pete B

   January 12, 2012

   My experience is that the court will never refund the DA fee, as the refund only applies to ‘Fast Track, Multi Track or Non Money Claim Hearings’.

   I agree with Richard, it is good practice to include the fee in the claim for costs until such time as it is refunded. We regularly concede the fee subject to a refund, but better safe than sorry.

   Reply
5. 

   Paul Williams

   January 12, 2012

   Allegations of fraud without evidence is enough to get solicitors struck off. Even in jest the blog posting is very poor form indeed.

   The blog also ignores the wonderfully efficient court system that has on many occasions refused refunds for a variety of arbitrary reasons. The Heywards Heath bulk centre has in the past informed me that the written request for a refund is considered made at the time they get round to reading the letter, not the date it was sent.

   In the vast majority of cases, at the time the bill is served the fee has been paid and there has been no refund granted. Until a refund has been granted (not merely requested) the disbursement is a valid item to claim.

   Reply
6. 

   John Allen

   January 13, 2012

   Well Simon did not actually accuse any individual of fraud – he merely made a general point. In my view, it is well made.

   I think it is mainly ignorance of the Order on the part of many solicitors and some individuals who call themselves costs draftsmen.

   Having said that,my work is around 50-50 Claimant/Defendant and I have certainly come accross situations where I am preparing a Claimant Bill where the fee has already been refunded and I have pointed it out but been instructed by the solicitor to claim the full fee in the Bill on the basis that “it is up to Defendant to take the point”.

   Reply
7. 

   annon

   January 13, 2012

   I trust you stood your ground and refused?

   Reply
8. 

   Pete B

   January 13, 2012

   ‘…the fee has already been refunded and I have pointed it out but been instructed by the solicitor to claim the full fee in the Bill on the basis that “it is up to Defendant to take the point”.’

   And you actually carry out that instruction? Are you one of these individuals you refer to that call themselves costs draftsman?

   Reply
9. 

   John Allen

   January 13, 2012

   No I did not carry out the instruction because I managed to persuade the solicitor of the error of his/her ways – in fact it was more than once with different solicitors over the last five or so years.

   However, that raises another discussion point.Whose bill is it – that of the costs draftsman or the solicitor? The solicitor is in control and signs the bill.

   Why should the costs draftsman not carry out instructions and put what the solicitor wants in the bill, so long as he has fully advised the solicitor?

   I await the expected onslaught!

   Reply
10. 

    Pete B

    January 13, 2012

    I suppose it would depend on whether he was regulated by the CLSB and how much he valued his membership of the ACL if he was.

    There was a case last year where the draftsman was sent to prison and recommended for deportation for dodgy drafting, so you cannot just point the finger at your instructing solicitor.

    Reply
11. 

    John Allen

    January 13, 2012

    I think you have made a good point Pete. Professional standards have improved greatly over the last few years, although some of us have maintained them for many years.

    Just for the avoidance of doubt, I merely posed a question.

    Reply
12. 

    annon

    January 13, 2012

    I think the case Pete refers to was subject to debate earlier last year on here. Someone tried to counter that we didnt know the full story but then failed to explain the situation from memory

    Reply
13. 

    Jacques Hughes

    January 15, 2012

    A costs draftsman, solicitor or barrister who does anything to support the recovery of fees from a paying party which he knows are not in fact payable is not merely acting unprofessionally – he is committing a criminal offence. And it would be wrong to think that the police do not take an interest in this sort of thing. I am aware of several cases in recent years where solicitors have been investigated by the police for presenting dubious claims for inter partes costs: eg not giving credit for “kickbacks” from medical reporting agencies.

    Reply
14. 

    Anonymous

    January 22, 2012

    Jacques, this is very true, however, in my 40 year experience of working within claimant Personal Injury and later costs, there are many many things wrong with the profession.

    If I cannot persuade the solicitor of the error of his/her ways then I simply refuse to act for them, there are many many solicitors who unfortunately fall within this category. To deny the existence of the problem, as some of the plebs have done, is irresponsible. Only when we face up to the reality of our profession can we find ways to change the problems.

    The conduct of many other people involved in the claim business is also questionable. to borrow a quote from Simon:

    The strange thing about reports delivered by independent experts is that they almost always manage to say what those commissioning the report wanted. Have you ever noticed how medical experts instructed by claimants always conclude that the injuries suffered by the claimant are so life-changing that the claimant will never be able to work again or lift anything heavier than a tooth-pick? On the other hand, the medical experts instructed by defendants invariably conclude that there is nothing wrong with the claimant that a strong mug of tea wouldn’t sort out

    the truth is obvious, I am just waiting for the day panarama investigate the PI lawyers, or cost experts the same way they do immigration lawyers. The result, I suspect would be surprising to those who live in the clouds, but not to those who know the reality and are fighting for change.

    Reply
15. Listing fee payable once only |

    January 25, 2012

    […] mentioned the other day the fact that the court hearing fee is refundable in whole or in part where a matter settles a certain number of days before the […]

    Reply
16. 

    Mohammed Qasim

    February 2, 2012

    I note with interest that “it is not now possible to obtain any refund for a DA fee once the Notice of Hearing has been fixed”

    I have a matter where after the request for DA (and paying a fee of £2,445 case management directions were given indicating a time estimate of a 3 day hearing with 3 hours reading time for the reginal costs judge. In the event the costs were settled between the parties before the remainder of directions had to be complied with and the bill was withdrawn by consent and upon the payment of a seperate fee on an agreed order.

    Please can anyone point me to any provision that says the DA fee should be refunded by the court in full or in part before the DA hearing has been listed?

    Reply
17. 

    Cliff Colley

    May 27, 2015

    how do I claim compensation for fees from the court etc when we turn up for court hearing and the court has not listed the hearing (their fault}

    Reply
18. 

    Anonymous

    June 1, 2015

    @ Cliff Colley
    not asking for freebie advice, when you don’t employ a solicitor or costs professional, is the best advice

    Reply