To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
2 thoughts on “Contents of Points of Dispute”
easy
Courts are now just going to pluck a figure from the air.
thats why they want a PD 8.3 letter with a figure to guide them. So they can continue with the pandering to the Insurers. When the new proportionality rule bites, there wont even be the pretence of assessments
Common sense perhaps. If PODs say “D offers 20 letters” few people also add on “totalling £300”. The monetary value of the number of letters offered is unnecessary, particularly if the hourly rate is also in issue. However, it may have been a good idea to retain the rule for objections to disbursements.
In my experience everyone ignored the old CPD and will do the same regarding the new CPD in any event.
Incidentally with regards to the first posters comments CPD 47 para 8.3 seems fairly pointless but it is hard to construe it in a pro defendant light. Def arguments on what is a proportionate amount would be contained in the PODs.
Agree that assessments are pointless if costs are deemed disproportionate but the problem is you do not know until assessment if costs are disproportionate. However, uncertainly on proportionality may keep a few of us in jobs for a while longer!