# No win no fee charges



## aimc (21 Feb 2005)

Hi,

My sister went to a solicitor almost 7 years ago (when she was 19)  regarding a personal injury claim, after a court hearing & an appeal she was unsuccessful but not on the basis that the accident didn't happen, on the basis that the other party were not negligent. She recently received a letter from the other parties solicitor with a bill for almost €19,000 & after contacting them they have informed her that it is up to her to pay this & that she should have been informed of this when her solicitor agreed to take the case, she kept every letter from her solicitor & the initial letter accepting the case does not mention any potential fees for the other party & neither do any of the subsequent letters. She has tried contacting her solicitor but they will not return her calls.

Is there anything she can do about this? Were her solicitors obliged to advise her of potential fees? Also she does not have the money to pay this, what could possibly happen if it is decided she has to pay this?

Any advice welcome.

Regards,

aimc


----------



## ClubMan (22 Feb 2005)

I thought that "no win no fee" didn't necessarily mean "no charge" as it only refers to the solicitor's professional fee and not other related charges or something like that? What sort of contract did she sight with the solicitor and what does it state about charges? What way was the bill broken down?


----------



## EAMONN66 (22 Feb 2005)

where did my post go


----------



## ClubMan (22 Feb 2005)

*where did my post go *

It was deleted by a moderator because it added nothing to the discussion of the substantive issue and only served to antagonise the original poster. If you want to open a separate discussion about the rights and wrongs of claiming compensation feel free to do so.


----------



## Tommy (22 Feb 2005)

Unfortunately litigation is a costly (and inherently risky) exercise despite what the ads tell (or told) us and if a case goes to court someone has to pick up the tab.


----------



## aimc (22 Feb 2005)

Hi,

I have a copy of her original letter & it says the following;

"Finally, with regard to the matter of fees, as you are aware we do not charge any fee until & unless the claim is successfully prosecuted"

it then goes on to explain that they can't give an exact figure but explain how 'their' fee is generally broken down....etc. The letter makes no reference to a potential fee if the case is lost. The bill she recieved is broken down into several minor parts including witness expenses, consultation fees, copying, attending counsel & the bulk of it is paying senior counsel & joe bloggs B.L.

Does she have any comeback with her solicitor if they failed to inform her of these fees & again what could because she doesn't have the €19,000 to pay this?

aimc


----------



## N0elC (22 Feb 2005)

You took a risk, you had your day in court, and the court found against you !

Of course you should pay the defendants fees. Why should anyone else pick up the tab for you ?

Good to see that claimants are being pursued for the costs of unsuccessful claims. Perhaps, it’ll put a lid on the whole compo culture ethos that costs businesses and the State millions each year


----------



## soy (22 Feb 2005)

*fees*

From your post it would appear that your correspondance only relates to your solicitors fees. (ie you did not have to pay him if you did not win the case).

However, the other side also had solicitors and because you lost the case, you are liable for their costs. 

In terms of your options, I would imagine that failure to pay will only result in further court appearances (and associated fees) as the other side pursue their costs.


----------



## aimc (22 Feb 2005)

Hi,

Well N0elC, i thought this was a forum for advice? I think you have issues with people who genuinely do have an accident & look for compensation, if a member of your family had an accident that prevented them from playing a sport & had to endure 6 months of physiotherapy while studying 30 hrs a week in college you wouldn't be happy to hear they were being charged €19,000 for trying to exercise their rights. If you have nothing positive to say you should perhaps keep your sinister comments to yourself.

aimc


----------



## EAMONN66 (22 Feb 2005)

i saw nothing sinister in noels comments which echoed my own deleted post. the courts did not sympathize with your sister, why should anyone else. if you think she was treated unfairly, why not post the full story here so people can form a more informed opinion. the other party who the court found to be not negligent did nothing wrong and did not ask to be sued. the entire proceedings were instigated by your sister, no one else. no one else is responsible. tax dodgers get no help here. IMHO this is a million times worse as it directly inflicts untold stress on individuals and costs jobs.


----------



## N0elC (22 Feb 2005)

> ...if a member of your family had an accident that prevented them from playing a sport & had to endure 6 months of physiotherapy while studying 30 hrs a week in college you wouldn't be happy to hear they were being charged €19,000 for trying to exercise their rights...



I wouldn't be happy with them runnin' for compo, I'd tell them to cop themselves on. Accidents happen, especially on the sportsfield. Indeed, as they were a student, and presumably not earning, then the financial loss would be minimal.

As you say, you came here looking for advice, and the advice seems to be: pay up for the fees you have caused others to incur as a result of your failed claim, and be more careful before you run for a lawyer in future ! 

Indeed, given your sporting prowess, be more careful before you run for any reason at all !!!


----------



## ajapale (22 Feb 2005)

Hi aimc,

Ill restate the substantive question here:

*Were her solicitors obliged to advise her of the potential downside should she loose the action?*

Guys if you want to start an interesting debate on the 'compo culture' then perhaps you could do so on the letting off steam section.

ajapale


----------



## N0elC (22 Feb 2005)

ajapale,

You make a fair point when you say . . . 



> if you want to start an interesting debate on the 'compo culture' then perhaps you could do so on the letting off steam section



However, the original poster has raised this himself by attempting to justify his sister's failed claim.

I mean realistically, how could an adult expect some one else to pick up the tab for them for not one, but two failed claims ?

Maybe she could find another "no win - no fee" solicitor to fight her case for her ?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (23 Feb 2005)

Hi aimc

Let's take this in stages. Your sister took a legal action. Her solicitor told her that he would not charge a fee if she lost the case. I think most people would understand that they would have to pay the costs of the other side if they lost their case. I don't know what the solicitors are supposed to tell their clients. They should be obliged to tell the person that they face a big loss if they lose their case.

Your sister lost her initial case. I really find it very hard to believe that in deciding whether to appeal, your sister did not think of the cost implications. Again, the solicitor should have explained them to her and given her some estimate of the cost of the appeal. 

So where does your sister stand now? The other side has a right to their costs and your sister has an obligation to pay them. If someone sues me and loses their case, I would want my costs paid. They can't get blood out of a stone. If your sister has no money or no house, then they won't be able to get the money from her. She won't be jailed for failing to pay a legal debt if she has no money. If  she has a house, they can get a judgement mortgage against her. This means that she will be unable to sell the house without paying them first.

Your sister should make a complaint to the Law Society. If they find in her favour, they could order him to pay her costs.

Eamonn666 and NoelC - I know exactly where you are coming from and you have a right to express a view, but could you be a little less aggressive in expressing that view , particularly to newcomers?

Brendan


----------



## oysterman (23 Feb 2005)

Well said, Brendan.

I'm as inclined as anybody else on this site to rush to judgment in all sorts of cases and have frequently been guilty of intemperate posting (even having the distinction of Brendan having to delete a recent post of mine concerning a so-called mutual institution in this state...).

However, we know nothing here other than that a young woman took a P.I. case and lost, in circumstances where she appears to have been unaware as to a potential liability.

_Prima facie_, as our bewigged friends would undoubtedly say, she appears deserving of some sympathy. She is not the sole cause of the compensation culture Eamon66 and NoelC are, quite rightly, so exercised about.

She should contact the Law Society. It seems to me to be reasonable that a solicitor should explain to a very young person in some detail the risks involved in 'no foal no fee' litigation.


----------



## cerberus (23 Feb 2005)

*no foal no fee*

her solicitors had a duty to inform her of the risks in pusuing the case and the appeal.
she is caught for the other side's fees

there is a judge, jury, and hangman culture on this site that Brendan, you should curtail.

Ryanair was censored to death, the various moderators censor all over the place (and not always fairly or unbiased) so the judgemental hang'em high mob should be curtailed as well.

The guy arrived at the site looking for advice and that is what he should of got.

He did not arrive at "letting of steam" with a kite to fly

enuff said, C


----------



## aimc (23 Feb 2005)

Hi,

Cerebus, burgessbrendan, ajapale & oysterman thank you all very much, this is the advice i was seeking in the first place, haven't used this forum many times but i was beginning to think i wouldn't again until you guys saw that i was purely looking for advice & not criticism.

Can any of you advise me how she should go about contacting the law society? Also will it turn into more court appearances or do they act as an independent adjudicator?

aimc


----------



## ClubMan (23 Feb 2005)

*the various moderators censor all over the place (and not always fairly or unbiased)*

Here we go again ... Bit of a tangent here but perhaps you could give specific examples of the sort of moderation which you consider inappropriate or biased? I'm not saying that we always get it right but I am very confident that individual moderators act in good faith and do not arbitrarily censor material just because they disagree with it (as opposed to it being potentially offensive or a nuisance - which can sometimes be a subjective judgement call). Did you consider my earlier intervention in this topic (to remove a bit of a tirade against "compo culture" in an attempt to allow the discussion to consider the original query as posted in good faith until/unless proved otherwise) inappropriate for example? What other recent examples of inappropriate moderation can you cite?


----------



## PMU (23 Feb 2005)

Leave all emotion out of this.  Her solicitors had a duty to explain to her the nature of her contract with them.  That’s all.  They did this – no win no fee - so I don’t see how anybody could say the solicitors were at fault.  If she wanted legal advice on contingent aspects she could have asked her solicitors for this.  This could, depending on the solicitors, have resulted in an additional fee.   But you cannot expect solicitors, unless they were specifically asked for their professional opinion,  to second guess what the other party might do if the claimant were to lose her case. Or to provide this advice unless it were  specifically asked for. And while the claimant was 19 years old at the time, there were presumably parents, relatives etc. more experienced in the ways of the world that could or should have been contacted for advice. If your sister is genuinely aggrieved you should look at the Law Society’s web site www.lawsociety.ie where you will see that complaints against solicitors can be entertained if they are complaints  about inadequate services; about excessive fees and about misconduct.  In your sister’s case this is one of inadequate services.  You will also see that the Law  Society cannot (or will not? ) investigate complaints on inadequate professional services if they relate to services provided by a solicitor more than five years ago. In your original post you said that your sister initially contacted her solicitor 7 years go.  So they may not consider your complaint. But you still should make a complaint under their scheme, you will find details on the web site, and see what happens.


----------



## cerberus (23 Feb 2005)

*clubby*

clubby

No, I was not refeering the compo culture bit being removed as you SHOULD have gathered from the tone of my reply.

If it had been the case then I would have directed the comment at you.

My general comment on the censonship culture and the lack of objectivity of the moderators, etc on certain topics or points of view still stands.

Still, a bit touchy, are we not? 
Do you have a cap?  

C


----------



## ClubMan (23 Feb 2005)

*Re: clubby*

*My general comment on the censonship culture and the lack of objectivity of the moderators, etc on certain topics or points of view still stands.*

Perhaps you could back your general comment up with specific examples? I reckon I speak for the moderators as a group (only one of whom I know personally as it happens) when I say that constructive criticism of our performance is always welcome. However sweeping generalisations don't really help.


----------



## oysterman (24 Feb 2005)

*Re: clubby*



> If she wanted legal advice on contingent aspects she could have asked her solicitors for this




Sorry? So a solicitor is allowed to offer a "no win, no fee" deal without informing the claimant that it's nothing of the sort, that, in fact, it could be a very large fee. This is an atrocious line of thinking. It is misrepresentation, pure and simple.



> But you cannot expect solicitors, unless they were specifically asked for their professional opinion, to second guess what the other party might do if the claimant were to lose her case.



Eh, why not? They are solicitors, after all.




> Or to provide this advice unless it were specifically asked for. And while the claimant was 19 years old at the time, there were presumably parents, relatives etc. more experienced in the ways of the world that could or should have been contacted for advice.



So solicitors shouldn't offer the advice they are professionally qualified to offer, simply on the basis that some barrack room lawyer known to their client is likely to offer his tuppence worth? This is truly bizarre.


----------



## Tommy (24 Feb 2005)

*Re: clubby*

It would be normal for the agreement between this girl and her solicitor to be detailed in a written agreement or "terms of business" letter that would have been signed by both parties at the outset. Of all professional groups, I reckon that solicitors would have themselves covered with such documentation.


----------



## Vanilla (24 Feb 2005)

*Re: the issue at hand*

And she DID get a letter in relation to the contract between her and her solicitors. It seems to me that the basis of this problem is that she didnt get a letter in relation to the OTHER parties costs. 
I, personally,  find it hard to believe she didnt recieve this advice, at least orally. Especially given that there was an appeal. I would go further and say that I, personally, find that INCREDIBLE. In every sense of the word.

Has your sister made her complaint to her solicitors first? If so, what have they had to say about it? If not, why not?

Sorry, having reread your initial post, I see you say her solicitors wont answer her. I'd suggest that if she has never had a substantive discussion in relation to this, that she make an appointment to discuss it. Failing that, write to them and request a reply. A phone call in this type of situation is useless.


----------



## rainyday (25 Feb 2005)

*Re: the issue at hand*

Given that your sister opted for a no-win-no-fee solicitor, it seems fair to assume that she understood that there was a fair chance that she would not win the case. Who did she expect to pay to other side's legal fees if she lost?


----------



## Unregistered (29 Apr 2005)

I would have though that if a solicitor took on a case on a “no win no fee’ basis he/she would not have taken on such a case if there was not a chance of winning.  Also on a “no win no fee” basis the solicitor should have taken out insurance to cover for any losses incurred this is how it operates in the UK and I would have thought it would have been the same in Ireland.  However you have to be very careful of the professionals in Ireland all that I have come across have very no scruples.


----------



## Unregistered (29 Apr 2005)

Also as it is seven years ago I would have thought that it was now statute barred.  Perhaps the solicitor in question is chancing his arm now that does not surprise me.  The property market is not so buoyant now and money has to made somewhere.


----------



## brodiebabe (30 Apr 2005)

Many of the replies say she should have asked the solicitor about being liable for the others sides fees if she did not know about being liable for them. Is this not a Catch 22? How is she meant to ask about something if she does not about them? 


I think the solicitor should have pointed out all the risks in taking this case to court including that she may be liable for the other sides charges if she lost.

Myself personally I don't agree with people claiming compensation at the drop of the hat. However, if she felt she deserved it, so be it. It always makes me suspicious going to a "No win, no fee" solicitor. if you truly believe that you have a case that will win surely you would go to a well established solicitir and pay fees.


----------



## Unregistered (30 Apr 2005)

How is a lay person to know the if they have got a case or not that is why the go to a solicitor in the first place in the hope that you are going to get some good professional advise and if the solicitor took it on a 'no win, no fee' basis then s/he should have got a legal opinion in the first instance to avoid incurring unnecessary legal fees but who know what that cowboy solicitor had in mind on taking instructions.


----------



## RainyDay (30 Apr 2005)

brodiebabe said:
			
		

> Many of the replies say she should have asked the solicitor about being liable for the others sides fees if she did not know about being liable for them. Is this not a Catch 22? How is she meant to ask about something if she does not about them?


So you are telling she had absolutely no idea that the other side would be incurring legal fees - right?


----------



## brodiebabe (30 Apr 2005)

RainyDay said:
			
		

> So you are telling she had absolutely no idea that the other side would be incurring legal fees - right?


 
Unbelievable I know!!!  But you wouldn't believe how dopey some people are.

I'd know about being liable for the other side, you'd know... but some people - forget about it, they pass through life with their head stuck you know where.  Completely oblivious to anything past their own nse.


----------



## RainyDay (30 Apr 2005)

brodiebabe said:
			
		

> I'd know about being liable for the other side, you'd know... but some people - forget about it, they pass through life with their head stuck you know where.  Completely oblivious to anything past their own nse.


Well if they are making major decisions with their head stuck you know where, I'd like to see blame allocated firstly to them, before we start castigating the (not blameless) solicitors.


----------



## Unregistered (30 Apr 2005)

Good for you that you know about the other side charges but when you are told your case would be taken on a 'no win, no fee' basis then you automatically think that you would be winning the case therefore the other side charges would not be an issue.


----------



## RainyDay (30 Apr 2005)

Unregistered said:
			
		

> Good for you that you know about the other side charges but when you are told your case would be taken on a 'no win, no fee' basis then you automatically think that you would be winning the case therefore the other side charges would not be an issue.



But anyone who fails to consider the possibility of losing the case is guilty of selective thinking, i.e. thinking only what they want to think.


----------



## Unregistered (1 May 2005)

The solicitor should have told his/her client that there would be a possibility of loosing the case and to be prepared for some fees to be paid to the other side.  The terminology should be change to ‘no win, the side fees will have to be paid’; the other version is totally misleading.  

As mentioned before I would have though that when a solicitor say that there will be no fees to be paid for a case then you take them at their word otherwise they are lying!


----------



## RainyDay (1 May 2005)

I agree that the solicitor is not blameless in this. However, don't you think the client had an obligation to think it through?


----------



## Unregistered (1 May 2005)

No, s you expect when a solicitor give an opinion then take that as fact.  When you are told that it is 'no win, no fee’ than you would take is as no fees payable.   

The majority of people trust solicitors as knowing the law and conveying the correct information to their clients otherwise what is the point in going to a solicitor if they are going to mislead you.  

If I was told after seven years that I owned the other side legal fees for word done seven years ago then I would contest it firstly on the base that my solicitor did not convey the facts of the proceedings and then after six years it is statute barred.

He/She would never get any money from me for such negligence.


----------



## Unregistered (2 May 2005)

Help needed - My mother died without leaving a will and a sibling who stayed in the home took over and keeping for themselves and family. Can that be done and if I wanted to contest it will all the other members of the family have to contest it as well. Say if only one member want their share will it matter that not all the other family members are doing the same?


----------



## RainyDay (2 May 2005)

Hi  Unregistered User - As you've already posted this query in this more relevant thread, I'll ask anyone who can respond to you query to do so in that other thread and keep this thread on-topic. Please don't duplicate posts.


----------



## tobo (10 May 2005)

brodiebabe said:
			
		

> if you truly believe that you have a case that will win surely you would go to a well established solicitir and pay fees.


 
Yes....in an ideal world!  Unfortunately, very few people could afford to pay a solicitor to bring a personal injury claim and especially so at a time when because of an injury the person is unable to work/earn.  If solicitors did not agree to take on cases on a 'no win-no fee' basis then very many people would be deprived of access to justice.  Solicitors are really filling a gap in the justice net because of the woeful lack of any civil legal aid system in this country.

In respect of the original post I believe that it would be good practise for a solicitor to advise a client about their exposure to the other sides costs if the case is lost.  It should be common sense that such a liability would be the case, but not everyone is well endowed with that commodity.

There are also many clients who would be aware of the liability but will feign ignorance when the chips were down in the hope that they will escape paying the bill.  Having the terms set out clearly from the outset will help to prevent the solicitor from criticism.

I am a solicitor and I am increasingly aware of the need for members of my profession to take steps to protect themselves from clients who have no intention to pay any legal fees for services rendered.  I have today instituted 5 sets of legal proceedings to recover fees due to me (not 'no win-no fee' cases).  The chances of recovering those fees will be slim in any event.

I also have a well educated and senior business manger client who sued his former employer for salary not paid to him.  His employer has now gone bust just before we are about to obtain judgement. Now this client insists that he does not wish to bring the case to a conclusion because he has no chance of recovering the money owed to him.  He also does not feel that he should pay me for his legal costs and outlays incurred to date because he "thought" he had a 'no-win, no-fee' arrangement.  I have advised him that he didn't and that I can still win his action for him.  He won't pay and feels that it was up to me to take the risk that his opponent would become insolvent and wouldn't be able to honour any judgement obtained.

Much of the solicitor knocking that I read on this site has it's roots in myth, prejudice and ignorance.  There will always be the bad apple and mistakes will also occur, as in any walk of life, but lawyers tend to take an unjust amount of criticism without any balancing views being expressed.

Few people realise that many solicitors take on a good deal of work on a pro-bono (free) basis.  I have recently concluded a very difficult case for a guy whose children were taken from him by a Health Board.  The guy had no money and it would have taken months for the legal aid service to have provided him with any legal assistance.  I successfully challenged the application for Care Orders and spent over 60 hours (often at night and whilst at home) working on the case for free.  I take on many other cases for free when I am faced with a desperate person with no other access to justice.  I know many of my colleagues do likewise, but I am unaware of any other professionals who give their skills, time, knowledge and experience so freely in this way.

Keep exposing any wrongdoing and shortcomings by members of the legal profession as that is worthwhile and positive but please stop the cheap jibes that are so often utilised by a section of posters on AAM.


----------



## Unregistered (10 May 2005)

“Solicitors to take steps to protect themselves”

Surely solicitors should advise their client of what the fees will be in any case up front and especially on a so call ‘no win. no fee’ bases.  Why should a lay person know that this has a different meaning.  To me ‘no win, no fee’ is exactly what it says, therefore, it not common knowledge that peoples should know that they will be liable for the other sides costs should he/she losses the case.

I feel that it is a bit like auctioneers, they will give the highest value on a property get it on their books.  A solicitor who wants a case will not fully advise his/her client of the other side costs.

In all countries solicitors do a bit of charity work but are handsomely compensated for it by other work that solicitors do such as conveyancing.  

Also taking on pro-bono work give a solicitors the change of gaining experience and knowledge that might come his/her way during normal working hours.


----------



## RainyDay (10 May 2005)

tobo said:
			
		

> I also have a well educated and senior business manger client who sued his former employer for salary not paid to him.  His employer has now gone bust just before we are about to obtain judgement. Now this client insists that he does not wish to bring the case to a conclusion because he has no chance of recovering the money owed to him.  He also does not feel that he should pay me for his legal costs and outlays incurred to date because he "thought" he had a 'no-win, no-fee' arrangement.  I have advised him that he didn't and that I can still win his action for him.  He won't pay and feels that it was up to me to take the risk that his opponent would become insolvent and wouldn't be able to honour any judgement obtained.
> 
> Much of the solicitor knocking that I read on this site has it's roots in myth, prejudice and ignorance.  There will always be the bad apple and mistakes will also occur, as in any walk of life, but lawyers tend to take an unjust amount of criticism without any balancing views being expressed.


I agree with the general thrust of your comments about cheap jibes. Just so I fully understand your comments, can you clarify if those clients who are disputing the fees would have been issued with a written notification of estimated fees up-front?


----------



## tobo (10 May 2005)

In respect of those proceedings issued there would have been either an estimate of fees or a fixed price communicated to the client.  In respect of the example of the business manager there wasn't, but that was because his wife was an acquiantance of my wife and he came to me at home in an urgent scenario.  He got Rolls Royce treatment and I was dealing with his case on an urgent basis.  His first few emails from me were sent from home at 01.30 in the morning.  Despite the connection and my sterling efforts he does not want to pay me.  It is very difficult to always spend time spelling out the detail but when you don't there are always those with an eye for the main chance who will try to take advantage!


----------

