# Solicitor's fees for PIAB application



## billythefish (20 May 2009)

Hi all

I'm wondering if you think that €2,400 is high for solicitors' professional fees to administer a PIAB application. 

I was initially told by the solicitor that the prof. fee would be €1,200. Now I'm being told that was a minimum fee. 

Granted, it's been going on for about 18 months but I really don't think that there's been anything out of the ordinary that would accrue double the supposedly "minimum" fee. I really haven't been a high-maintenance client.

Also, a "miscellaneous" amount of €250 has been slapped on for telephone, fax and postage, an amount that I know could not possibly have been spent on my account.

Any informed opinions would be appreciated.


----------



## MOB (20 May 2009)

billythefish said:


> Hi all
> 
> I'm wondering if you think that €2,400 is high for solicitors' professional fees to administer a PIAB application.
> 
> ...



In my standard client engagement letter for PIAB matters, the minimum fee is stated as €1400 plus VAT and outlay.  I am fairly cheap, (though I don't do a lot of PIAB work), so a minimum fee of €1200 sounds reasonable to me.  

For me a 'minimum fee' case is a case where the client's injuries are already fully healed ( so none of the hassle of looking at future pain, future loss of earnings etc. and one medical report is adequate to allow me properly assess the case), liability is not being contested ( no need to worry about getting orders to preserve evidence and\or get an engineer out and\or take witness statements) and the insurance company are willing to settle relatively quickly.  Such a case does not usually take 18 months.

The client engagement letter should make clear that the fees are likely to be higher than the stated minimum in all but these most straightforward of cases.  But even if it doesn't, it is perfectly logical when you think about it - certainly so if you analyse it in light of what I have set out above.


----------



## billythefish (20 May 2009)

Hi MOB

Many thanks for that. The following work would have been done apart from what I suppose would be normal administration re a PIAB application:

- Arrange for consultation with specialist re injuries
- Co-ordinate with respondent's insurance company re their medical exam
- Arrange for consultation with PIAB doctor
- Pass on correspondence from respondent insurance company re inspection of damaged vehicle.
- 25 letters to me. For most of these, phone calls or even e-mails would have been sufficient.

Also, there was no stated minimum fee on the initial letter. I was told that the fee would be €1,200 + Vat + Outlay at the initial consultation. I'm not yet fully healed but there's none of the additional work relating to that like what you've mentioned above. The respondent's insurance company paid out on my car as soon as they received their doctor's report and we don't expect them to reject PIAB's ruling.

Any thoughts?

Thanks


----------



## MOB (20 May 2009)

Bad communication from solicitor;  or failure on your part to hear what was being said.  Or both.   It may be that at initial consultation the case appeared utterly straightforward and that the indicative fee quote was given in this context.  But solicitor should have made clear that this was only on the basis of the case continuing to be utterly straighforward.  TBH, from your admittedly brief description, the fee sounds fine.  I would, however, be upset if I thought that a solicitor had deliberately pitched a misleadingly low figure to secure the work in the first place.


----------



## Askar (21 May 2009)

Most of the work sounds mechanistic and run-of-the-mill. Even if there was an additional doctors consultation or so (which could be arranged by the secretary/apprentice/gap year student) it hardly justifies the extent of the increase outlined (which would assume doubling of workload). There is vagueness as to whether fee was agreed as a minimum and what was covered by that minimum.  If you did not receive an initial letter explaining charging structure (as solicitor was required to provide) I think you can properly challenge revision of fees, especially if your account of fee agreement differs from solicitor. Failing to achieve satisfactory resolution it is always open to you to make a complaint and your solicitor is open to censure by not outlining fees in writing.


----------



## Askar (21 May 2009)

billythefish said:


> Hi MOB
> 
> Many thanks for that. The following work would have been done apart from what I suppose would be normal administration re a PIAB application:
> 
> ...


 
There appears to be nothing unusual in this that would warrant doubling of fees. In fact, this would be standard work for processing of claim.


----------



## MOB (21 May 2009)

Askar said:


> Most of the work sounds mechanistic and run-of-the-mill. Even if there was an additional doctors consultation or so (which could be arranged by the secretary/apprentice/gap year student) it hardly justifies the extent of the increase outlined (which would assume doubling of workload).




Most legal work is mechanistic and run-of-the-mill, especially if you are a lawyer.   I am not suggesting that there was any unusual complexity here.  I do say that:

a.  It is possible to settle a claim with a good deal less work;
b.  A fee of €1200 would be consistent with such a case ( i.e. one involving a good deal less work)
c.  the total amount of work in this case sounds consistent with a fee of €2400.

None of this excuses the fact that OP feels misled about what the case would cost - which, as I say,  may be due to bad communication, failure to listen, or other factors.  

But if OP is wondering whether he\she is being overcharged then - on the basis of the information available thus far - my answer would be no.


----------



## billythefish (21 May 2009)

MOB said:


> None of this excuses the fact that OP feels misled about what the case would cost - which, as I say,  may be due to bad communication, failure to listen, or other factors.



My sister attended this initial meeting with me. It was three days after the accident and my head was still in a bit of a spin. She got the same understanding re fees from the meeting as I did.

The fees were never verified in writing other than to say that no win meant no professional fee.

If there was work over and above what would normally accrue the "minimum" charge, I could understand a fee that was a certain percentage over that, maybe 25% or 30%. But double?.. with an extra €250 thrown on for postage, fax and phone? I just feel like I'm having a pound of flesh taken.

I spoke to the solicitor yesterday. He said that best case scenario would be that it would go to court, we would win and that the other side would pay the legal fees. Best case scenario?? Is the PIAB not set up so as these cases wouldn't have to go to court?

Also, in the "best case scenario" where the respondent would pay the legal fees, my solicitor can probably name his price. Am I being hammered for denying him his day in court and what would probably be a big payday?


----------



## MOB (21 May 2009)

billythefish said:


> My sister attended this initial meeting with me. It was three days after the accident and my head was still in a bit of a spin. She got the same understanding re fees from the meeting as I did.



Then it seems that the solicitor was ( initially) unduly optimistic about the amount of work involved in the case OR that the solicitor pitched the fee low to secure your business (something which I would be unhappy about, but I can't tell you it never happens; nor, of course, can I say that it happened in this case.).



billythefish said:


> The fees were never verified in writing other than to say that no win meant no professional fee.



The nature of PIAB work is such that fees can be quite variable.  That is why the "section  68" letter usually sets out the basis of charge, rather than simply a flat fee.  Did you get a Section 68 letter in this case?



billythefish said:


> If there was work over and above what would normally accrue the "minimum" charge, I could understand a fee that was a certain percentage over that, maybe 25% or 30%. But double?.. with an extra €250 thrown on for postage, fax and phone? I just feel like I'm having a pound of flesh taken.



I am afraid it just doesn't work like that.  A PIAB case which goes on for a bit can easily end up having two, three, five or more times the amount of work compared to a case which is already suitable for settlement at the time of the first consultation.



billythefish said:


> I spoke to the solicitor yesterday. He said that best case scenario would be that it would go to court, we would win and that the other side would pay the legal fees. Best case scenario?? Is the PIAB not set up so as these cases wouldn't have to go to court?.



I think that the PIAB is set up to 'reduce' legal costs by the simple expedient of not paying them.  So if you bring a case to PIAB, you ( mostly) have to pay your own legal costs.   Many solicitors would be of the view that in many cases you are as well off going to the courts ( after PIAB) in order to secure payment of your legal costs.  Obviously it is a decision which can only be made on a case-by-case basis.



billythefish said:


> Also, in the "best case scenario" where the respondent would pay the legal fees, my solicitor can probably name his price. Am I being hammered for denying him his day in court and what would probably be a big payday?



No, you are not being hammered.  At risk of repeating myself, €2400 is by no means out of order as a professional fee for the work to date in a case of the type which you have described.  I suspect that I would charge more.  Your solicitor will undoubtedly want to get paid more if the case ultimately has to go to court, but that is because there will be more work involved - so there is nothing sinister about that either.


----------



## billythefish (21 May 2009)

Thanks MOB. I'm feeling a bit better about it now. I'm a firm believer in a good job for a fair price paid in good time but I just thought I was being made a fool of. I think he's going to do something about the €250 slapped on for fax, phone and post. 

I did get a letter after my initial consultation that seemed quite standard and it was very detailed. But it didn't set out any minimum fee or give any numbers whatsoever re fees. Are solicitors obliged to do that?


----------



## MOB (21 May 2009)

Yes - that letter is the so-called "Section 68" letter.  

To be frank, though it is a legal requirement, it is not a lot of help to get such a letter at the start of a case, where the amount of work is not readily predictable - because it really says very little more than 'we don't just make up a number, there is a basis for calculating what we will charge' followed by a whole set of factors which go into the decision as to how much to charge.   My own S 68 letter veers rather more in the direction of timesheets\hourly rates\uplift payments etc. -  but many people don't like to think of paying hourly rates either.


----------



## billythefish (21 May 2009)

Okay. Well like I said, I'm feeling a bit better about the fees after speaking with you though it is still quite a surprise. I always said that if I got anything over x, I'd be delighted, and I did. So if the solicitor can do something about the €250 add-on I think I'll walk away pretty happy.


----------



## Askar (21 May 2009)

MOB said:


> Most legal work is mechanistic and run-of-the-mill, especially if you are a lawyer. I am not suggesting that there was any unusual complexity here. I do say that:
> 
> a. It is possible to settle a claim with a good deal less work;
> b. A fee of €1200 would be consistent with such a case ( i.e. one involving a good deal less work)
> ...


 
I find it hard to imagine how there could be a 'good deal less work' then what has been described by OP. It appears very minimal and would be necessary in all PI cases. It would be the expected minimum amount and scope of professional work for any run of the mill PI case. The issue, in my opinion, is the doubling of the agreed fee and the basis for that. I do not understand the basis for doubling the agreed fee.


----------



## MOB (21 May 2009)

Askar said:


> I find it hard to imagine how there could be a 'good deal less work' then what has been described by OP.



As stated, the amount of work can be very variable as between two superficially similar cases.

It is possible for a case to settle before papers are even filed with PIAB - i.e. take instructions, get medical report, write to insurer, share medical, negotiate settlement, get cheque, close file.  Say four letters to insurer, four to client, three to doctor, (plus responses),  two consultations at office, some telephone consultations.

In the OP's case, the PIAB claim is filed and there have been at least 3 separate medical examinations (and reports), plus 25 letters to client alone.


----------



## lawdable (23 May 2009)

The fee seems reasonable, but clients need to stop paying "estimated" outlay for phone, fax and post. Some solicitors are treating this as a 10% tip.

They're not in the business of selling postage; outlay should be itemised and passed on at cost. Where a solicitor bills a large rounded non-itemised amount for these items, the client should simply refuse to pay.

It's a dishonest practice and it's outrageous. A reputable solicitor will only bill you their actual outlay.


----------



## billythefish (1 Jun 2009)

Hi guys

I just wanted to give you an update on this.

After speaking with my solicitor, he agreed to cut the professional fee to €2,000 + Vat. Also, the "miscellaneous" was cut from €250 + Vat to €100 + Vat. It's still higher than I was expecting but I'm happy with what I'll be left with if the respondents settle.


----------



## mathepac (1 Jun 2009)

€660-ish knocked off the bill, not a bad outcome. Thanks for the update, well done.


----------

