Solicitor fee but charge struck out

Just curious - when you paid the fee did you voice any reservation about the amount or were you happy to pay it based on your anticipation or receiving sole level of service during the court sitting the need for which never arose? If so what level of involvement in court would have justified the fee in your opinion?
 
Clubman...when I paid the fee, I expected that that at a minimum, my solicior was going to have to trot out the usual, this is his first offence, no previous convictions etc., etc. Not being a courtroom regular, I thought it prudent to have a solicitor, if for nothing more than appearance and to have him utter the usual line(s). Given that there was zero required of him in court, I would have imagined €150 was more than adequate?? Maybe others think not. That's why I posted the question here - to solicit opinion as to whether the majority thought it a fair price.
 
I'm just back from Court. It took up the whole morning and while we were 24th in the list and the case itself only took about 5 minutes that was facilitated by the fact i had spoken to the prosecution in advance and had agreed a plea in return for two charges being struck out. The client faced a maximum fine of almost €4,000 but ended up being ordered to pay €630.

A court attendance fee of €300 is cheap enough (€53 is VAT). However long the actual case itself takes the solicitor is gone from the office for a half or full day depending. Very often it is not until you get there or until the case is called that the solicitor finds out if it is going ahead.

At least he told you in advance, for first time clients in cirmcumstances like yours I would ask for the money to be paid on the day (not in advance of the hearing date but before going into court). You engaged him to be in court for you that is the bottom line. If you went out for dinner and only ate half your main course they wouldn't give you the dish for half price.
 
Is this not a bit like insurance though? I pay €300 for my annual house insurance because I consider it a fair price given what it could potentially be worth to me - but I don't claim that it's a rip-off just because my house does not actually burn down and so I don't get to claim €300K or whatever? You paid what you initially presumably considered a fair price to the solicitor for what he was potentially going to do for you. Does the fact that he didn't need to do this in the end necessarily change matters substantially? Have you written to the solicitor voicing your reservations about how much you were charged?
 
OP - So you agree that his fee should have been 150 Euro. Why didn't you negotiate this amount in advance then? It seems to me you thought the 300 was good value before the court case and not afterwards. You were paying for his expertise, in your case he actually didn't need to use it but if the case had gone ahead without him you might be thinking 300 was very little especially if you'd been hit with a large fine/penalty points etc.

Ubiquitous, very funny. Do you think revenue are down in court following cases all day. In any case how on earth would they know what fee was paid, if any.
 
I guess its a matter of opinion Clubman. For the service I received & the level of involvement of the person who acted on my behalf, I thought and still think the fee to be expensive. I do welcome the opinions of others though. As to the previous poster, I would have had no issue had the same process materialised in my case, i.e. you were instrumental in securing a better outcome for your client. In my case, the solicitor had no hand nor part in the outcome. It would appear though that there is a significant number who believe the fee was fair..............so be it.
 
apple1 said:
It would appear though that there is a significant number who believe the fee was fair..............so be it.
Click to expand...
But if you don't believe so then surely you should be taking it up with the solicitor? Have you?
 
apple1 said:
expensive. ... fair..............
Click to expand...

Do bear in mind that it is possible for a price to be both expensive and fair.

Bronte said:
Ubiquitous, very funny. Do you think revenue are down in court following cases all day. In any case how on earth would they know what fee was paid, if any.
Click to expand...

No, but in the event of a Revenue Audit of a solicitor or other professional, I would expect that the Revenue would use a range of audit tests to verify the accuracy or otherwise of the fee income, including perhaps a reconciliation of the professional's fee records and client list against publicly available information such as court documents. I would also expect any professional worth their salt to have a basic awareness of this possibility in assessing whether or not they should be tax-compliant in respect of fee income.
 

Having never been in a firm which was audited by the Revenue i don't know exactly what they do but would assume that they go through each paper file to reconcile it with the client account.

Now if the file only has a faxed copy of the summons it is possible that the solicitor spoke to the client on the phone and that was that.

Furtehrmore there is nothing on the court records to show that the OP was represented (unless he applied for legal aid) in such cases. Therefore nothing for the Revenue to start with.
 
Clubman...I haven't spoke to the solicitor about the fee. That was the second part of my original post....did others think there was any recourse to request a refund. Clearly the majority think not!

Bronte...I didn't negotiate ahead of time, as I'd little to no idea what to expect on the day, how much time was required on his part, whether there would be an adjournement etc., etc. On reflection and having experience now of the process, I'd be a little wiser next time (not that I intend being an ever-present!). I don't think its unusual to think that an item (good/service) may be good value before you procure it, but on receiving the good/service, consider it to be bad value. If I get a meal in a restaurant, irrespective of whether or not my expectation is high of the product, if it transpires that the meal is of poor quality, then I certainly wouldn't be paying list price.
 
Stifster said:
Furtehrmore there is nothing on the court records to show that the OP was represented (unless he applied for legal aid) in such cases. Therefore nothing for the Revenue to start with.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying that.


But would there not be an expectation that there should be a fee invoice & receipt to correspond to each file - and a record somewhere on the file of the fact that the client was represented in court on the day?
 
apple1 said:
Clubman...I haven't spoke to the solicitor about the fee. That was the second part of my original post....did others think there was any recourse to request a refund. Clearly the majority think not!
Click to expand...
Whatever others think there is nothing stopping you from voicing your concerns to your solicitor and asking for a partial refund. Chances are you probably won't get it but without asking you never know.
If I get a meal in a restaurant, irrespective of whether or not my expectation is high of the product, if it transpires that the meal is of poor quality, then I certainly wouldn't be paying list price.
Click to expand...
I thought that my insurance analogy was much more apposite. Do you disagree with the general thrust of my analysis on that front?
 
ubiquitous said:
But would there not be an expectation that there should be a fee invoice & receipt to correspond to each file - and a record somewhere on the file of the fact that the client was represented in court on the day?
Click to expand...

I have a lot of files that got opened after an initial consultation or telephone call that would not have generated a fee note. Some may even have copy summonses on them. In fact one I advsied a client on last week has. It is part and parcel of most practices.

There is no obligation to keep a note of having attended at court (obviously there is an obligation to declare the earnings but that is another issue) and if nothing happened then there was nothing to note....
Everyone has different ways of doing their housekeeping.

my meal analogy didn't work as it was supposed to have been a lovely dish but more food than was needed! However what is more relevant is the fact that he was out of the office for a period of time when he could have been billing hours on other matters.

Unfortunately this does appear to have been a fee for cash and is low in the first place.
 
Stifster said:
There is no obligation to keep a note of having attended at court.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I would have thought that such notes would be an essential element of practice housekeeping, and a basic protection for the practice in the event of a future dispute, complaint to the Law Society or Revenue Audit?
 
The opinions the OP are getting here might be a tad biased. I'm sure many of the respondants are solicitors or other fee earning professionals such as accountants etc, that would have €300 down the back of their expensive couch.

In my opinion, the problem stems from the fact that maybe the OP didn't know what they'd be getting for their €300.

There's also the element of fear. Pay up or else.
 
ubiquitous said:
Yes, but I would have thought that such notes would be an essential element of practice housekeeping, and a basic protection for the practice in the event of a future dispute, complaint to the Law Society or Revenue Audit?
Click to expand...

to quote myself

Everyone has different ways of doing their housekeeping.
Click to expand...

Good practice management and common sense, yes. Legal obligation, no.
 
Thanks Leghorn......for a moment there, I felt like a sheep among wolves!! While I may disagree with many of those posting, I do value & appreciate the opinions - the beauty of this site I suppose.
 
leghorn said:
The opinions the OP are getting here might be a tad biased. I'm sure many of the respondants are solicitors or other fee earning professionals such as accountants etc, that would have €300 down the back of their expensive couch.
Click to expand...

So what? I am an accountant and that didn't stop me from saying "I don't think it represents particularly good value".
 
leghorn said:
The opinions the OP are getting here might be a tad biased. I'm sure many of the respondants are solicitors or other fee earning professionals such as accountants etc, that would have €300 down the back of their expensive couch.
Click to expand...
Well I'm not in case you were concerned...
 
leghorn said:
The opinions the OP are getting here might be a tad biased. I'm sure many of the respondants are solicitors or other fee earning professionals such as accountants etc, that would have €300 down the back of their expensive couch.
Click to expand...

That is an outrageous generalisation - I can assure you I am neither a solicitor nor other fee earning professional and my Dunnes Stores couch never has more than 3 cent in it.

I believe that Clubman's analogy of insurance is the best - you paid for him to look at the case, have a defence ready, attend court away from his office and be prepared to speak in your defence - you were both just lucky it got struck out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register