Practitioners would be wrong to think that they will never touch a small claim.

Increasingly, it can be expected that legal advice will be sought by litigants before small claims are issued.

I do not consider that #5,000 - the new maximum upper limit for the small claims track - is small change by any means.

Neither will most of the public.

It is likely that claimants seeking the maximum, or close to it will be particularly anxious for advice and, generally, both sides may well look to a solicitor, not to handle their disputes from start to finish, but to help them draft statements of case, to advise on evidence and represent them at the hearing - when the solicitor or a legal executive may appear, or counsel be briefed.

Solicitors could and should be there, often behind the scenes.

The current projection by the Court Service is that in the n ext year there will be upwards of 110,000 small claims hearings.Legal expenses insurance will continue to grow.

More and more of the public buys it as an add-on to household insurance policies.

It is cheap and easy to arrange.

Predominantly, it is used at the moment in road traffic cases but its usage may well extend over the years.

Practitioners need to be aware that a client might have this resource available.

Solicitors cannot help their clients without knowing how the small-claims track will work.ScopeAlthough claims of up to #5,000 will come within the small claims track, personal injury claims will be excluded where the claim for damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity is more than #1,000.

Also excluded will be disrepair claims involving more than #1,000 and claims of harassment or unlawful eviction relating to residential property, whatever their value.After defenceOne of the notable features of the new small claims regime is that the directions, to be given at the allocation stage, will be much more detailed than the directions currently given in arbitrations.

This is because district judges will be working to more extensive standard directions which can be found in the practice direction for part 27 of the new rules.There are some interesting changes in procedure too.

The 'Benchmarks' column has already highlighted how claims currently regarded as unliquidated will be capable of having a specified value applied to them in the claim form (see [1999] Gazette, 20 January, 34).

If the claim form asks for damages for loss of use of a car at the rate of #50 per week for two weeks and no defence is filed, the claimant will be at liberty to apply for default judgment for #100 and fixed costs.

No longer in that situation will there be an interlocutory judgment followed by an assessment of damages.The claimant will also be able to apply for summary judgment in a small claim but the district judge may well then list the case itself for hearing and not just the application.The current approach of dealing with small claims quickly - with a minimum of fuss and with only one hearing - survives the rules changes.There should be fewer preliminary hearings.

To what extent district judges will exercise their new powers to strike out hopeless claims or defences remains to be seen, but the powers will be there and will be used.At the hearingMost hearings will now be in public.

The district judge may adopt any method of procedure considered appropriate, as long as it is fair.

The strict rules of evidence will not apply.

The judge may ask questions of a witness before allowing the advocate to do so.

The advocate may find his prepared questioning in chief going straight out of the window.

The district judge may ask questions of all the witnesses before the advocate gets a turn.

The judge will even have the power to limit the cross-examination of a witness to a fixed time or to a particular issue.Judge's reasonsThe intention is that all decisions given by the district judge in small claims will be mechanically recorded.

A party will be able to obtain a copy of the transcript on payment of the transcriber's fee.A new provision is that if a party has told the court at least seven days before the hearing of an intention not to attend, or if both parties have asked the court to decide the case in their absences, then the court will send the parties a note of the judge's reasons for the decision reached.

The parties should not expect an essay.

The reasons will be brief.

But the provision will be of value to those for whom a personal attendance would involve a lengthy, and perhaps uneconomic journey to the court of trial.

Solicitors may well have a role in preparing the absent party's written submissions to the court.CostsBasically, the present position is preserved.

There will be fixed costs for issuing the claim, a maximum of #50 per day for each witness including a party who has lost earnings, #200 for an expert, and travel costs.

Anything more and it will be necessary to show that the party against whom an order is being made has behaved unreasonably.

However, the recoverable court fees are set to rise significantly if the current proposal to levy both an issue fee and an additional fee on allocation is adopted.An important change is to be found where there is a default judgment with damages to be decided by the court, and not least because of the introduction of the concept of a claim for 'a specified sum of money'.At the moment, the successful plaintiff with an unliquidated small claim only obtains a default judgment for damages to be assessed with costs on scale 1.

It is not uncommon to see costs taxed at #1,500 after a damages award of #150.However, after 26 April 1999, the court, when entering the default judgment and giving directions for the assessment of an unspecified claim, will consider the estimated value of the claim.

If it is within the small claims track then the allocation will be to that track which means restricted costs as we have mentioned.

So from the practitioner's point of view, it will always be better to opt for the 'specified amount' approach rather than force an uneconomic assessment hearing.

In the rare instance of the parties agreeing to a claim of more than #5,000 being allocated to the small claims track, costs will not be restricted.AppealSo the client lost? What can be done? There is a limited right of appeal but the grounds are extremely narrow.

The appellant needs to prove either a serious irregularity affecting the proceedings or that the judge made a mistake of law.The second ground is pretty straightforward.

As for the first ground, it would not suffice just to show a 'serious irregularity'.

It would additionally have to be shown that such irregularity altered the outcome.The time for appealing is 14 days from the date of service of the order.

The circuit judge may determine the appeal without a hearing.

That ought to filter out the hopeless appeals quite quickly.