Conduct and service

Stick to the letterThese days, most solicitors give at least some costs information at the outset of their retainers.

Cases in which that did not happen, not once, but twice for the same client, are rare - but that is what occurred in one recently referred to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (OSS).

Not only that, but the solicitors also ignored their obligation to ensure that any information given was in a form the client could understand.

In this instance, the solicitors compounded matters by then trying to shift the blame to a third party.The circumstances were simple enough - perhaps that was part of the problem.

The client was a first- time purchaser of a leasehold flat, who had been introduced to the solicitors by the selling estate agent.

She maintained that she understood the solicitors' costs would be on a 'no sale, no fee' basis - something that the solicitors never disputed, though it was unclear who had told her that.

Her first purchase fell through, so a second was embarked upon.The client had a shock immediately prior to completion, when she was asked to pay the solicitors' costs, of nearly 1,000.

She protested that she was expected to pay, and had budgeted for only 350.

She had assumed this to be an all-in figure.

The surprise items were the VAT and disbursements.The solicitors retorted that it was not they who had told the client that, but the selling agents.

The problem for the solicitors was that they could not demonstrate they had told the client anything about costs.

True, there were scribbled file notes referring to both purchases, which the solicitors said reflected verbal information given.

One of the problems with this was that both the figures indicated a profit charge of 445, whereas the solicitors' final bill was indeed for profit costs of 350.A problem then arose about apportionments.

Again, there was nothing in writing on the file.

This was all the more surprising as the solicitors themselves apparently considered that the client lacked mental capacity - a fact noted in a file note and later confirmed in letters to the OSS.Practitioners should always remember not only that costs information must be given and confirmed in writing, but it must also be in a form the client can understand.

Paragraph 3(b) of the Solicitors Costs Information and Client Care Code, on page 267 of the 8th edition of The Guide to the Professional Conduct of Solicitors, makes this clear.In this particular case, the penalty imposed represented a total loss of fees for the firm.l Every case before the compliance and supervision committee is decided on its individual facts.

These case studies are for illustration only and should not be treated as precedents.