Talk about the money

The client, a young woman, had allegedly been treated badly by a well-known sports club and sought redress under racial discrimination legislation.

She was advised by a friend to see a partner in a large London law firm.

She was told that the solicitors would take the case through to hearing for a fee of 3,000.

The client borrowed 3,000, which, as it turned out, she could ill afford, and presented it to the solicitors.

She heard nothing from them for some weeks and had no idea what they were doing for her.

She then received a bill for 7,000.

Unhappy, she visited the solicitors who explained the work they had done, although they had not issued an application to the tribunal at that stage.

The partner told her that he had now decided he was unable to take the case and had invited one of his colleagues to look after the matter.

His colleague indicated that a barrister would be instructed for the final hearing and the costs could escalate to 10,000 or 15,000.

No other explanation was given.

The client was worried.

At a further meeting with the solicitors, the new fee-earner told her, 'the firm does not like to discuss money with its clients'.

She was informed that 'most of our clients don't like that sort of thing and we don't do it'.

She was distraught and made a complaint.

The solicitors were uncooperative in dealing with the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors.

They conceded that inadequate costs information had been provided and that no costs risk/benefit analysis had been undertaken.

They did not appear to understand that even if successful, the client would recover rather less than the estimated costs.

They accepted their work had been slow and that no proceedings had been commenced.

However, they offered no redress, and no apology to their client.

On adjudication, it was considered that the client had received no effective service from the solicitors, and in a combination of directions, the client recovered her 3,000 together with a significant compensatory award.

After some 14 years during which the profession has been urged to comply with practice rule 15, and latterly with the Solicitors Costs Information and Client Care Code 1999, there are those who fail to comply with their professional obligations.

Every case before the adjudication panel is decided on its individual facts.

This case study is for illustration only and should not be treated as a precedent