Counting the costI read with interest the recent article on costs only-proceedings and was also particularly impressed by the subtlety of the letter concerning 'so-called costs negotiators' (see [2000] Gazette, 15 December, 16, 20).I am an old-fashioned costs draftsman with 23 years' experience in the business, and in recent years have come to work exclusively in the road traffic accident field.

It is my business to deal with costs negotiators, day in and day out, and it is my experience that for the most part they do a decent job.

On the other hand, there are some complete idiots holding themselves out as costs experts; frankly, one of the carpet tiles in my office could do a better job than these people.

This goes to the heart of the reason for the increase in costs only proceedings.

There is also the question of delay; in other words, the time that it takes to get costs paid.

Might I suggest that the solution to the problem would be the introduction of a costs protocol for non-contentious matters.

It should provide: l For an offer of settlement to be made within 14 days from details being provided; l A response thereto within seven days; l Any increased offer seven days thereafter, such offer being deemed final; l Costs incurred thereafter to be the receiving party's, should the paying party make a subsequent acceptable offer of settlement, and; l Payment of cogs to be made within 14 days of agreement.

With such a protocol, the marketplace would quickly sort the wheat from the chaff.

Mark Balme, Tortac, Doncaster