Drafting a riposte

The Council of the Association of Law Costs Draftsmen, of which Bill Gibson is not a member, wishes to make it clear that Mr Gibson's letter does not represent the association's views (see [2002] Gazette, 14 March, 18) and was written without its authority or consent and the ALCD disassociates itself entirely from his comments regarding the solicitors' profession.

His comment that the association has been at the forefront of attacks on costs negotiators is also incorrect (see [2002] Gazette, 21 February, 16).

The position is that owing to criticisms made of costs negotiators, the ALCD established a sub-committee and all members were invited to comment.

The published report dealt with three areas: conduct, charging and the way forward.

Concerning charging, the position was made clear that the association could not tell its members how to charge until the court had adjudicated on this point; a point that Mr Gibson has overlooked.

With regard to the way forward, the report proposed that the association be appointed as a much-needed regulatory body in the whole area of legal costs, and that costs negotiators be invited to apply for membership, thus introducing them to a code of conduct and compulsory professional negligence insurance, as well as education and training, in order to achieve high occupational standards.

It is noteworthy that a number of professional bodies have supported these proposals.

Contrary to Mr Gibson's assertion, the vast majority of costs negotiators are not experienced law costs draftsmen or members of the ALCD.

John Hocking, vice-chairman, Association of Law Costs Draftsmen, Diss, Norfolk