LOSING TRACK OF CASHPerhaps one of the delegates who attended the 'high-powered' costs forum held recently by the Civil Justice Council could explain why the majority of those attending supported the introduction of fixed costs for fast-track litigation (see [2001] Gazette, 6 December, 1).

I can think of nothing more depressing for clients than to be told that, whereas in the past they were likely to recover most if not all of the costs and disbursements incurred on a successful outcome, in the future they will only recover a percentage of their costs and will have to write off the balance.

What precisely is the thinking behind this move?I have just concluded a claim for 20,000.

The district judge decided that it was a fast-track matter and would not justify being treated as a multi-track case.

There was a defence and an extremely complicated counter-claim, which the defendant limited to 15,000.

In the event, the court was simply unable to deal with the matter in a day.

It was concluded after another half-day of legal submissions.

Both sides were represented by counsel.

The defence and counter-claim failed, with the claimant recovering the full amount of the claim.

Costs were assessed by the judge at just less than 5,000, fractionally less than the amount that we had charged the client.I assume that under the new regime, fixed costs will be substantially less than 5,000 which, in this instance would have resulted in a substantial loss to my client (a sole trader), which he could ill-afford.If the Civil Justice Council decision is implemented, this will be disastrous for individuals and companies pursuing money that is due and payable, but where the defendant employs time-consuming tactics.CJA Cope, Cope's Solicitors, Umberleigh, Devon