Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

The system is flawed by being over engineered. Yes control costs so parties know where they are but keep it simple . There is no need to calculate and fix the actual profit costs figures themselves. Just firmly set and control the key costs drivers, which are:
1) Narrow the issues
2) Set What expert and lay witness specialism/rates are appropriate/proportionate.
3) Set What Solicitor Charge rate/Locality/Grade is appropriate/proportionate.
4) Firmly fix the timetable to trial allowing only rare/exceptional extensions.
5) How much time the lawyer spends on it.

1 - 4 can easily be controlled by early vigorous and clear directions. Doing so by default controls 5. There is simply no need to specify crystal ball calculations of time, that may or may not be spent into specified, vague and rarely agreed categories.

5 Can be further controlled by a firm hand at paper provisional assessments where i guarantee if the amount of fee earner time spent is the only significant issue 95% of costs claims would settle without an assessment hearing, particularly now additional liabilities are largely disappearing. We can all spot a pudding over egger. Look at how few provisional assessment decisions are going to detailed hearings

More worryingly rather than taking stock and changing what is not working we are now moving towards changing the tried, tested and familiar bill of costs to match the flawed Budget. The intention being that a single push of a computed button will change your perfectly maintained and 100% accurate J Coded, computer time ledger into a lovely bill matching/cross referencing a budget set 2 - 3 years before . Really?

Your details

Cancel