Report comment

I don't know whether my experience is representative, but as a matter of course my budget would go to the defendant weeks in advance with a request to confirm agreement, only to be met with a stony silence.

Imagine how galling it is to be told by my defendant friends that more than one insurer insists on having certain experts draw up two fee notes: one to go before the court to show how reasonable they are and how unreasonably high the claimant's experts are in comparison, and a second, much higher fee note that represents what the insurer is actually paying.

Can we not go back to post facto assessments? Assessment predicated on the reality of a litigation fought, rather than the presumption of a fantasy that never will be?