Report comment

As someone that has worked in the costs industry for over 25 years, I would say that Mr Stark's comments do not reflect what the majority in that industry are thinking. I would imagine that there was a low take up with the survey conducted by the ACL as many of us are completely disenchanted with the organisation. The simple fact is that costs budgeting is a mess. You cannot polish a t*rd and it was a bad idea from the very beginning. If the judges had simply approached budgeting in round terms (as we used to deal with security for costs application) time would not be wasted with filling in boxes in PH forms etc. It is inevitable that fixed costs will come in at some point. Those in the costs industry have said from the beginning that costs budgeting was designed to fail so that fixed costs would be brought in. However, litigation is unpredictable and some claims are more complicated than others irrespective of the financial value of those claims. I just hope (logically in vain) that some common sense will prevail in relation to more complicated multi-track claims. However, having seen the panel that has been appointed, I fear that insurers will win again. Yet in 5 years' time, my premium will still be higher. It is the definition of madness - i.e., trying the same thing time and time again and expecting the same result. I am just pleased that this is happening at the end of my career rather than the beginning.