Report comment

Further to below I would suggest that fixed costs also have a potential to cause detriment to the Defendants.

In anon 13.55's example they are doing all this work up-front before the claim is even submitted. As such Anon will be vetting the claim initially and should they find that there is no cause of action it will (presumably) not be submitted and the Defendant will have no cause to investigate.

Prevent Anon from doing the work up front and they just submit the claim as it stands, meaning the Defendant has to consider all the claims which would otherwise have never reached them.

I know it is customary for the Defendant side of the lobby to totally ignore their own costs, but surely having to vet an extra 9 claims for every 1 claim currently submitted would far outweigh the savings.