Report comment

I agree that PI lawyers should be fairly reimbursed for doing a good job for their clients.

However, the problems have arisen from the systematic refusal of most PI lawyers to comply with the referral fee ban.

Fixed costs were reduced by the equivalent of the average CMC referral fee in a clear attempt by the government to drive CMCs out of the market. Instead of that happening, PI solicitors sidestepped the ban by relabelling their referral fees as ‘marketing’ or ‘introduction’ fees – paying the same money to their CMCs post LASPO as they did pre-LASPO.

So that shortfall had to be ‘found’ somewhere else in the chain. Unfortunately, it has fallen on the feet of the client to pick up the slack. Hence the various methods to ensure the maximum possible can be deducted from their damages. Those methods of deduction vary – be they unreasonable hourly rates (as is the case here,) excessive success fees, etc etc.

But why should the client be the party that picks up the tab for the solicitors refusal to comply with the law?

I imagine Lord Justice Jackson would be horrified to learn about this disturbing result of his reforms.