Report comment

"Lacked integrity but he was not dishonest".... - not totally negative but probably not one for the testimonial page on the website either.

I am a huge fan of integrity and miss it dearly in my day job. The legal profession used to be awash with the stuff. Sadly not so much now. It seems that "Integrity" retired from certain law firms at around about the same time they summarily dismissed "loyalty".

In this particular case, some might argue that “overcharging” is not what happened here. The costs claimed were high and as the Costs Judge said “ambitious” (who doesn’t want their solicitor to be ambitious?) however they are ‘an invitation to treat’. The process permits this. It is for the Court’s and paying parties to address such perceived overclaims and to reduce accordingly.

On the other side of the argument is a queue of Defendant’s solicitors and the NHS claiming outrage and obscenity when we all know that they are equally guilty when they are claiming costs. This week I’ve seen some outrageous (not merely ambitious or even obscene) costs claims by Defendant’s solicitors. I’m having them substantially reduced either by agreement or by the Court. I’m not running to the SRA to complain.

Incidentally, I note that the SRA are “claiming” £300,000.00 in costs of these proceedings. I wonder what hourly rate they’ve applied or what they are reduced to on assessment.... Hopefully the Gazette will report on this..... ?