Application of costs

[claireloupul]

I don't know if they are required to provide the schedule before the hearing )but how else could you be afforded time to inspect/challenge the aggregated total figure?) Perhaps this is another point that other caggers could please clarify?

 

Also there has been some advice along the lines that respondents can either apply for the cost of external legal advice, or internal legal time spent preparing for the hearing, but not both sets of costs. It might be worth knowing for the hearing which rule/procedure sets out that distinction - could other caggers advise please?

 

Your hearing is on Friday 25th isn't it? How are you shaping up - feeling OK?

 

Thank you!!

Yes it is that friday I have sent them all copies of my dads illness also copies of my dmp.

I have also done what somebody suggested and sent them a settlement figure that doesnt impact my dmp, they have till thurs to decide.

I want you to understand I have done this because of the stress im going through right now with my dad. I dont live near my parents which makes things harder.

I weighed up the pros and cons I could lose that is a reality and I need closure because its affecting me.

some might not agree but I thought it was the best for me to do.

I have said to them its not a admission of guilt but for the reasons ive just mentioned.

 

Thanks for asking SweetLorraine I would suggest anyone going to a et to think very carefully tho. X

[SweetLorraine]

Hi again claireloupul,

 

well it could be resolution of sorts by Thursday then. If you do have to go forward to a hearing then hopefully we can improve your chances of a successful hearing with some of the ongoing questions and answers in the thread.

[claireloupul]

Hi again claireloupul,

 

well it could be resolution of sorts by Thursday then. If you do have to go forward to a hearing then hopefully we can improve your chances of a successful hearing with some of the ongoing questions and answers in the thread.

 

Thanks sweetlorraine, I do appreciate everyone's help. If they don't agree then I have my bundle and statement ready and I will just have to pray for the best.

[SweetLorraine]

I don't know if they are required to provide the schedule before the hearing )but how else could you be afforded time to inspect/challenge the aggregated total figure?) Perhaps this is another point that other caggers could please clarify?

 

Also there has been some advice along the lines that respondents can either apply for the cost of external legal advice, or internal legal time spent preparing for the hearing, but not both sets of costs. It might be worth knowing for the hearing which rule/procedure sets out that distinction - could other caggers advise please?

 

Your hearing is on Friday 25th isn't it? How are you shaping up - feeling OK?

 

Hi, I'II just use the quote option to 'bump up' these latest little queries for other caggers to consider again.

 

Just to clarify again claireloupul - when did the respondent warn that they might apply for costs (was after the first hearing date and before the second hearing date?) and when did you first hear that the figure would be £3k?

[claireloupul]

Hi, I'II just use the quote option to 'bump up' these latest little queries for other caggers to consider again.

 

Just to clarify again claireloupul - when did the respondent warn that they might apply for costs (was after the first hearing date and before the second hearing date?) and when did you first hear that the figure would be £3k?

 

They did so before the first hearing, they did say it would be £2500-£3000 if it proceeds to a final hearing (there wording). Then I received a letter stating they were applying for costs of £3000 plus Vat with a final hearing costs of £1600 plus vat.

 

Hope that helps thanks

[claireloupul]

They did so before the first hearing, they did say it would be £2500-£3000 if it proceeds to a final hearing (there wording). Then I received a letter stating they were applying for costs of £3000 plus Vat with a final hearing costs of £1600 plus vat.

 

Hope that helps thanks

 

hi just to let you know they have come back with a offer of without prejudice and rejected my offer and said they would accept £1500 and said I cannot use that letter in the courts.

of course because of my dmp I cant accept this. So it will be rejected.

Thanks

[claireloupul]

SweetLorraine you do make a very good point about the costs.

In there first settlement offer they said they client had spent £3000 and then £1600 to go to court and in the letter i Recieved today it was said it was a reasonable offer considering there client had spent £5000 in costs preparing the case I had withdrawn.

[claireloupul]

Okay, just thinking, the solicitor has first said that costs to date in one letter is approx £3000 plus vat which is £3600 now there saying it is £5000 ( vat wasn't mentioned ) in another letter which was the without prejudice now could I use this letter as evidence to prove that they are trying to profit out of this case?

 

Any thoughts?.

 

Thanks

[smokejumper]

Just thinking aloud.

 

If a letter is without prejudice save costs, I wonder if it can be presented in a costs hearing, therefore showing the inconsistency of their actual costs.

 

 

Okay, just thinking, the solicitor has first said that costs to date in one letter is approx £3000 plus vat which is £3600 now there saying it is £5000 ( vat wasn't mentioned ) in another letter which was the without prejudice now could I use this letter as evidence to prove that they are trying to profit out of this case?

 

Any thoughts?.

 

Thanks

[Derwent]

Just thinking aloud.

 

If a letter is without prejudice save costs, I wonder if it can be presented in a costs hearing, therefore showing the inconsistency of their actual costs.

 

No it can't be presented or even referred to in court.

 

However, what the OP could do is get the schedule of costs from them and make a comparison with the original letter that was not marked as being "without prejudice". That would be allowed by the judge.

[Pusillanimous]

The whole point of 'Without Prejudice Save as to Costs' is that it CAN be produced in a costs hearing.

 

Claireloupul: it looks like they are trying to call your bluff. They are not being reasonable, so there is no popint in arguing with them further.

 

Assuming you did mark your offer WPSATC then you can bring it to the Tribunal's attention should they rule that costs are payable. Point out you made the other party a reasonable offer and in effect, they brought about the costs hearing having to be heard after your reasonable attempts to settle fairly.

 

If that fails and in the worst case scenario you get landed with a huge bill (I doubt this will happen) then remember to ask if you can pay in reasonable instalments according to your means.

[SweetLorraine]

Hi claireloupul,

 

so it looks as though the hearing on the 25th is on. If the respondent is now quoting totals it is perhaps reasonable to assume they now have drafted a costs schedule. If they have drafted such a schedule it would be reasonable to expect them to send you a copy in advance of the hearing. A failure to send you a copy in advance is not reasonable behaviour on their part.

 

Worth flagging up at the hearing itself perhaps? (comments welcome).

[Derwent]

The whole point of 'Without Prejudice Save as to Costs' is that it CAN be produced in a costs hearing.

 

.

 

Yes but only AFTER the judge has made a ruling as to liability for costs. It can not be used in the context of a defence to avoid costs being awarded. In this instance if I was the OP I would be going all out to have the application for costs denied rather than making offers as if the judge does make a costs award then it will be based on time x rate and not on what the OP has offered. Her offer is only really of any significance if the judge awards an amount lower than what is being claimed.

[steampowered]

WP correspondence cannot be produced when the court decides on liability for the underlying claim, but it can be produced when the court decides who should be liable for costs.

 

In the civil courts outside small claims track this is usually the same thing (since the person who wins on liability will almost automatically get their costs from the other side) but not the same thing in Employment Tribunals.

[Pusillanimous]

Yes but only AFTER the judge has made a ruling as to liability for costs. It can not be used in the context of a defence to avoid costs being awarded.

 

That is what I said. Once costs are ruled then it bcomes an issue. As there is a costs hearing, based on a postponed listed hearing, then there is quite a high risk of costs being awarded. If all else fails, assessment of means and the WPSATC is the next safety net.

 

The best thing the OP can do is be fully prepared. I believe it is unlikely the cost award will be over £500.

[claireloupul]

Thanks everyone, yes there are differences on the amounts quoted even before the wp letter, the first one said that it was between 2500 and 3000 no mention of vat and then the next one was £3000 plus vat as a reasonable settlement. This was said because of the postponement they had to.do four months work I dont see how to be honest and one of my questions will be can you produce all dates and times.

the offer is up till close of business tomorrow so I will let you know.

[Pusillanimous]

The exact figure doesn't really matter as the judge is likely to award a fraction of it anyway. Perhaps a third at most, judging by case law.

[claireloupul]

They emailed me today and said they have a response from their client but they want my number so they can discuss it.

I'm not sure if I should talk to them or to keep everything by email.

Any thoughts.

Thanks

[smokejumper]

I would say it depends on whether you are confident enough on the phone.

 

Email allows you to think about your answers.

 

Sounds like they want to negotiate ( bully)

[claireloupul]

Yeah that's what I thought, I did think its best to have it in writing myself.

 

Thanks for that tho.

[smokejumper]

I have read ( not experience ) that any acceptance should be checked over by a solicitor.

[claireloupul]

Thanks for that, humm yeah I'm very wary, think I might re ask them to email it. Thanks

[SweetLorraine]

When I had conversations with "the other side's" legal reps I found it rather one-sided and I found that they would later deny things they had said and twist/clip things I had said to fit their own agenda. (I wish I had recorded those conversations). Of course you end up having to address these half-truths rather than putting across your own points. One of their favourite tricks was to state 'we have here in our notes' before trotting out some nonsense that I would not have said/agreed to beforehand. Bad memories.

 

I would prefer an email exchange - they can stick a 'WP' on it surely?

 

Whatever media you choose I would also say when dealing with legal reps that brevity is important. If you meander around a point of discussion they can pick up on it and take you for a spin down a wrong turning.

[claireloupul]

When I had conversations with "the other side's" legal reps I found it rather one-sided and I found that they would later deny things they had said and twist/clip things I had said to fit their own agenda. (I wish I had recorded those conversations). Of course you end up having to address these half-truths rather than putting across your own points. One of their favourite tricks was to state 'we have here in our notes' before trotting out some nonsense that I would not have said/agreed to beforehand. Bad memories.

 

I would prefer an email exchange - they can stick a 'WP' on it surely?

 

Whatever media you choose I would also say when dealing with legal reps that brevity is important. If you meander around a point of discussion they can pick up on it and take you for a spin down a wrong turning.

 

I really dont know what to do.

they have said they will only accept £1000

And its something I cant afford

[smokejumper]

Personally I would read into that, that they know they might not get anything.

 

Big difference from what they were claiming to now accept £1000.

 

These people go for all they can get, they are not out to help you, don't for one minute think they are being reasonable, they know they might not get anything.

 

If you really don't want to wait for the tribunal, then get back to them and confidently tell them you only have £500 do you want to take that, if not we will leave it too the tribunal, where you probably won't get anything.