Landlord's advice needed

[wannagethelp]

The withdrawal letter stated 'unforeseen actions by a third party', which they state is the tenant thought they had a new property to move into but it was a [problem], so not able to move out of my property. This could be the case, but I really don't understand what this has to do with the legal fees, not even relevant, as the tenant is not asking for more money, still accepts the initial offer to them of 1k, nothing to do with the legal aid fees. Can a solicitor do this????

[wannagethelp]

Apologies, yes, all by way of letters, but it doesn't make sense

[Ganymede]

Did your solicitor definitely accept the original offer in writing before it was withdrawn by the other side's solicitor?

[wannagethelp]

Yes it was accepted in writing

[wannagethelp]

Can anyone help me

[roony]

If you cant afford them, just ask to pay in installments.

 

You can challenge the expenses, demand to ask for a breakdown of legal fee's. After that ask them about the expenses for stationary, pens, & other accessories. Also ask how much they charge for the secretary or clerk to draw up papers. Cost of photocopying paper, printer ink etc.

 

From there you have some sort of grounds to claim theyre gratuitously overcharging, relative to the costs of stationary & secretary to draw up papers etc.

 

Its not guaranteed to lower the fee's, & you're probably better off paying installments, say £10 or £20 a month, regardless.

[wannagethelp]

Can anyone advise me please?

 

I initially lost a possession order in the magistrates court for my property, and had to go through a new Sect 21 and start again.

I understand that I had to pay the defendant's solicitor fees, although my solicitor said they were far too excessive, approx £9,800, so he sent them back to the magistrates court to be re-assessed.

 

Last Saturday, I got through the post, a letter from my solicitor, with a copy letter from the defendant's solicitor, asking for the full payment within 14 days, plus interest, as the new re-assessed bill of approx £9,600, had been outstanding since July 2016, as that is when the court sent it back to them.

 

My solicitor is saying that he hasn't received the new re-assessed bill, and had no knowledge of it.

 

What can I do, as I feel this is wrong to have left me over a year, now my solicitor advised to re-mortgage my property, as this was the cheapest way to pay this legal bill, plus costs.

 

Can anyone advise, as surely the courts would have sent via DX?

Is that a fail proof system?

 

 

Also, what can I do about this as I don't have this kind of money.

[AndyOrch]

So did he get possession...or lose ?

 

How exactly are the costs quantified...£9,600 ?

 

Current rules provide that a court cannot order the payment of costs, other than the fixed costs of issuing proceedings for claims that don’t exceed £10,000.

 

Courts and tribunals generally follow these rules and refuse to permit landlords to recover costs despite leases containing cost recovery clauses.

 

Andy

[wannagethelp]

Apologies, I didn't make myself clear.

I had a tenant and took them to court on a Sect 21, but I lost, so I had to pay the tenant's solicitor fees.

 

My solicitor felt the fees far too excessive for a small claims court matter,

he sent the solicitor fees to the court to be re-assessed and the judge/magistrate court, knocked of approx £200,

 

 

this was in July last year, and my solicitor is saying to me that he hadn't received them from the court,

I have ended up with 14 days to pay (7 days actually by the time my solicitor sent me notification),the tenant's re-assessed solicitor fees,

 

 

I'm really upset and confused how the tenant's solicitor got the re-assessment documents over a year ago, and my solicitor is saying he didn't receive them. Would they not all have been sent via DX?

[AndyOrch]

Ah okay I understand ...was this in the small claims track ?

[wannagethelp]

Thank you for your responds, Yes, this was in the small claims bow magistrates court.

[BazzaS]

Thank you for your responds, Yes, this was in the small claims bow magistrates court.

 

Small claims track = county court.

Magistrates court = magistrates (lower level criminal and some licensing / civil matters)

 

Unless you are saying "county court, located in the same building as Bow Magistrates" you are getting confused.

 

A District Judge can sit in a Magistrates court and hear Magistrates cases.

A Magistrate (or bench of 3) can't sit in a County Court.

 

Thames Magistrates court is at 58 Bow Rd, E3.

Bow County Court was on Romford Rd, E15, but has closed,

County court cases for Bow would now likely be heard at Clerkenwell County Court.

[BazzaS]

 

Unless you are saying "county court, located in the same building as Bow Magistrates" you are getting confused.

 

Thames Magistrates court is at 58 Bow Rd, E3.

Bow County Court was on Romford Rd, E15, but has closed,

County court cases for Bow would now likely be heard at Clerkenwell County Court.

 

Housing Possession cases might also be heard at

The Court House, 389-397 High Street

London, E15 4SB

("Stratford Magistrates' Court and Family Court"), although I notice the admin for this court is done through a central unit based at the Bow Road address (Central Administration Unit

Thames Magistrates' Court, 58 Bow Road)

 

A hearing possession case is still heard in a County Court and not a Magistrates, though. Magistrates don't hear small claims (track of the County Court) cases.

Costs that high in a small claims track case are also very unusual.

 

Was it definitely small claims track? Was it reallocated to another track? Were there claims of unreasonable behaviour??

[wannagethelp]

Thank you for responding,

 

I've had a look at the paperwork and it was definately at Bow County Court, 96 Romford Road E15,. I am too concerned that the solicitor fees were so high as I did ask the initial solicitor dealing, to end the Sect 21 as I had then been told by the defendant's solicitor, that I needed to end it as I would absolutely not win, (I think he felt sorry for me as I am elderly).

 

Thank you everyone for taking the time to look at my post and advise.

[BazzaS]

I've had a look at the paperwork and it was definitely at Bow County Court, 96 Romford Road E15,.

 

Bow County Court makes more sense than Bow Magistrates (which is what you said before!)

 

I am too concerned that the solicitor fees were so high as I did ask the initial solicitor dealing, to end the Sect 21 as I had then been told by the defendant's solicitor, that I needed to end it as I would absolutely not win, (I think he felt sorry for me as I am elderly).

 

It is the defendant's solicitor's job to represent the interests of their client, not your interests.

They aren't allowed to mislead you but can highlight the risks : what did your solicitor advise?

 

If you ended (withdrew) the claim that adds another possibility to what I previously asked :

 

Costs that high in a small claims track case are also very unusual.

 

Was it definitely small claims track? Was it reallocated to another track? Were there claims of unreasonable behaviour??

 

One can add "was it ever allocated to a track"?

If it wasn't ever allocated to the small claims track then you wouldn't get the protection regarding costs of the small claims track .....

[wannagethelp]

I'm looking at the initial court claim form for possession of property but it doesn't say anything about a 'track'. would it be noted on the claim form? I'm almost sure it was just a standard possession order.

 

The later possession order was 'fast tracked' I believe, but I was successful on that one.

 

I hope this all makes sense.

[wannagethelp]

I'm so confused with this matter, I've never read or heard anywhere of anyone having to pay such high solicitor fees for a possession order.

[andydd]

I'm looking at the initial court claim form for possession of property but it doesn't say anything about a 'track'. would it be noted on the claim form? I'm almost sure it was just a standard possession order.

 

The later possession order was 'fast tracked' I believe, but I was successful on that one.

 

I hope this all makes sense.

 

Not really.. i think you need to spell out all the exact steps taken.

 

Costs would generally not be awarded on a small track, but you mention fast track above, you should of opposed this, also if you ended the case prematurely it may not of been allocated hence fast track costs rules would apply, we cant really add more as to why your solicitor didnt receive paperwork from the courts, ask him and/or the court.

[BazzaS]

CPR 55 applies, in particular CPR 55.9

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part55

 

 

55.9

(2) The court will only allocate possession claims to the small claims track if all the parties agree.

(3) Where a possession claim has been allocated to the small claims track the claim shall be treated, for the purposes of costs, as if it were proceeding on the fast track except that trial costs shall be in the discretion of the court and shall not exceed the amount that would be recoverable under rule 45.38 (amount of fast track costs) if the value of the claim were up to £3,000.

(4) Where all the parties agree the court may, when it allocates the claim, order that rule 27.14 (costs on the small claims track) applies and, where it does so, paragraph (3) does not apply.

 

 

If the other side never agreed it would be on the small claims track, it probably was never small claims .......

If the other side never agreed to limit the costs under CPR55.9(4) then the costs wouldn't have limited by that provision, either.....

 

What did YOUR solicitor (rather than the other side's) say about discontinuing, costs (and the timing of any discontinuance) before you discontinued your claim?.

[andydd]

BazzaS.. Well spotted, so let this be a warning to others thinking of the same route

[BazzaS]

BazzaS.. Well spotted, so let this be a warning to others thinking of the same route

 

Well, IF (and its a big 'if') the OP's solicitor said "Its OK, it'll be small claims and you'll have limited exposure to costs as a result!" then that opens up a further option for the OP.

 

But we don't know:

a) what happened, when, and

b) who said what, to whom, when.

 

I hope I'm not straying too far from justifiable comment when I say that the OP isn't giving the impression they are sure of events.

 

Yes, this was in the small claims bow magistrates court.

 

When it wasn't in magistrates court and probably wasn't small claims, when taken with:

 

I'm so confused with this matter

 

So, it seems that the first step for the OP is to go back to their solicitor and get a clear picture of what actually happened.