Jump to content


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2016 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I recently started a claim against an individual.

 

 

His solicitor wrote to me this week advising me that they are willing to settle the case

and pay me in full

 

 

at the same time have asked me to agree to an order for "costs in the case".

 

 

I do not know what this means.

 

 

Could someone please help me?

 

 

Is this something I should agree to?

 

 

Thank you for any help you can provide.

 

 

kind regards Nigel

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Costs in the Case/Costs in the Application. These type of orders are usually made at interim hearings and mean that the party entitled to costs at the end of the trial will be entitled to the costs of this part of the proceedings.

 

 

My understanding from what you have said is that whilst they are looking to settle, they are also looking to you to pay their legal costs ! I would think as this is a small claim, then there would be no costs order made if it were to go to a hearing. But I will ask for you.

 

I have asked someone from the site team to look in and advise what you should do about this. So hold tight for a while.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Costs in the case means the losing party pays.

 

Now I'm a little rusty on small claims court but it used to be that the winning party could claim fixed costs (court fees, travel expenses, expert reports) but not solicitors costs (with a few exceptions i.e. unreasonableness).

 

Was the offer to settle "without prejudice".

 

Can you tell us a little more about your claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello goodatresearch,

 

Yes the offer to settle is without prejudice.

 

my claim is that I paid for treatment that I did not have to pay for, on the understanding that I would be reimbursed. However, when I made a claim for reimbursement, the defendant changed his story and said that my treatment was private. I have evidence against him proving my case which is why I believe they want to settle. I started the small claims to get my money back after many unsuccessful attempts at reaching an agreement with him.

 

So the letter states that the defendants' solicitors are looking for a resolution to this matter. A second letter says that they are agreeable to settling the claim.

 

They have requested extra time to prepare a defence, which is not a problem. The part I don't understand is that they have requested an order for "costs in the case." How does this impact the settlement? Will I be liable to paying anything?

 

I hope that clarifies things a bit more. Any help is much appreciated.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am no legal expert but "Costs in the case" orders are applcations for costs during the case management stage. Say they applied for a summary judgement or made any application to the court. by way of a hearing in front of the judge. The solicitor would claim costs for his services by presenting a costs order to the judge. But that is normally done at each individual hearing,

 

But it will be if the defendant wins will be the only way to recover those costs

 

It looks to me the "without prejudice" is an offer to agree settlement and if not acceptable they are preparing to go to trial and claim full costs if successful.

 

What you need to do is send a "Without Prejudice" letter back to the solicitor saying you are agreeable to settlement on the understanding the defendant pays all your application costs to date with a mutually agreed full and final settlement

 

 

That is the way i see it but wait for more replies as it is just my own opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are wanting to settle, I don't understand why they need more time to prepare a defence ? I think any response from you should confirm that you are not prepared to pay their costs - either each party bears their own or you want them to pay for any you have already laid out ?

 

I have asked someone to look in on you

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Costs In The Case/Costs In The Application are types of orders that are usually made at interim hearings and mean that the party entitled to costs at the end of the trial will be entitled to the costs of this part of the proceedings. Thus a party in whose favour such an order is made will only recover costs for this hearing if they are awarded costs at the end of the trial.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Costs in the case - win the hearing/application - other side pays he costs.

 

 

I am no legal expert but "Costs in the case" orders are applcations for costs during the case management stage. Say they applied for a summary judgement or made any application to the court. by way of a hearing in front of the judge. The solicitor would claim costs for his services by presenting a costs order to the judge. But that is normally done at each individual hearing,

 

But it will be if the defendant wins will be the only way to recover those costs

 

It looks to me the "without prejudice" is an offer to agree settlement and if not acceptable they are preparing to go to trial and claim full costs if successful.

 

What you need to do is send a "Without Prejudice" letter back to the solicitor saying you are agreeable to settlement on the understanding the defendant pays all your application costs to date with a mutually agreed full and final settlement

 

 

That is the way i see it but wait for more replies as it is just my own opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites
hello goodatresearch,

 

Yes the offer to settle is without prejudice.

 

my claim is that I paid for treatment that I did not have to pay for, on the understanding that I would be reimbursed. However, when I made a claim for reimbursement, the defendant changed his story and said that my treatment was private. I have evidence against him proving my case which is why I believe they want to settle. I started the small claims to get my money back after many unsuccessful attempts at reaching an agreement with him.

 

So the letter states that the defendants' solicitors are looking for a resolution to this matter. A second letter says that they are agreeable to settling the claim.

 

They have requested extra time to prepare a defence, which is not a problem. The part I don't understand is that they have requested an order for "costs in the case." How does this impact the settlement? Will I be liable to paying anything?

 

I hope that clarifies things a bit more. Any help is much appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

It wouldn't be unusual for the other side to request an extension to file defence whilst negotiations are ongoing, nor would it be unusual for it to browbeat a LiP into a relatively low compromise or acceding to a demand with the threat of application for costs.

 

Without sight of the content of its correspondence I can only guess that it seeks your agreement for an extension absent which it will make application for same requesting costs in the case.

 

Posts 8 & 10 should provide you with ample information regarding 'costs in the case'

Link to post
Share on other sites

lovecoconuts, not long ago I saw the papers in a small claim which had been argued by a LIP and a lawyer. At an interim hearing the lawyer managed to get an order for costs in case, the LIP not realizing its significance and not challenging it. At the final hearing the lawyer managed to get costs on that basis. It's a puzzle that the other side wants to file a defence. I would be very careful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...