Statement of Costs for SAR non compliance claim

[3333]

Would someone please kindly point me in direction of some recent schedule of costs examples for circumstances like this?

 

Thanks

[maroondevo52]

Hello and welcome 3333,

 

I've flagged your question up, hopefully you will get some advice shortly.

Sorry it's not something I can help you with.

 

Regards,

 

Scott.

[3333]

How to claim costs as a Litigant in Person & Under which circumstances would a County Court consider the Defendant having complied with a SAR if the Defendant has only provided partial SAR information?

 

I am sure that this question will have been asked before but I can't find an answer.

 

I am the Claimant in a County Court action for SAR non compliance.

It is coming up to the trial date very soon..!

 

Initially I was hoping as the Defendant failed to respond within the 40 day timeframe set by the DPA that the Judge would enter default judgement and make a summary assessment on the costs and disbursments (part 7 procedure), however the Judge insists on a hearing to establish costs.

 

What is the correct procedure and format of the claim?

 

What are the current LiP charges (£19 ph?) and how much can be charged for drafting letters and disbursements? The information in older threads varied considerably regarding this.

 

If using a Form N260 (Statement of Costs - summary assessment) as some have suggested here on CAG - does the first para "Attendances on (party)" relate to e.g. all communication with the CC and Attendances on opponents relate to all communication e.g. with the Defendant?

 

Further would letters out/emails listed under one of the Attendances paras would have to be itemised/specified in the bottom section "Schedule of work done on documents" again? Or would this mess up the total sum calculated by the PDF?

 

Thanks for your help in advance.

Edited September 26, 2017 by 3333

[AndyOrch]

Has it been allocated to track yet ?

[3333]

Good question, the Notice of Hearing does not specify it.

 

As the CC initially issued the Notice of Issue on Form N205C

I requested them to re-issue it on Form N205A which has the detachable bottom section allowing for requesting entering default judgement.

The CC has ignored that request.

 

 

Is the N205A the correct form under these circumstances

can I insist on them re-issuing it on the N205A or is there no real difference between the N205C and N205A regarding entering default judgement?

[AndyOrch]

Quite correct to issue the N205A the 'Notes for Guidance' contained in the form N205C 'Notice of issue non-money claims' are misleading, and the use of the form in its current state should be discontinued.

 

Judging by the forms you refer to I assume this was a part 8 claim ?

 

N205A - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 7 County Court claim form (specified amount of money)

N205B - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 7 County Court claim form (unspecified amount of money)

N205C - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 7 County Court claim form (non-money claim)

N209 - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 8 County Court claim form

N215 Certificate of Service

[ploddertom]

I did this a few years ago and yes it was as a non-money claim and it took approx 12 months to get it resolved.

The question of costs is however a thorny issue.

 

 

I never got so much as 1p back but did get the satisfaction of getting all the info I knew had to be there plus then being able to prove I was never responsible for the debt the other side said I owed.

 

 

It did cost the Defendant a small fortune as they were held responsible for paying all their own travel costs from the South each time and paying for the hire of rooms where mediation took place.

 

 

Fortunately once they saw what I was looking for they caved in and provided everything + more that was needed & several staff were left looking for new jobs.

[3333]

@ Andyorch: Thanks - so going by your comments the CC should have re-issued the Notice of Issue on a N205A then (and as mentioned above they haven't) - how can I get the CC to rectify this?

 

Regarding Part 7 or 8 - the CC was clueless and following guidance in an ICO publication (can't post the link due to low post count according to a CAG system note) - I was under the impression that it was not a Part 8 procedure as I had specified damages / costs on the N1... ???

 

Initially I was only after full release of the SAR information, however I also wanted the accountable time and effort that went into this to be included.

Edited September 27, 2017 by 3333

[AndyOrch]

Did they acknowledge service and submit a defence ?

[3333]

Apparently according to RCJ CAB leaflet "Going to Court" the N260 is recommended in any event as it facilitates calculations rather than a non-standardised Bill of Costs.

 

Can anyone help regarding the use of the N260 - as stated above:

How/where to record on form N260 any time/hours spent for sending letters/emails to

a. The County Court and

b. The Defendant ?

 

versus letters which are itemised under Schedule of work done on documents on the last page?

Does any communication with the County Court fall under

1.) Attendance on (party) and any communication with the Defendant under

2.) Attendances on opponents or under Schedule of work done on documents?

Which section of Form N260 to use in order to account for relevant research regarding e.g. DPA, CPR and other relevant laws?

 

Did they acknowledge service and submit a defence ?

 

No, as far as I am aware no defence has been submitted - at least I haven't received a copy and last time I enquired with the CC no defence had been submitted.

[AndyOrch]

Difficult to advise until you confirm which track what type of claim 7/8 ... did they AoS and submit a defence?

 

If its SCT your only entitled to fixed costs.

[AndyOrch]

And you submitted through MCOL ? or manually ?

 

" as I had specified damages / costs on the N1 "

 

" It is coming up to the trial date very soon..! "

 

 

If they did not respond at all then it would be a default judgment...if you submitted electronically you can check on screen to see if they did acknowledge submit a defence...I assume they must have if your going to trial as you confirm above.

 

I would assume also that you submitted a directions questionnaire as you have a trial date ?

[3333]

I hope I understand all your abbrevations ... couldn't get hold of CC again to get details confirmed.

 

Afair - defendant did not acknowledge service and submit a defence.

 

Not MCOL, local CC as it is not a money claim per se. Most and foremost it is about performance.

 

No directions questionnaire either - I believe the Judge only wanted to establish whether the ball park figure put on the N1 is adequate.

 

Though after calculating it based on CPR 45.39(5)(b) and rule 46.5(4)(b) @ £19/h the initial amount stated has almost doubled anyway.

 

Re: Part 7 or 8 - CAG member car2403 stated in the following thread (2009) @ post #97:

 

Re: Starting a court claim for SAR non compliance

 

I think they are asking for Part 8 because you've asked for compliance with your request.

 

if you include a claim for damages - such as the costs you've incurred in sending the request, along with the £10 fee - then that would have to be a Part 7 claim.

[AndyOrch]

So did you actually state a value on your claim and did you request costs within your particulars ?

 

Damages would have to be determined by the court presuming you had proof and quantified...have you asked the court to determine ?

[3333]

So did you actually state a value on your claim and did you request costs within your particulars ?

 

Damages would have to be determined by the court presuming you had proof and quantified...have you asked the court to determine ?

 

Yes, estimated costs and in addition it stated at the end of the POC: "Damages and costs within the discretion of the Court."

 

If its SCT your only entitled to fixed costs.

 

In an older thread ("Application for costs" / 2007) it was stated:

 

Although costs are strictly limited in the small claims track, there is a provision which allows them to be

awarded against a party who has "behaved unreasonably". See here for rules governing costs on the small

claims track - CPR PART 27.14

Re-reading the ICO-leaflet again, it becomes totally confusing as by the sounds of it if damages are asked for it appears to be neither a Part 7 nor Part 8 procedure??? - I would very much appreciate if someone could shed some light on this please:

 

CLAIMING SPECIFIC

PERFORMANCE

3. If you apply for action to be taken to

comply with a specific right, this is known

as a claim for specific performance. If you

are not asking for damages as well, there

are two possible procedures the court

could adopt to deal with your claim:

PART 8 PROCEDURE....

PART 7 PROCEDURE

[AndyOrch]

I think its being treated as a part 8 claim at a guess .

 

" I am the Claimant in a County Court action for SAR non compliance. It is coming up to the trial date very soon..!

 

Initially I was hoping as the Defendant failed to respond within the 40 day timeframe set by the DPA that the Judge would enter default judgement and make a summary assessment on the costs and disbursments (part 7 procedure), however the Judge insists on a hearing to establish costs.

 

What is the correct procedure and format of the claim? " You have already submitted the claim so you should already know ?

 

Attend the hearing and the court will decide...you do not need to submit a schedule of costs..

[3333]

I think its being treated as a part 8 claim at a guess .

 

Attend the hearing and the court will decide...you do not need to submit a schedule of costs..

 

Thanks & will contact CC again today to find out re part, track, defence...

 

Just came across this:

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?247247-Small-Claims-Track-Discontinuance-advice-needed&p=2767462&viewfull=1#post2767462

 

So all Claims are effectively Multi-Track until Track has been allocated?

[AndyOrch]

All part 8 are treated as MT.

[3333]

Difficult to advise until you confirm which track what type of claim 7/8 ... did they AoS and submit a defence?

 

If its SCT your only entitled to fixed costs.

 

Finally after hours got hold of CC - still quite obscure, clerk could neither confirm track allocation nor part 7/8, apparently no defence submitted. Hearing listed as interlocutary - what does that mean?

 

Given the other side hasn't responded at all, can I rely regarding costs on CPR 27.14(2)(d) and (g) i.e. the other side acted unreasonably?

[AndyOrch]

Provisional; interim; temporary; not final; that which intervenes between the beginning and the end of a claim.

 

" Given the other side hasn't responded at all, can I rely regarding costs on CPR 27.14(2)(d) and (g) i.e. the other side acted unreasonably? "

A court would not regard that as acting unreasonably...its their prerogative to respond or not..wont help their defence though.

 

Have you not already asked for costs within your claim ? What costs exactly have you got on top of preparing and issuing this claim..the defendant has not caused you any costs ?

[3333]

Thanks very much for explaining that, does it allow for a final order being made at the interlocutory hearing or does it have to be followed by a final hearing?

 

I would not have thought that something as straightforward as this needs that amount of hearing time.

 

Can I still ask for the N205c to be amended into a N205a in order to facilitate entering default judgement?

 

No issue costs (EX160), initially asked for an estimated £300, if I put any reasonably justifiable costs under disbursements as per:

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?247247-Small-Claims-Track-Discontinuance-advice-needed&p=2767462&viewfull=1#post2767462

 

- that should still be permittable?

 

Btw CC has meanwhile also confirmed SCT

 

Quite correct to issue the N205A the 'Notes for Guidance' contained in the form N205C 'Notice of issue non-money claims' are misleading, and the use of the form in its current state should be discontinued.

 

Judging by the forms you refer to I assume this was a part 8 claim ?

 

N205A - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 7 County Court claim form (specified amount of money)

N205B - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 7 County Court claim form (unspecified amount of money)

N205C - Notice by court to claimant of issue and service of Part 7 County Court claim form (non-money claim)

 

All part 8 are treated as MT.

 

Are part 7 or 8 both exclusive of SCT?

 

Given that I requested initially a specific amount of damages on the N1 & POC - accordingly shall I request at the hearing for the claim to be changed to a part 7 procedure or would part 8 apply?

 

What is the benefit of the claim continuing as SCT or part 7 and if it continued as part 7 would that change it to FT or MT automatically?

[AndyOrch]

There will be a further hearing.....this hearing is to decide costs only.You cant request it be changed now from 7 to 8..your claim is a mix because of the way you claimed your particulars.

 

So its a part 7 claim in the SCT...you have stated a value (amount on the claim form for damages only ) and costs to be decided at the courts discretion.

 

Therefore none of the above forms are applicable...because it is not a straight forward normal part 7 claim...if you had also entered a figure for fixed costs within the total claim...then you would have submitted the N255/227 and requested default judgment.....as stated this is not a normal part 7.

 

The benefits of it being in SCT is that costs are fixed...part 7 claims can be in in any track SCT ...FT...MT subject to the value of the claim.....but anyway that is irrelevant as the court has confirmed its SCT.