Express Solicitors @ExpressSols- Breach of Contract, court summons *** Claim Dismissed - with costs!!!***

[BankFodder]

I would just like to dampen down the enthusiasm of be here.

I have a sense that people are starting to feel a bit gung ho about this.

I'd like to make it clear that the chances of succeeding on this are only just 50-50

[Stormy1976]

Hi,

well I am not enthusiastic or optimistic at all on this matter

- I am frustrated and any time I hear from them it brings back memory of how tired I felt dealing with them,

repeating the same information to the same Legal executive person who dealt with my case- quoting express  solicitors correspondence on the matter long time ago. 

 

 I feel a sense of injustice done here from express and that’s why I would like to defend the case with the help and contributions on here. 
 

 

[London1971]

1 hour ago, BankFodder said:

I would just like to dampen down the enthusiasm of be here.

I have a sense that people are starting to feel a bit gung ho about this.

I'd like to make it clear that the chances of succeeding on this are only just 50-50

I’d be gung ho if it was 10%. You don’t become a successful ambulance chasing ‘law’ firm without being ruthless. 50% sounds pretty good to me.

 

However, I will go out in a limb and guess that 99% don’t bother to defend and get issued with a default judgement.

[Stormy1976]

Hi @London1971I would have probably been in the 99% statistic if it wasn't for husband coming on here and you guys offering direction.

Thanks guys.

A bit of a quiet day today, but sent out some SAR requests and awaiting letter from doctor.

[Ganymede]

Hi all. 

 

I am very familiar with Express solicitors and they are a well known and reputable law firm. 

 

Sadly the OP is in breach of the CFA for not co-operating and as such Express can pursue a claim for breach of contract as they are doing. 

 

They electronic signing is also lawful. 

 

Not requesting ID documents from the OP will not be a Defence to this claim.

 

Settling is the best option. 

 

I would argue that the charge out rate of £300 is too high. 

 

What was the grade of the solicitor/fee earner who dealt with the case? 

 

There will also be a lot of time charged that is not recoverable so you need a full breakdown of the fees. 

 

I would ask for a bill of costs from Express as well. 

 

Overall I can't see the OP winning this claim. 

 

 

 

 

[BankFodder]

Thanks for this input. I'm glad that you seem to have had such a good experience from this firm.

However, the claimant's claim has placed the defendant in a position where frankly there is nothing to lose by proceeding to defend.

I'm quite certain that express our aware of this thread and what is being proposed – or at least they certainly are now! – But there is nothing to hide as long as everybody deals straightforwardly and honestly.

 

[BankFodder]

In terms of your question as to what was the grade of the person who dealt with the case – I'm not aware that any information at all has been furnished as to this.

In fact there is very little detail which justifies the bill which has been presented. No doubt this will all be asked about and will come out during the court hearing. And in fact I expect it to be fully disclosed in the claimant's court bundle.

[Ganymede]

I only have experience of Express on a professional level, not a personal one. 

 

The OP does have something to lose by defending. 

 

The OP could go to trial and win. Unlikely but possible. 

 

If the OP goes to trial and loses they'll have to pay £3000 odd. 

 

They could settle now for say £1500 to avoid that risk. 

[BankFodder]

I take it that this is an offer that you are making to the OP on behalf of express?

[Ganymede]

The grade and hourly charge out rate will be detailed in the CFA and T&Cs the OP signed. 

 

The OP should ask for a bill breaking down all the time units charged and rate etc. 

 

On 02/07/2020 at 12:41, BankFodder said:

I take it that this is an offer that you are making to the OP on behalf of express?

 

Nope. 

 

I do not, and never have, worked for Express Solicitors nor have ever claimed to do so. 

[BankFodder]

Furthermore, £3000 was double the amount of commission they were entitled to if they succeeded. £1500 equals the maximum commission had the case succeeded according to their maximum expectation and the case had been fully pursued.

As it is, the case has not been fully pursued and £1500 still is at the top range of expectations so it is probably still reasonable to say that £1500 – in other words the entire consideration for an abandoned contract – amounts to an excessive penalty – or the result of an unfair term

[Ganymede]

It's not commission.

It's a deduction from the OP's damages as a contribution towards their own legal fees capped at a maximum of 25%.

 

What you said could be a good argument to try and negotiate a settlement with Express though.

[BankFodder]

It amounts to a commission. It may sound like a dirty word in the legal profession – but that's what it is. It's calculated on the level of achievement – it's a commission. Set at 25% – with the actual sum varying on the amount obtained.

It's a commission by any other name.

As I'm aware, I'm sure that express is aware of this thread. They have set the ball rolling – and personally I don't think it is for the defendant to do anything other than go through the court process and if express have something more to say then they should reach out to her.

If they do then no doubt they will try to say that it is without prejudice and in confidence – and I have already suggested on this thread to the defendant that she should make it clear that nothing is without prejudice and nothing is in confidence. The imposition of unilateral duties of confidence doesn't work and it's really just an industry practice which is poorly understood by the legal profession – and unfortunately poorly understood by people who receive "confidential" correspondence and who feel that for some reason rather they are bound by it.
If express want confidentiality then they should write to the defendant initially and ask if she agrees that a further exchange will be subject to a duty of confidence.

 

And to add, I think that express have shown a certain poor-non-customer-facing attitude by trying to impose an obstructive and unnecessary ID condition before agreeing to satisfy a simple and straightforward SAR when the identity of the data subject is clear and in fact they are completely satisfied as to her identity and address because that's where they have issued proceedings.

This is the kind of behaviour I expect from Barclays bank

[Ganymede]

 

I agree with you on this. 

 

But It's not a commission. 

 

See here for an explanation...

 

https://direct2compensation.co.uk/help-articles/why-you-lose-25-of-your-settlement-if-you-win

 

And I doubt Express are aware of this thread or will have a debt recovery department monitoring the internet for posts on forums. 

[BankFodder]

Thanks for the link but I don't see that it defines the word commission anywhere.

Here's another link which might possibly be be at least as useful https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/commission

 

 

[Ganymede]

Call it a commission if you like, it's irrelevant and not helpful to the OP. 

 

The Government introduced the maximum 25% costs deduction from a client's damages in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012

[Stormy1976]

Fee information from Express when another legal executive took over the case.

 

Case Taken Over - New Fee Earner v1.pdf

[Ganymede]

Thanks. 

 

£230 is very high for a trainee or paralegal and if you wanted to settle this would almost certainly be knocked down.

 

The hourly rates are set by the SRA but often firms charge more than the SRA levels. 

 

Here are the current hourly charge out rates for reference... 

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/solicitors-guideline-hourly-rates

[BankFodder]

I think the best thing to do is put all the figures to the judge and let the judge decide. I think we already getting a rather interesting view of the approach of this company

 

Even if it doesn't win, I think a judgement which criticises the conduct and also the level of money sought in the claim will make useful reading on this forum

[Ganymede]

It's an option. But not without risk. 

 

The OP might end up better off settling directly before trial than leaving it to the Judge. 

 

Ultimately it's the OP's decision and risk to take. 

[Stormy1976]

I agree and will proceed with defending the case.

I find the aggressiveness which Express representatives were dealing with me at the time troubling,  this frankly mounted my anxiety and made me unable to cooperate- which is sad really.  

[BankFodder]

I suppose it will be interesting to see their script when that is produced in their court bundle and also when we hear the call recording

[London1971]

Quite potentially they have broken GDPR already. The whole point of the regulation is that somebody totally independent to anyone on the case deals with the necessary information. The fee earning solicitor working on her ‘case’ does not meet those criteria.

 

Why on earth is their data controller not dealing with it? Why on earth has the data controller handed it on to someone where there might be a conflict of interest?

 

I think the OP should get on the phone to the ICO and ask some advice on this, it seems very suspicious. From express’s point of view they could be risking a bankruptcy level fine.

 

 

 

[Manxman in exile]

Hmmmm...

 

I was in agreement with BankFodder that some posters on this thread were adopting a bit of a gung-ho approach to the OP's problem here and were being far too optimistic in thinking there was much chance of success. 

 

If you engage a NWNF firm of solicitors you will almost always be liable to pay their costs and expenses if you decide to discontinue the case.  They have to make their money some way and if the client prevents the case from going ahead they will have incurred costs they need to recoup from somewhere. 

Some posters may not like that, but that's how it is.

 

Questions about GDPR is a complete non-starter and the idea that a competent firm of NWNF solicitors is going to cock-up a SAR request is not remotely likely to happen.  (FYI my wife has been a local authority solicitor for 30 years and one of her current areas of specialisation is data protection law).  We are not likely to be talking here about people who don't understand the law.

 

Also, as the OP's wife has been successfully holding down a highly responsible and demanding job throughout this time, I think it might be difficult to suggest that she was disadvantaged in any way by the behaviour/tactics of the firm.  I don't think she would be seen to have any justification for discontinuing

 

Although I agreed with BF about others taking too optimistic an approach (and possibly giving the OP false hope) I think even BF's own estimation of success at less than 50% is optimistic.  I think I'd put it at definitely less than 40% and in all probability well below 30%.

 

Having read Ganymede's posts I tend to agree with them.  Dispute the rate and try to settle for an acceptable amount.  My view would be the OP's wife is in clear breach of contract by discontinuing the case and I think that's the view a court would take as well.  Cut you losses.

 

Oh - and the OP does need to find out if she can still make a claim against the uninsured third party.

 

I presume she thought that if they were uninsured she couldn't claim, but I'm pretty sure that's not the case.  My understanding is that if the third party's vehicle had any sort of insurance at all* then they should pay out, even if the driver was uninsured to drive it.  If the car wasn't insured and the driver wasn't insured, then a claim can still be made against the MIB - that's what they are there for.

 

As somebody else has pointed out, if a claim had actually already been started against the third party and then been discontinued, it may not be possible to go again.

 

*That's why the first thing you should do when you've sold your car is take it off your insurance - just in case the person you've sold it to decides to drive around uninsured, in which case your insurance may be liable.

[BankFodder]

I'm not sure that the other party was uninsured. There may be confusion with the other thread involving the person who is trying to help their son.

Of course it depends on the way that the claim has been discontinued, but in principle I don't see any problem with resuming a claim