Mercantile Court 27th March

[laura1303]

Still not backing down despite stating all the above, Paul's adamant I am in the wrong even though it's a small claims and the letter from the court states "the costs rules for the Small Claims Track should apply". However they have agreed extra interest to this date and to remove the confidentiality part of the offer letter, I've said I need a minute to think and frankly feel brow beaten by his rude and incredulous telephone manner. I suppose one good thing from this is without the confidentiality it has left me free to discuss my case with my work collegues, for once it may actually help to work on a well known terrestrial magazine show

[Glenn UK]

Ahh if the costs rule being aplied by the court is for the small claims track then he may be right, although you can aruge that you think they have been unreasonable in their actions and ask the court for costs on that basis.

 

It is worth pointing out in case ive missed it, you are entitled to recover the court costs irrespective of track but not necessarily costs for your time.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[roboraver]

Laura I was in the same boat last week, and they used the same tactic. My understanding is that if you hired a solicitor for the Merc (As it is the highest court) then cost for time and pre-paration can be re-claimed, it does not matter if it small claims or fast track, if you mention this to him AND also mention that as you will have to take a day of work to travel to the court then you will also charge for loss of earnings. I could be wrong but it worked for me ! (I also work in the industry ) and it would of cost them £500 more if I had to turn up to court !

[Glenn UK]

Roboraver,

 

the letter from the mercantile court seems to say that cost are as per the small claims track unless the letter is from another court?

 

The court can make orders as to costs whatever track so if they have then thats the deal i believe.

 

glenn

[laura1303]

Well I feel I may have fallen at the last hurdle, sorry for not having more of a backbone guys. I accepted the offer which was just over £1000, maybe it was the way I argued my case regarding the costs However, if anyone else speaks to Paul regarding the same matter and he says he has never heard of anyone claiming for work carried out on the case you know that he is telling a big old porkie. My arguement was the following maybe someone can point out where I may have gone wrong:-

 

1. Appointment letter stated "cost rules for the small claims track applied"

2. I am a litigant in person, if I had hired a solicitor I would have expected those charges to be refunded and my costs did not exceed 2/3 of that of a professional.

3. Part 48 "Litigant in person" outlines these charges are applicable.

 

Anyway thanks for all you help and advice with my claim everyone I really appreciate it.

[Glenn UK]

 

1. Appointment letter stated "cost rules for the small claims track applied"

 

Unless the court means something different to what is says, then CPR 27.14 applies. Which basically means you cannot recover your costs unless the other side is deemed unreasonable.

2. I am a litigant in person, if I had hired a solicitor I would have expected those charges to be refunded and my costs did not exceed 2/3 of that of a professional. This is not recoverable under CPR 27.14

3. Part 48 "Litigant in person" outlines these charges are applicable. CPR 48 is not relevant as the court has said 'cost rules for the small claims track'

 

Anyway thanks for all you help and advice with my claim everyone I really appreciate it.

 

For the avoidance of doubt

 

27.14 (1)This rule applies to any case which has been allocated to the small claims track unless paragraph (5) applies.

(Rules 44.9 and 44.11 make provision in relation to orders for costs made before a claim has been allocated to the small claims track)

(2)The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party's costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal, except –

(a)the fixed costs attributable to issuing the claim which –

(i)are payable under Part 45; or

(ii)would be payable under Part 45 if that Part applied to the claim;

(b)in proceedings which included a claim for an injunction or an order for specific performance a sum not exceeding the amount specified in the relevant practice direction for legal advice and assistance relating to that claim;

©any court fees paid by that other party;

(d)expenses which a party or witness has reasonably incurred in traveling to and from a hearing or in staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing;

(e)a sum not exceeding the amount specified in the relevant practice direction for any loss of earnings or loss of leave by a party or witness due to attending a hearing or to staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing;

(f)a sum not exceeding the amount specified in the relevant practice direction for an expert's fees; and

(g)such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably.

(3)A party's rejection of an offer in settlement will not of itself constitute unreasonable behavior under paragraph (2)(g) but the court may take it into consideration when it is applying the unreasonableness test.

 

Now if i have got this wrong I would be pleased to have it pointed out.

 

If the court makes an order and says costs as per a particular track then thats the rule to check out.

 

So it doesn't seem to means if Laura has actually done anything wrong or lost in any sense.

 

The only way she could have been awarded costs other than those set out specifically in 27.14 would have been if the court had deemed the defendants unreasonable.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

[Calculator]

Did anybody actually get as far as going to the hearing?

 

RRFCFAN did you go or did you get a result beforehand?

[chantelle]

My case was also heard that day. I could not attend. I called the court and they told me that the bank are to settle with me but I have head nothing from them as yet. Do I contact them now or wait?

[Calculator]

I would speak to the Court if it were me to ask what is supposed to happen next and under what timescale.