Ruksaana Schutt -v- Austin Kemp Solicitors Ltd - 21st August 2019 : Legal fees on divorce reduced by more than £8,000

Legal-fees-for-divorce Court finds client overcharged by more than £8,000

Following a hearing in the High Court in Sheffield, one happy customer has declared that she is delighted with the outcome of her assessment of her divorce solicitor's fees, reduced down to £30,000 from over £38,000.

I was so sure that the solicitors who had represented me during my divorce had made several errors including overcharging on my bill but they refused to listen. The best decision I ever made was to contact Mark Carlisle, one phone call was all it took to reassure me that he would help to resolve the problem. The process was so easy, my final bill was greatly reduced and I couldn't have wished for a better outcome. When asked to write a testimonial, I didn't hesitate; Mark and his team are highly qualified and provided an excellent service. If ever you are in doubt just give the team a call. Well done to Check My Legal Fees, I am eternally grateful that you believed in me.

Ruksaana Hamid, Bristol

Ruksaana always suspected that she was being overcharged by Austin Kemp Solicitors Limited in Leeds but initially didn't know what to do about challenging her legal fees. There were gaps in her solicitor's file where her 'client care' letter should be, gaps even including the name of who her conducting solicitor would be and more gaps where an increase in her solicitor's hourly rate was not confirmed in writing. She contacted us at when she was sued by Austin Kemp for what they said were the outstanding legal fees in the sum of £14,601.03 including interest. We defended those proceedings for her, filing a Defence and agreeing a stay of proceedings while the invoices were assessed. We issued separate proceedings for an assessment of her solicitors' bills under the provisions of the Solicitors Act 1974 and those proceedings were defended all the way to a full hearing by Austin Kemp. Within those proceedings Austin Kemp sought to justify their invoices by arguing that, whilst they had charged Ruksaana just over £38,000, they had in fact done work to the value of nearly £43,000. The Judge reduced Ruksaana's liability for legal fees by 21% allowing Austin Kemp's bills at just £30,000 inclusive of interest. As a consequence Austin Kemp also had to pay the costs of the proceedings under the Solicitors Act, which were allowed at £7,750.

The assessment Judge took into account Ruksaana's arguments about the hourly rate change of the solicitor, the additional loan interest for erroneous billing by the solicitor, the travel time billed at full rate despite the estimate saying it would only be billed at half-rate, the use of a courier and printing firm for the trial bundles that were disallowed because of a wasted costs order. The failure to manage the client's expectations well was considered and that Ruksaana genuinely believed she would recover more than she did from her ex-husband.

Following on from the assessment under the Solicitors Act 1974, which brought all matters to an end, Austin Kemp agreed to discontinue their separate claim for outstanding fees, also paying Ruksaana's costs of that case.

Cowell -v- Thorneycroft Solicitors Limited : £613....

Related Posts

News Search

News Tag Cloud

Accident at work Administrators Amanda Cunliffe Solicitors Appeal Assessment ATE premium Austin Kemp Solicitors Ltd Back Injury Bill Breach of retainer Brethertons LLP BT-2 Solicitors Camps Solicitors Carpenters Cash Account Children Claims Management Companies Client Care Letters Closure Cold Callers Collier Law Commercial Comparison Compensation Conditional Fee Agreement Coops Law Cordell & Co Costs Estimates costs law Counsel Counsel's Fees Court CPR 46.9(3) Damages debts Deduction Delivery Up DG Law Din Solicitors Disclosure Divorce Emerald Law Solicitors Employment Tribunal cases Enforcement Equitas Solicitors Estates Exempt Fairwoods Solicitors Family Family Plus Fees Final Bills Fixed Costs Fletchers Solicitors Forster Dean Forum Garvins Law Gowing Law HCC Solicitors Holiday Holiday Sickness Claim Inheritance Act Insolvency Interim Statute Bills Irwin Mitchell LLP JC&A Solicitors Jigsaw Law Keith Smart & Co Lance Mason landmark case Lawyers Legal challenges Legal Expenses Insurance Legal Ombudsman Legend Legal LIP's Litigants in person Litigation Litigation Friend Matrix Solicitors Michael Lewin Solicitors Michael Rose & Baylis Solicitors Money Laundering Regulations Motorbike Accident MTA Solicitors No Win No Fee North Solicitors Limited Overcharging partners Personal Injury Pilkington Shaw Solicitors Price Probate Progressive Solicitors Proportionality Protected Party QC Reasonable Notice rebuttable presumption Refund Representation Retainer Richard Slade & Company Right to conduct litigation in respect of costs Rights of Audience RJ Gill Solicitors Road Traffic Accident Rotherham s.68 Solicitors Act s.74(3) Solicitors Act 1974 Scott Rees & Co Senior Courts Costs Office Seth Lovis & Co Simpson Millar LLP six minute units solicitor solicitors SRA Statute Bills Success Fee success fees Supreme Court tax tax management Termination Terms of Business Thorneycrofts Time limits trades Union Unison Transparency True Solicitors Turner & White Solicitors Unusual Items Viceroy Law Woodwards Solicitors

About Us

We are a team of legal costs experts with over 60 years' experience.

We have dealt with costs arising from almost every legal specialism.

We have conducted cases challenging solicitor's costs at all levels up to and including the Court of Appeal.

We are not part of a firm of solicitors and are therefore entirely independent.

Latest News