WITHOUT PREJUDICE:
This article is recommended to whoever needs information about advocates or solicitors and assessment of bills.
- Parties who are considering to get their tax bill assessed by the Court.
- Foreign parties who are suing a local party in IOM,
-
Also parties who already are represented or intend to be represented by ;
. Appleby global advocates, Isle of Man.
. Quinn Legal advocates, isle of Man
. Gaugh advocates, Isle of Man
If
you don't wish to be triple charged, pls read this article.
In brief terms, I was told by an advocate
that when you loose a case, it is always better to negotiate with the party.
You should be able to pay two third of the costs, because that is what the
court orders you to pay.”Don’t expect to pay any less than that!”
In that way at the beginning of the case, the
law firm decides how much they want to make out of a case, then they add one
third to it and build up a tax bill which adds up to their desired number. They
are sure that they can get what they want from the court.
So an assessment of bill is really a
formality and a way that the paying party losses more money because they have
to pay the court to get their bill assessed.
In Isle of Man in particular this is the
case because there is an understanding that local professionals get what they
want. If you are a foreign party such as me, just forget about suing a local
party, let alone getting your bill assessed by the court!
As a foreign party I sued a local firm and naturally
I lost the case in the High Courts of Justice of Isle of Man. I was adviced by
my advocate to negotiate with the other party and pay two third of the bill.
But it did not seem fair to me because the
two third of their bill seemed still too high to me. Therefore I decided to get
the bill assessed. I thought I prefer to pay the court’s fees for assessing my
bill but get the opportunity to say exactly what I want in the middle of the
court.
That’s what I did. Through a serious of
short emails to the court and the defendants I said very openly exactly what I
wanted. I said the local parties lied and cheated in the court and got rewarded
for it and that their bills were a formality etc…
It took the court 2 months to assess my bill
and costed me an extra £5000. And at the end the court ordered me to pay two
third of the bill!!! Exactly what the local firm had decided to make me pay at
the beginning of the case! What a farce….
Pls read below how the local party lied
in the middle of the court and got rewarded, and what I said to the court!
-
Background:
I lost a case in the courts of justice
of Isle of Man and have to pay Appleby Advocates tax bill.
If they
are your advocates you should read my blog:
In brief
terms initially I sued Trident Trust company Isle of Man.
I was
represented by Mr. Chrisotpher Webb at Quinn legal thanks to whom I
lost my case. So I sued Mr. Webb at Quinn Legal.
Mr. Webb was
represented by Mr. Tim Swift at Appleby global Advocates. I lost the
case not because of Mr. Swift's merit, but because i was a foreign
litigant in person, and the Defendant was a local 'reputable' professional. so
I have to pay Appleby's tax bill now.
Once I received
Appleby’s tan bill I realized that it was at least 3 times higher than all the
other bills of the other reputable law firms that I have paid in Isle of Man .For
some reasons which are explained in detail below, I came to the conclusion that
the two local firms, that is Appleby and Quinn Legal had ganged up to ‘milk’
me, poor old stupid foreign litigant in person..
I disputed the bill and Appleby and their
clients Quinn legal decided to have their bill assessed by Isle of Man’s
court assessor, Mr. John Kennish.
Before and
after the assessment hearing I wrote a series of emails to Mr Kennish (copied
to Appleby) which describe well the situation: Pls see below extracts of my
emails:
Before
the hearing I wrote the following email to Mr. Kennish:
Dear Mr. Kennish,
Pls excuse me if I disturb you again and pls
excuse my poor English.
I
refer to paragraph Appleby's letter to you dated 21 Feb 2014. Page 1,
paragraph page 1 ,point (c):
"This
was a complex claim.....The claimants were seeking damages in excess of
£830.000 against the Defendant ....it involved the reputation of the
claimant.....litigant in person necessitated more attention and
work...reference to tone and nature of claimant's communications....the
claimants changed the basis of their claim...."
With
all my respects all law firms believe all cases are complex and if it is not
complex their job is to make it complex. I believe what Appleby really means
here is that they had all the reasons to make one tenth of the claim. It is not
by co-incidence that their costs are £88.000- that is just in excess of one
tenth of the claim. It explains all the unreasonable time that they have spent
working on my case, such as 8 entire days for preparation for trial.
As
for the rest of the paragraph, regarding the Defendant's reputation or my tone
and nature etc, they do not justify a tax bill.
Two
third of £88.000 is about £58.000 which is the minimum amount which they expect
to get in court. It is not a co-incidence if they refused to negotiate for less
than that twice.
If
the courts have a certain way of assessing the bills, the law firms can adapt
and get what they want. At least that is what i was told by a lawyer.
Another
example is Appleby's clients Quinn Legal who charged me £18000 for 2 days of
work. There is no plausible explanation for this except that they 'wanted' to
make £18000 out of 2 days of work. When I complained they did not tell me that
I had 6 months to ask for assessment of their bill, as such I lost the
deadline.
There
is nothing extraordinary if a law-firm decides to make a tenth of the claim or
expects to receive two third of their costs in court, or charges £18000 for 2
days of work. It seems reasonable. It is business.
However
in my case it is not reasonable. I have brought to your attention the invoices
of several other law firms who have worked on my case and who have charged me
much less.
My
submissions might be of no importance but at least if I am going to be over
charged i bring to your attention these facts and I would be most grateful
if you took them into consideration and used your good sense when you assess my
bill.
It
does not seem reasonable if a foreign litigant in person is ordered to pay one
third of a bill, but in this case it is reasonable.
Appleby
will deny the facts above, but what else can they do? Numbers talk clear and
loud.
-
Mr.
kennish answered that he was just to assess the bill and it was not up to him
to make a decision in favour of any party. However I could save money by
settling out of court.
I
did not settle with Appleby and during the hearing I explained to Mr. Kennish:
“ Sir,
today we are here, because the Defendants are confident that they can make
minimum two third of their tax bill. However I believe I should pay only one
third.
The
reason is that I believe it does not make sense that the advocates decide what
should one pay before the case starts and produce a tax bill accordingly. Each
day someone opens my files and spends a couple of hours in front of it until
they reach the desired number.
I
already brought to your attention that the Defendant Mr. Webb charged me £18000
for 2 days of work and subsequently I lost the chance to have the bill
assessed. During the hearing Mr. Webb
explained to his Worship Need ham that when he told his partners that he had
charged me £18000, the partners were not satisfied because they felt that he
should have charged me more. I would like to say that I do not accept to be
charged in this way. Which is at random.
In
that case there is no point to produce bills and have the bills assessed. It
becomes a formality and a waste of time.
Mr.
Swift’s main argument is that the case was complex and it required skilfulness
and responsibility. I would like to say that all cases are complex a nd require
skillfuln ess and responsibility. Several other prominent law firms worked on
my case and I am sure they found it complex and they were skilful and
responsible . They all charged me more or less the same amount for the same
type of job which is about 3 or 4 times less than Appleby.
With
all my respects, I believe that if Appleby needs 3 to 4 times more time to do
the same type of job that the others do, then it means that they are not as
skilful and I should not pay if the advocates are not skilful enough.
Therefore
today I would like to pray that you compare this tax bill with the invoices of
other law firms and allow me to pay as much as I paid the other firms. That is
about one third of the tax bill.
In
order to do that I would like to have a justification for every minute of the
time that they have spent on my case. Up to now they have provided no plausible
justification and I do not accept that they rely on court to provide them
justifications.
I
would like also to be provided proof of payment by Quinn Legal.
Finally
I do realise that Appleby is the stronger i nfallible party but hopefully it
does not mean that I can be bullied into paying an unreasonable sum of money.”
Naturally Mr. Swift denied everything and
Mr. Kennish did not make any comments.
Then after the hearing I
wrote other emails to Mr. Kennish which are the following:
Dear Mr. kennish,
Pls excuse me if i disturb you again. Following our hearing on 15
October, I would like to bring a couple of isssues to your attention.
During the hearing Mr. Swift claimed that Quinn Legal had not made any payment,
but was liable. If Quinn Legal has made no payment it means their liability is
yet another formality.
It is not credible that Quinn legal simply did not make any payment and Appleby
simply did not ask for any payment. Usually law firms including Quinn Legal and
Appleby do not work before the payment is made. Therefore they surely reached
an agreement about the payment at the beginning of the case. If there was an
agreement between Appleby and Quinn legal and their insurers from the
beginning of the case, it means that it was not necessary that Appleby and
insurers exchange a huge amount of emails and phone calls. As such I
claim once more that I should not pay anything for correspondence and phone
calls between Appleby and the insurers.
I believe 2 law firms and one insurance company do not make a vague vocal
agreement regarding the payment and do not wait to see what happens later...
There was surely a written agreement between them. I believe the contents
of this agreement should come to your attention. As such I pray Mr. Swift to
disclose their agreement about the payment for the court and explain why their
client did not make any payment. The only plausible explanations which come to
my mind are the Following:
There is the probability that the agreement was about a fixed fee in case Quinn
Legal lost the case. However if Quinn Legal won the case, the fixed fee would
not apply. As such I believe the tax bill was produced only for me not for Quinn
Legal.
There is also the possibility that there was a commission for Quinn legal who
brought a case for Appleby. In the business world when a party brings
another party business they get their commission.
If Appleby denies all the facts above, i bring to your attention the one
and only useful piece of information that their client Mr. Webb gave me
while he was my advocate-. I quote: "lawyers lie".
Finally i am proud to bring to your attention that in the judgement His Worship
referred to me twice as an intelligent person. I assume it was
because of the way I conducted my case and the things that i said. At no
time His Worship stated that Appleby was skilful or responsible. Therefore i
would be most grateful if you took into consideration the facts above when you
assess my bill.
Pls do not permit 2 law firms and an insurance company to bully
me through a court order because they have a good reputation,
Mr. Swift answered by saying that in fact Quinn Legal had made full
payment. Mr. Kennish did not make any
comment. So I wrote to Mr. Swift, copied to Mr kennish:
Dear Mr. Kennish,
i would like to bring to your attention that
in my letter to the court regarding my tax bill, also During the hearing on 15
October. I did ask Appleby proof of payment.
If Appleby refuses to
forward you a simple proof of payment, it is in itself proof that payment was
not made and there was some sort of agreement between Appleby and their client.
I strongly believe that
the tax bill was produced only for me and they decided how much i was to
be charged at the beginning of the case- that is two third of one tenth of my
claim or £58000.
I believe it is essential
that you know the truth before you give me any order.
There is no reason that
i pay 2 law firms through one bill, or i pay triple the amount that Quinn Legal
had agreed to pay.
If Appleby refuses to
disclose their agreement, i suggest to pay exactly the same sum that you
ordered me to pay Caines.
I believe right now
Appleby is relying on their good reputation within the court in order to bully
me. Why don't they forward you proof of payment?
Mr. Swift refuted
everything and Mr. kennish did not make a comment. So I wrote to him again:
Dear Mr. Kennish,
Pls excuse me if i disturb
you again.
I would like to ask you to
postpone ordering me to make payment until it is clarified how much Quinn Legal
has paid Appleby.
As i have already brought
to the attention of His Worship Needham lying and cheating are common practices
in courts of justice and even rewarded. Mr. Swift gave you a small example by
telling you during the hearing that Quinn Legal had not made payment, but then
subsequently writing me that they had made payment. I assume when you have an
impeccable reputation you can do that.
Before, during and after
our hearing i asked them to provide proof of payment. However I was ignored and
treated with arrogance and contempt as if what i said did not count. If this is
not bullying what is it? However it is one thing to refuse to disclose
information to me,it is another thing if they refuse to dislcose information
for the court. I believe Appleby should provide you proof of payment.
You have a very important
job which you do properly, but how can you do it properly if Appleby refuses to
disclose important information to you? It is not enough to believe what they
say because they have an impeccable reputation. We have seen that they are
capable to contradict themselves in the middle of the court.
In that case what is the
point of an assessment hearing? They can just order me to pay whatever they
want.
I believe I should not
make any payment before this issue is clarified for the court. Or in
order to put an end to this case I would pay as much as you ordered me to pay
Caines. In fact I paid way higher than two third of their bill, therefore
Appleby should be satisified with it.
Dear Mr.
kennish,
Pls excuse me
if i disturb you again.
Thank you for
spending time to assess my bill. I am sorry to say that it seems that you have
wasted your time as evidently the bill is a formality and calculated by the two
law firms to overcharge me through a court order.
As such I would
like to ask you again to postpone ordering me to make payment.
Otherwise, with
all my respects, pls excuse me if I will be obliged to disobey your order.
For the Court's
records, either i will pay the same amount which you ordered me to pay Cains,
or i will not make any payment until it is clarified how much Quinn Legal
has paid Appleby. As such I believe the best solution is that Mr. Swift writes
another one of his applications and ask for a hearing or make appeal so we will
meet again in court where he can provide proof of payment.
As I have
already brought to the attention of His Worship Needham, sometimes your
reputable local firms invent documents the day of the hearing to satisfy the
court, as such by proof of payment I don't mean an invoice which is invented
the day of the hearing to satisfy the court, I mean the real proof of bank
transfer which shows clearly the date and the amount of the payment.
No 'authentic'
proof of bank transfer, no money
- 2 months later the court ordered me to pay two third of the costs. + about £5000 for their time for the hearing and assessing the bill !
Do you get it?!!
What do you think about this?
