WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

[Amethyst]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Mmm it's not really my area so see what [MENTION=7765]Joanna C[/MENTION]; or [MENTION=551]pt2537[/MENTION] think, but indemnity costs would be awarded specifically where the other side has acted poorly throughout the claim ( I know, matter of opinion there but comes down to what the judge decided ) and would mean costs wouldn't need to be proportionate regards the final award ( the £12.5k ) so I think as the order doesn't say on an indemnity basis, it would be standard costs ( so your £19 an hour plus travel / parking etc ) up to 2/3 of the amount that could be claimed had you had formal representation. What kind of level are you at at the moment with your costs?

Was your £750 from last June on an indemnity basis?

See what those in the know think first anyway xxxx

[Peridot]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

It looks like this is standard costs. With filing the costs schedule, you seem to indicate you had provided a provisional schedule. Did the Judge acknowledge that and was mention made of providing an up-dated version?
Here is the relevant Civil Procedure Rules Part 46 section relating to costs awarded to a Litigant in Person (just for interest and completeness really. I'm sure you're well aware of the section anyway:-
Litigants in person
46.5
(1) This rule applies where the court orders (whether by summary assessment or detailed assessment) that the costs of a litigant in person are to be paid by any other person.
(2) The costs allowed under this rule will not exceed, except in the case of a disbursement, two-thirds of the amount which would have been allowed if the litigant in person had been represented by a legal representative.
(3) The litigant in person shall be allowed –
(a) costs for the same categories of –
(i) work; and
(ii) disbursements,
which would have been allowed if the work had been done or the disbursements had been made by a legal representative on the litigant in person’s behalf;
(b) the payments reasonably made by the litigant in person for legal services relating to the conduct of the proceedings; and
(c) the costs of obtaining expert assistance in assessing the costs claim.
(4) The amount of costs to be allowed to the litigant in person for any item of work claimed will be –
(a) where the litigant can prove financial loss, the amount that the litigant can prove to have been lost for time reasonably spent on doing the work; or
(b) where the litigant cannot prove financial loss, an amount for the time reasonably spent on doing the work at the rate set out in Practice Direction 46.
(5) A litigant who is allowed costs for attending at court to conduct the case is not entitled to a witness allowance in respect of such attendance in addition to those costs.
(6) For the purposes of this rule, a litigant in person includes –
(a) a company or other corporation which is acting without a legal representative; and
(b) any of the following who acts in person (except where any such person is represented by a firm in which that person is a partner) –
(i) a barrister;
(ii) a solicitor;
(iii) a solicitor’s employee;
(iv) a manager of a body recognised under section 9 of the Administration of Justice Act 19851; or
(v) a person who, for the purposes of the 2007 Act2, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act).

The Practice direction referred to is below. The hourly rate would be £19 ph.:-
Litigants in person: rule 46.5 - Practice Direction
3.1* In order to qualify as an expert for the purpose of rule 46.5(3)(c) (expert assistance in connection with assessing the claim for costs), the person in question must be a –*
(a) barrister;
(b) solicitor;
(c) Fellow of the Institute of Legal Executives;
(d) Fellow of the Association of Costs Lawyers;
(e) law costs draftsman who is a member of the Academy of Experts;
(f) law costs draftsman who is a member of the Expert Witness Institute.
3.2* Where a self represented litigant wishes to prove that the litigant has suffered financial loss, the litigant should produce to the court any written evidence relied on to support that claim, and serve a copy of that evidence on any party against whom the litigant seeks costs at least 24 hours before the hearing at which the question may be decided.
3.3* A self represented litigant who commences detailed assessment proceedings under rule 47.5 should serve copies of that written evidence with the notice of commencement.
3.4* The amount, which may be allowed to a self represented litigant under rule 45.39(5)(b) and rule 46.5(4)(b), is £19 per hour.

pt5237 and JoannaC probably more up to date than I am so may well have further comments.

Well done you, you should be rightly proud of yourself taking this all the way.

[JinnyD]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Thank you

the Judge said this in th eFinal Judgement. “In relation to costs I have considered the submissions of both parties. Despite the declarations and orders I have made above and the best offer made to the Claimant in settlement being a payment of £5000 with no admission of liability on any issue the Defendant seeks no order to costs. It argues that the Claimant’s case has fundamentally changed and she has abandoned or lost the original claim. I do not accept these arguments. The Judgements I have given at the interim stage and now are broadly in favour of the Claimant and the Claimant has recovered monetary relief in excess of any offer and a number of declarations of discrimination which have their own value to her. Costs must follow the event in my judgement. I therefore make an order that the defendant pay the Claimant’s costs to be assessed if not agreed. I would certainly hope that they can be agreed, but if not the rules and procedures set out in th eCivil Procedure Rules PD46 paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 and in rule will apply”

[Peridot]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

So you need to get your statement of costs finalised and sent over to the defendant as soon as possible unfortunately. No doubt they will argue the figure but if you don't put everything in then you won't get anywhere near the amount of time you are entitled to claim for.
I have no doubt you spent a huge amount of time on this. You need to include the time it took you to prepare documents, travel to Court, telephone calls etc as well as attendance at the hearing, since the first costs order. You can claim £19ph so if you bring the previous statement of costs up to date and send it to them, then see what they come back with.

[JinnyD]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

I did have a go, I thought it was to be submitted with the final submission. I tried my best but it isn't everything. On past experience they will argue and try to draw it out for as long as possible, so would a detailed costs assessment be best for me? Is this something that guidance is given for by the person in charge of the details costs assessment at court? I know I can get the reasonable adjustments at court, its the process I am trying to work out in my head. Hope this makes sense? And running out of energy so will take time for me to get back. View it as a some one with the battery life of your worst mobile phone and you'll get ME. sorry

[Peridot]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Please don't apologise you've achieved amazing things dealing with this claim by yourself!
The detailed assessment process needs to have a bill of costs in front of them to go through I'm afraid so it will need to be completed and sent to the Defendant.
This is the section of the Civil Procedure Rules part 47 that deals with detailed assessments. Don't panic reading it all but for interest the section dealing with applying for detailed assessment is at 47.6.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...led-assessment
From the sounds of it the schedule only needs up-dating with the most recent things to the final judgment, but it can wait a few days.

[JinnyD]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Thank you for your reply I am looking at the costs now and they want to pay the damages. When I made my claim I stated in Value "Not exceeding an unlimited amount" Obviously I did not have a clue what was doing but it did get the Local Government Ombudsman attention. Is this like costs where 8% interest is added automatically? Or was that something I should have asked for?

Also when is the interest for the costs charged from? When I started the Claim or on the first offence?

Just to update you, so after suing the LGO for breach of the data protection act, they then post a report online regarding my claim with inaccurate information. Really not happy about that. If you follow the link its the Chief Executives report http://lgo.org.uk/information-centre...g-20-july-2017

I received an apology from them but as its based on a lack of understanding of the Judgement or my complaint I am not confident the changes they say they are making are going to help people. I've started putting bits on a blog hopefully so that it will help others daft enough to do this. Hope its ok to share https://blamiresvlgo.wordpress.com

[JinnyD]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Hi All

District Judge Geddes has asked the Draft Judgment be taken down for Blamires v Local Government Ombudsman. I sincerely apologise. I have just removed it.

I had sought advice from the court and was originally advised that after the Judgement was handed down I could share the Draft Judgement.

Anyone that has posted the Draft Judgement, please could you remove it?

I am very sorry for the inconvenience.

For your interest I am now attaching the previous Interim Judgement which was with regard to changing the Particulars of the Claim and my request for Specific Disclosure which I won. It has some interesting points including the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (new name) arguing that the county courts do not have jurisdiction to hear a complaint under section 29 because it refers to Part 2 of the Act.

[Amethyst]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Are you still waiting for the final judgment ?

Is the Draft the one that begins...

1. This is the final hearing of the Claimant’s claim issued on 4 June 2013 for remedies under the Equality Act 2010, Data Protection Act 1998 and the Human Rights Act 1998.
2. The Claimant represents herself with the help of her husband and with considerable support from the Personal Support Unit. The Defendant is represented by Solicitors and Counsel.
3. I have read two trial bundles plus a supplementary bundle and Defendant’s authorities bundle. The Claimant has produced another bundle of authorities as well as a “micro-bundle”. I heard oral evidence from The Claimant and read her husband’s statement, which is unchallenged. I heard oral evidence on behalf of the Defendants from Mr Jonathon Buckley and Mr David Pollard.

???

If so it does seem to be in a couple of other places too - Civil Litigation Brief and Stammering Law. I'll check through on here.

Nice summary on Stammering though - http://www.stammeringlaw.org.uk/cases/blamires.htm

Also on here -> https://world4justice.wordpress.com/...ation-conduct/

[Amethyst]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

Thank you for your reply I am looking at the costs now and they want to pay the damages. When I made my claim I stated in Value "Not exceeding an unlimited amount" Obviously I did not have a clue what was doing but it did get the Local Government Ombudsman attention. Is this like costs where 8% interest is added automatically? Or was that something I should have asked for?

Also when is the interest for the costs charged from? When I started the Claim or on the first offence?

Just to update you, so after suing the LGO for breach of the data protection act, they then post a report online regarding my claim with inaccurate information. Really not happy about that. If you follow the link its the Chief Executives report http://lgo.org.uk/information-centre...g-20-july-2017

I received an apology from them but as its based on a lack of understanding of the Judgement or my complaint I am not confident the changes they say they are making are going to help people. I've started putting bits on a blog hopefully so that it will help others daft enough to do this. Hope its ok to share https://blamiresvlgo.wordpress.com

Sorry just seen this post

As expected, a County Court judgment on 21 June was critical of the way we handled
reasonable adjustments under the Equalities Act. The original complaint dates back five
years and, despite our best efforts to deal with this complicated case, we were not able to
demonstrate to the judge that we have done enough, and under the Equality Act the burden
of proof rests on us to show that we have discharged our duties.
The complainant made a complaint against North Yorkshire County Council about the level
of support it was affording her and one of her daughters, as disabled people. We had
previously upheld a complaint from her. The complainant started litigation soon after we
reached a provisional view on her complaint. She claimed we failed in our Equality Act duties
to provide reasonable adjustments to enable her to use our service. Those reasonable
adjustments included – but were not limited to – face-to-face meetings with frequent
adjournments; Skype calls to hear her evidence; and the commensurate time extension
needed to enable her to prepare her response to the draft decision. She also alleged a
breach of the Data Protection Act when we amalgamated two complaint forms – one from
her on behalf of her daughter, and one purporting to be from her daughter – onto the same
ECHO record.

We have accepted the judgment in good faith and are determined that it is something we
can learn from. We have already fixed the specific problems the case identified, including
the IT issue about the way adjustments are held and transferred within ECHO. We have also
introduced new processes to document the adjustments we agree to make.

More generally, we have revised our reasonable adjustment policy and issued new guidance
to staff. We have also added a statement to letters and factsheets asking complainants to
highlight any adjustments they may need. We have changed all our process manuals and
arranged mandatory Equality Act training for all investigative staff. We have also adopted a
pro-forma where we send a written record to everyone who requests a reasonable
adjustment in response to our frequent ‘anticipatory duty’ prompts to say what we have
agreed, and that we will continue to keep this under review. This has been communicated
internally to staff and a brief statement has been prepared in case we have external
enquiries.

In terms of the litigation itself, we were dissatisfied with the quality of our initial legal advice
and so changed our legal representation part way through the case. We have arranged a
meeting to reflect on this and other aspects of the case to ensure that any further learning
points are also captured and acted on as appropriate.

[distress]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

4 yrs it has taken very well done, respect [MENTION=42351]JinnyD[/MENTION]

[JinnyD]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

The Final has the Costs in the last paragraph and runs to 30 pages. Thanks

[JinnyD]

Re: WON Jeanine Blamires V Local Government Ombudsman

4 yrs it has taken very well done, respect @JinnyD

Thank you