Tweet
Hi Everybody
This is my first visit to Legal Beagles, and there is such a bewildering array of forums that I'm not sure where to post this thread, so I'll post it here.
I feel I have been badly served by a barrister I engaged under the Direct Access Scheme, and I have been preparing to make a claim against him. I'm a pensioner with hardly any savings, so I would have to do this as a Litigant In Person. My main worry is having costs awarded against me if I lose: although the amount I would be claiming (£3,000) puts it within the Small Claims track (which would give me protection from adverse costs), there is a lot of evidence I would need to present, which might mean a hearing lasting more than a day, which I believe might take it out of the Small Claims track, so I'd be exposed to costs again.
From what I've read, a way to minimise the possibility of having costs awarded against you is to be able to show that you did everything in your power to avoid bringing the claim to Court, and I've done this: in my Preliminary Notice, I wrote that I would much prefer Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), but the barrister did not even reply to the notice. In my Letter Of Claim, I again told him I preferred ADR, but he didn't reply to my Letter Of Claim. I sent a reminder a few weeks later, again stressing I'd prefer ADR, but he didn't reply to that either - he will not engage with me at all. If I do make a claim, I will certainly tick the box that says I'd consider ADR. Yet despite all this, I'm still afraid that costs will be awarded against me if I lose.
For this reason, I'm considering ADR, and the only route here seems to be the Legal Ombudsman. This is where my query comes in. I've looked at reviews on Trustpilot and Google, and they're just shocking. Almost everybody gives them one star, and many write, "I'd give them no stars if I could". The general consensus seems to be that the Legal Ombudsman is there just to protect solicitors and barristers. Now, I realise that people are more likely to leave a review if they're disgruntled, but still, it leaves me wondering what to do. For one thing, if I make a complaint to the Ombudsman and they find against me, it could undermine my case if I go to Court, and from what these reviewers write, it seems they'll automatically find against me, no matter how strong my case might be.
So, can anyone here share their thoughts please?
This is my first visit to Legal Beagles, and there is such a bewildering array of forums that I'm not sure where to post this thread, so I'll post it here.
I feel I have been badly served by a barrister I engaged under the Direct Access Scheme, and I have been preparing to make a claim against him. I'm a pensioner with hardly any savings, so I would have to do this as a Litigant In Person. My main worry is having costs awarded against me if I lose: although the amount I would be claiming (£3,000) puts it within the Small Claims track (which would give me protection from adverse costs), there is a lot of evidence I would need to present, which might mean a hearing lasting more than a day, which I believe might take it out of the Small Claims track, so I'd be exposed to costs again.
From what I've read, a way to minimise the possibility of having costs awarded against you is to be able to show that you did everything in your power to avoid bringing the claim to Court, and I've done this: in my Preliminary Notice, I wrote that I would much prefer Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), but the barrister did not even reply to the notice. In my Letter Of Claim, I again told him I preferred ADR, but he didn't reply to my Letter Of Claim. I sent a reminder a few weeks later, again stressing I'd prefer ADR, but he didn't reply to that either - he will not engage with me at all. If I do make a claim, I will certainly tick the box that says I'd consider ADR. Yet despite all this, I'm still afraid that costs will be awarded against me if I lose.
For this reason, I'm considering ADR, and the only route here seems to be the Legal Ombudsman. This is where my query comes in. I've looked at reviews on Trustpilot and Google, and they're just shocking. Almost everybody gives them one star, and many write, "I'd give them no stars if I could". The general consensus seems to be that the Legal Ombudsman is there just to protect solicitors and barristers. Now, I realise that people are more likely to leave a review if they're disgruntled, but still, it leaves me wondering what to do. For one thing, if I make a complaint to the Ombudsman and they find against me, it could undermine my case if I go to Court, and from what these reviewers write, it seems they'll automatically find against me, no matter how strong my case might be.
So, can anyone here share their thoughts please?
