Selling house to pay court costs?

Peig Sayers

My friends who live in the U.K. lost a court case recently. They're a couple, one is on disability benefit and the other works in a low paid job. They have no children and own their own home. They're in shock, especially as their solicitor told them they would definately win and everything seemed to be going their way. Unfortunately the juge ruled against them and they have to pay two solicitors and the court costs. They don't know how much it will be yet.

They are thinking they will have to sell their house to pay the fees. They have no money left as they spent it all on their solicitors fees and are paying back a loan as well for this. Can they be forced to sell their house or can they pay the costs in installments? If they have to sell they will have nowhere to go

Anyone have any advice? They have the option to appeal to the High Court but if it goes wrong they won't be able to pay those fees either.

coylemj

If they have to pay two sets of solicitors, surely one of them can advise them as to what's going to happen with the bill for costs instead of them relying on a friend in Ireland asking people on an internet forum who know nothing about the case?

Peig Sayers

coylemj wrote: »

If they have to pay two sets of solicitors, surely one of them can advise them as to what's going to happen with the bill for costs instead of them relying on a friend in Ireland asking people on an internet forum who know nothing about the case?

He will advise them but he won't know the costs for another two weeks. They're not relying on me for information, I want to know myself in case I can give them a crumb of comfort. Thanks for your help though :rolleyes:

No Pants

So, to summarise: they spent all their money on this case, lost it and now will have huge bills to pay and have only one asset that could possibly cover it? They should possibly have wondered what they were going to do before they took this action. It is indeed possible that they'll have to sell the house.

Rudiger

If only one of them is involved in the case they could transfer the house to the other to put it beyond the reach of the creditors.

coylemj

Rudiger wrote: »

If only one of them is involved in the case they could transfer the house to the other to put it beyond the reach of the creditors.

That would post date the award of costs so could probably be overturned.

tenifan

"disability benefit and the other works in a low paid job".. sounds like they could have done with the extra cash!

Is bankruptcy an option?

Peig Sayers

No Pants wrote: »

So, to summarise: they spent all their money on this case, lost it and now will have huge bills to pay and have only one asset that could possibly cover it? They should possibly have wondered what they were going to do before they took this action. It is indeed possible that they'll have to sell the house.

Their solicitor told them it was a sure thing, no doubt about it, they would definately win as did any of his colleagues he spoke about it to I think they are going to appeal to the High Court which would give them about a year's breathing space before the case is heard.

My query is about paying in installments. Would the house have to be sold straight away? Surely there must be some law regarding people on DLA being able to pay at their own pace?

No Pants

Peig Sayers wrote: »

Their solicitor told them it was a sure thing, no doubt about it, they would definately win as did any of his colleagues he spoke about it to I think they are going to appeal to the High Court which would give them about a year's breathing space before the case is heard.

My query is about paying in installments. Would the house have to be sold straight away? Surely there must be some law regarding people on DLA being able to pay at their own pace?

I think that sometimes the High Court asked for some money to be paid up front as evidence that costs can be paid. Your friends are now gambling. I would advise seeing another solicitor before digging this hole any deeper.

234

Peig Sayers wrote: »

Their solicitor told them it was a sure thing, no doubt about it, they would definately win as did any of his colleagues he spoke about it to

I seriously doubt that his advice was as unqualified as this; that would be a serious lapse in professional standards.

coylemj

Peig Sayers wrote: »

Their solicitor told them it was a sure thing, no doubt about it, they would definately win as did any of his colleagues he spoke about it to

If the solicitor was so confident and they couldn't afford to lose, they should have told him to take the case on a contingency ('no foal, no fee') basis.

Peig Sayers wrote: »

I think they are going to appeal to the High Court which would give them about a year's breathing space before the case is heard.

Stand back from your personal connection to this case this for a second and ask yourself this: how would you feel if you were their solicitor? You have bills and salaries to pay and these people who have run out of cash simply want you to kick the case upstairs to the High Court (which will probably double the legal costs) simply to get some 'breathing space'.

I think if you look at it from that angle you'll see that they won't get very far with that option without being able too put up a substantial amount of cash against costs in the event that the appeal is unsuccessful, something the other side will probably ask for anyway.

Peig Sayers wrote: »

My query is about paying in installments. Would the house have to be sold straight away? Surely there must be some law regarding people on DLA being able to pay at their own pace?

Why should there be a law which allows people with no money to drag a case out to the ultimate and then pay their bills in instalments? You rack up a bill, you pay it.

Peig Sayers

234 wrote: »

I seriously doubt that his advice was as unqualified as this; that would be a serious lapse in professional standards.

Actually, it was. He was very sure about it from the onset and up until the final verdict he was still predicting an unqualified win. He thinks they should appeal as he doesn't think the judge handled the case very well.

No Pants

Peig Sayers wrote: »

Actually, it was. He was very sure about it from the onset and up until the final verdict he was still predicting an unqualified win. He thinks they should appeal as he doesn't think the judge handled the case very well.

Is he willing to front the cash himself?