Solicitor's fees, personal injury

FebruaryStars

Hi, a few weeks ago I asked for advice here regarding whether or not to consult a solicitor when pursuing a personal injury claim following a RTA.

I met with a solicitor this week, but I haven't decided to proceed yet.
The information he gave me seemed a little vague, to the point where I'm even unsure if i'm to contact him, or if he'll contact me next.

My question today is about fees in a case like this:
The solicitor said that the insurance company and PIAB will usually include costs when they award a payment, but that the costs awarded "usually aren't enough", therefore it's likely that he would have to take the balance of his fees from the amount awarded to me.
He didn't say what the fees might be likely to be, but suggested that I might have to top up his fees. He gave a hypothetical example of €1,000 to be paid to him from a €10,000 compensation payment if the costs awarded aren't enough.

Could anyone tell me please if this is standard practice, or if I should get a second opinion?

I'm a little concerned about it going to court and me ending up with thousands of euro in legal fees.

Thanks

NUTLEY BOY

FebruaryStars wrote: »

Hi, a few weeks ago I asked for advice here regarding whether or not to consult a solicitor when pursuing a personal injury claim following a RTA.

I met with a solicitor this week, but I haven't decided to proceed yet.
The information he gave me seemed a little vague, to the point where I'm even unsure if i'm to contact him, or if he'll contact me next.

My question today is about fees in a case like this:
The solicitor said that the insurance company and PIAB will usually include costs when they award a payment, but that the costs awarded "usually aren't enough", therefore it's likely that he would have to take the balance of his fees from the amount awarded to me.
He didn't say what the fees might be likely to be, but suggested that I might have to top up his fees. He gave a hypothetical example of €1,000 to be paid to him from a €10,000 compensation payment if the costs awarded aren't enough.

Could anyone tell me please if this is standard practice, or if I should get a second opinion?

I'm a little concerned about it going to court and me ending up with thousands of euro in legal fees.

Thanks

I thought that if PIAB were going to assess your claim that you were not entitled to recover legal costs incurred if you instructed a solicitor. See the guidelines on legal costs on PIAB's website. LINK https://www.piab.ie/eng/forms-guidelines/

It would be different if the case was going to be contested in court. In that event PIAB would issue a letter effectively authorising proceedings. Even then I think that you would only recover costs incurred after PIAB approval in the event that you won.

Basically, you retain a solicitor at your cost if the matter is just a PIAB assessment.

Be sure that you get a S. 68 letter from the solicitor setting out work required and likely charges.

BTW you need to be perfectly clear with the solicitor that you are not yet deciding formally to instruct them pending receipt of a S. 68 letter - that prevents you sliding unintentionally in to a binding contract.

Shop around.

Pat Mustard

FebruaryStars wrote: »

Could anyone tell me please if this is standard practice, or if I should get a second opinion?

Solicitors fees are not awarded in PIAB claims, generally. There are certain exceptions in infant ruling, for instance.

So, if you want to hire a solicitor, you will have to pay the legal fees. However, I think that what the solicitor may have been trying to say is that if a matter proceeds to court after PIAB, a court may make an award of legal costs, which may go some or all of the way to covering his fees, if awarded.

By all means, get a second opinion from another solicitor.

Claw Hammer

Some solicitors want a top up, some don't. The PIAB element of the work won't be compensated, although some solicitors might be prepared not to make a charge for on the basis they are going to get an instruction fee from the court case.

FreudianSlippers

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Solicitors fees are not awarded in PIAB claims, generally. There are certain exceptions in infant ruling, for instance.

So, if you want to hire a solicitor, you will have to pay the legal fees. However, I think that what the solicitor may have been trying to say is that if a matter proceeds to court after PIAB, a court may make an award of legal costs, which may go some or all of the way to covering his fees, if awarded.

By all means, get a second opinion from another solicitor.

As an aside, I wonder if that's a part of what's leading to the significant issue with people not accepting PIAB recommendation, as opposed to the recommendation not being correct?

hullaballoo

If you fail to beat the PIAB assessment, you're on the hook for costs so it's unlikely a competent solicitor would recommend proceeding to court if the PIAB assessment is anything like adequate. I've seen someone say recently that in most cases, a solicitor would be crazy to recommend the PIAB assessment but my experience is very different.

The stats PIAB publish show they've upped their game and started behaving reasonably in relation to claims that are capable of being assessed at their level (i.e. purely physical injuries with a reasonably definitive prognosis.) The result is that more and more claims are being compromised at the PIAB stage. The ones that aren't usually involve irrationality on the part of one, another, some or all of the parties involved.

So, it's unlikely that a plaintiff solicitor will recommend rejecting a reasonable PIAB assessment.

FreudianSlippers

hullaballoo wrote: »

If you fail to beat the PIAB assessment, you're on the hook for costs so it's unlikely a competent solicitor would recommend proceeding to court if the PIAB assessment is anything like adequate. I've seen someone say recently that in most cases, a solicitor would be crazy to recommend the PIAB assessment but my experience is very different.

The stats PIAB publish show they've upped their game and started behaving reasonably in relation to claims that are capable of being assessed at their level (i.e. purely physical injuries with a reasonably definitive prognosis.) The result is that more and more claims are being compromised at the PIAB stage. The ones that aren't usually involve irrationality on the part of one, another, some or all of the parties involved.

So, it's unlikely that a plaintiff solicitor will recommend rejecting a reasonable PIAB assessment.

PIAB behaving reasonably recently doesn't negate years of people ignoring them. It's been a good few years since I've had to deal with an aul slip-and-trip, but I recall (and have heard recently) the opposite of what you suggest.

I agree that it's unlikely that a reasonable solicitor would reject a reasonable PAIB assessment, but aren't the usual clientèle cute to the game?

hullaballoo

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

PIAB behaving reasonably recently doesn't negate years of people ignoring them. It's been a good few years since I've had to deal with an aul slip-and-trip, but I recall (and have heard recently) the opposite of what you suggest.

I agree that it's unlikely that a reasonable solicitor would reject a reasonable PAIB assessment, but aren't the usual clientèle cute to the game?

I'm not really too sure what the point of this discussion is.

I'm relating what I know as a person who practices in the PI sphere quite a lot. My experience is that PIAB have started in recent years giving more money in their assessments. They are still slightly mean in that regard but they are more often getting the valuations in or around the scale that would be awarded in court.

Are you saying that I'm wrong about that and PIAB are leaning ever more towards mean assessments?

As for the clientele, mine are all upstanding members of society whose rights and dignities have been infringed much to their detriment as the result of the borderline criminal negligence of others. Whether they're cute or otherwise is not part of the package I offer. :pac:

FreudianSlippers

hullaballoo wrote: »

I'm not really too sure what the point of this discussion is.

I'm relating what I know as a person who practices in the PI sphere quite a lot. My experience is that PIAB have started in recent years giving more money in their assessments. They are still slightly mean in that regard but they are more often getting the valuations in or around the scale that would be awarded in court.

Are you saying that I'm wrong about that and PIAB are leaning ever more towards mean assessments?

As for the clientele, mine are all upstanding members of society whose rights and dignities have been infringed much to their detriment as the result of the borderline criminal negligence of others. Whether they're cute or otherwise is not part of the package I offer. :pac:

I think my point was questioning the rationale of the significant amount of rejection of PAIB assessments, seemingly regardless of your assessment that the PAIB assessment has become more realistic/generous.

Seemingly the quantum of the PIAB assessment and the amount of people accepting those assessments are not significantly linked (when they should be).

Pat Mustard

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

As an aside, I wonder if that's a part of what's leading to the significant issue with people not accepting PIAB recommendation, as opposed to the recommendation not being correct?

Not only that, but PIAB does not cover all costs of medical reports and does not cover the costs for engineers or motor assessors. If a case looks as though it could be contested, it is important to retain engineers and motor assessors early on so that the locus of the accident and vehicle(s) can be inspected.