How to make your lawyer love you, save legal costs and reduce disputes

Courts are tightening the costs that can be recovered by the 'winner' in a money claim, so that now claims for money valued below £100,000 have a fixed level of recoverable costs.  Most solicitors should be able to offer a good service level within the fixed costs for claims between £25,000-£100,000.  For money only claims below £25,000 it is likely legal costs would exceed the fixed costs.  

So what can you do to avoid overspending on litigation lawyers when you're already owed money?  

There are ways to save on legal costs (or even reduce disputes in the first place).  Your litigator will thank you too, as it will save time and they are more likely to come in on budget.  Whilst this guidance is aimed at businesses owed debts, the same rules will largely apply to other would-be litigants so will always make your lawyer smile. 

1. Make your terms tight - most money claims will be a dispute about a contract.  You can help to make it easier for the Court to agree with your position (or reduce the risk of a dispute altogether) if you make sure your terms are clear.  They would ideally include: 

- a straightforward explanation of who will do what and when; 

- exactly how a cost is calculated; 

- an uncomplicated termination or cancellation clause, including a clear explanation of any penalties for terminating / cancelling;  

- if you want to charge interest on unpaid costs, set it out, but make sure it is a reasonable amount - a punitive amount would be reduced or disallowed by the Court.  [For B2B relationships the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) terms are usually a good inclusion.]  

2. Make sure your contract is evidenced in writing.  It doesn't have to be a professionally drafted or lengthy document.  It might be an exchange of emails for example, but having clear evidence of exactly what was agreed will help the Court.  Having a lawyer check over your terms once you have drafted them is usually a sound investment - I am always happy to give a free view as to the clarity of terms and any improvements that I think could be made.

3. Follow your terms to the letter.  It may be obvious, but if you have taken the time to do 1 & 2 above, don't then breach the terms you have set down.  That is likely to lead to a dispute when it comes time to pay.

4. KEEP YOUR DOCUMENTS SAFE.  I cannot stress this enough.  It's all very well spending time drafting contracts and terms, but if you have lost or destroyed them when it comes to a court hearing, not only will it leave it to the Court to interpret what was agreed or has happened BUT it might also stand against you.  The Court can make a finding that documentation was intentionally destroyed, which can lead to adverse findings and even a punishment in costs!  When I say documents this includes anything electronic or physical.  On that note, please don't alter or mark them (including highlighting), or forward emails to your lawyer.  Any marking or forwarding changes the original and that could add costs too.

5. Consider having a consistent and clear credit control policy.  Treat every customer the same and let them know what to expect in advance (usually in your terms).  This gives a good flow to a trigger point for instructing solicitors and deals with some of the necessary pre-action work you would normally pay for.

6. Act promptly in the case of a dispute that you can't resolve alone.  Prolonging a dispute in an attempt to persuade an intractable customer to your way of thinking is simply going to delay payment and probably increase legal fees later on with more documents to review and / or preparing lengthier witness statements.  An early view from a solicitor (and maybe a solicitor-drafted letter for you to send) could unlock the dispute.  We offer a fixed fee legal advice service, including reviewing documents and an interview with follow up written advice, which could be used for this situation.  

7. Try to amicably resolve things before instructing your solicitor.  The Court will expect you to have tried to resolve the dispute without legal intervention.  There are so many routes available for what is deemed 'alternative dispute resolution' (ADR) including mediation, early evaluation by a legal professional, round table meetings and good old negotiation.  If the Court considers insufficient attempts have been made at ADR it can pause the proceedings to order to allow the parties to try again and / or penalise parties in costs.

Ideally you will have followed the guidance above before seeking out advice (and you'll likely hit the ground running as you have instantly saved your lawyer a good deal of work and yourself a few hours of legal fees).  

If you're already in a dispute you can't resolve, don't despair.  There are still costs savings to be had by getting your documents together, in chronological order (or, for extra 'great client' points, in one pdf) with a very short summary of what has happened.  That will still raise a smile.  

How do you choose your litigator (i.e. why instruct me)?

You need a litigator.  You want urgent advice that you can afford.  You have your pick of anyone.  Why choose a single practitioner firm in Cornwall?

Honestly, you don’t have to.  It would be a boring article if I stopped there though, wouldn’t it?

I could promise to be “tenacious”, “robust”, “ferocious”, like others do, or whatever description you think you want to hear about your choice of litigation solicitor.  All of that is white noise. 

So what should you look for in a litigator? 

The relationship you have with your litigation solicitor is an important one and thought should go into it.  You wouldn’t settle on the first car you viewed without test driving a few to check you get on, would you?  The same goes for your lawyer.  You might be working together for months (or years), trusting them at possibly the most stressful or worrying time of your life.  Depend upon it – there will be frustrations, hard to hear realities and tough decisions.  Who do you want to see you through it?  A flashy lawyer who you think ‘matches up’ to the opponent or someone you can ride out that journey with and trust to put you first? 

It should go without saying that your chosen lawyer will be available for you when you need them, get back to you promptly, tell you what you need to know in a clear way and always do their best to protect and guide you.  You should also be confident they know what they’re doing.

So you should go to a big firm then?  Maybe.  Big firms tend to have a large team of lawyers at all levels at a range of prices.  However, you might find that the partner you first speak to, who you gel with really well, isn’t the person who does your work and that you’re very quickly shunted over to a significantly less experienced lawyer for the remainder of your work.  

If that works for you, great.  If you liked the pedigree of having a partner represent you, you may find the service you receive from a junior team member isn’t as ‘gold standard’ as you were hoping for that premium price.  Alternatively, with popularity sometimes comes inability to take on your work, leaving you out in the cold at the very worst of times.

This is where small firms come in.  They may not be well known to opponents, so may not command respect from larger firms.  However, there is significant value in choosing a smaller firm:

• There are no huge overheads on premises, staff and various other ‘trimmings’, so prices can be kept low (I offer fixed fee advice as standard);
• Smaller firms tend to focus on a wider offering to clients, including (in my case) out of hours and urgent appointments, so you can be seen sooner and at your convenience;
• There’s value to being underestimated when working in such a technical and tactical area as litigation – it is possible to outmanoeuvre opponents who focus on a perceived inexperience or lack of ‘pedigree’ in their opponent and I’ve certainly been underestimated when toeing up to some of the biggest city firms in the past.  Those same large firms who might allocate a lesser experienced team member to you might do the same to your opponent;
• A smaller litigator has access to the same barristers, courts and experts as any other litigation firm so you aren't at a disadvantage;
• As most software and resource packages tend to charge per user, smaller firms are able to dedicate an appropriate budget to the most cutting-edge tools available (in my case the ability to book appointments and make payments online and the use of research and assistance tools with generative AI), leading to time and therefore costs savings;
• Payment arrangements - smaller firms tend to be more willing to work with you on payment terms or pricing, making representation on a budget work better for you.

These factors may well be the least important, though, as the firm size, name and ethos doesn’t matter when it comes to how good your litigator actually is.  Websites and CVs are really important, so check out website and social media bios.  Read reviews.  Do they have experience of dealing with the type of dispute you have?  Have they been reported in notable cases?  What do others say about them?  A really good litigator will tell you about more than just successes and will offer something extra.

At the end of the day, though, it's your choice.  First impressions and instinct go a long way.

If you’d like to see if we’re a fit make an enquiry.

 

 

Why start a law firm?

I have been asked a lot why I decided to start my own law firm.  That’s a good question.  I’m a forty-something, lifelong employee-and-never-boss and busy parent.  Getting regulator approval is complex and time-consuming, with nail-biting moments.  There are much easier ways to entertain yourself!

The short answer is freedom.  

I've always been in traditional legal practice.  In my experience, many firms remain ‘old boys clubs’ offering core property, family and probate services, with a token litigation team, mostly seen (or treated) as a poor relation or a pack of ‘mavericks’ turning tricks in front of wig-donning judges.  Most firms steadfastly maintain 9-5, Monday to Friday, opening, with meetings taking place face to face at a fusty law office.  Some firms claim to be “modern and progressive” simply by offering emailed correspondence or an occasional video call and having a website. 

Whilst some clients are of course happy with this, I have always thought improvements could be made.  As a litigation solicitor, it has been frustrating having to follow the same procedures as teams who necessarily need to follow set rules and processes.  Things move fast in this line of work, so a 'one size fits all' approach can unnecessarily complicate and delay things when clients just want someone to take the stress off of them immediately.

With courts also increasing their control over costs, value for money is increasingly important to clients, as well as convenience.  I think it is possible to deliver that, without losing a personal service.

My goal is to provide a service free from the constraints of more traditional practices, by bringing client experience to the centre of everything I do.  I have spent time carefully researching and tailoring my processes and tools to keep pace with the modern demands of dispute resolution work.

I can offer the most up to date software and technology I can source (including generative AI), to pass on as many time and labour-saving conveniences as possible to my clients.  I want every client’s experience to be the easiest, quickest and least stressful that it possibly can be.  I have stripped unnecessary frills, to keep overheads low, so that I can pass on that saving to clients by pricing my services lower than my nearest competitors.  I will offer tailored and fixed fees where possible to ensure my services are as affordable as possible.  And I will continue to tailor my services to each and every client to ensure transparency, professionalism and expertise at a realistic price.

Read more