Page 34 - PIC e-newsletter Spring Issue 8

YOU ASK...
Costs O cer
Sonia Ponceby- waites
If you would like
to ask Costs Officer Sonia Ponceby-Thwaite
a burning question in
s s
our next issue of Partne
r r
s s
e In Costs, please email
e
Kerry.Ridley@pic.legal
34
The Judge is ‘away’ and in his place we have Costs Officer Sonia Ponceby-Thwaites.
Kieran, 44, Shropshire
“What do you think of recent attacks on solicitor’s bills by clients?”
I once had a Gardner called Bill. Hairy hands and black fingernails. Robust though, damned robust. Anyway, it’s absolutely b****y fantastic, isn’t it? It’s about time some of those jumped up ambulance-chasers were brought low. Scrums up!
Alex, 21, Cardiff
“Where will the court service secure funds for all new IT systems?”
Why, the recent closures have left prime city centre buildings with solid foundations and wanting only for a slap of paint and a few brutes waving their large encrusted brushes around. I’d rent them out to students; they’re happy to wallow in filth and live on the floor; and they’ll pay a premium to do so too.
Sarah, 25, Berks
“The new Excel Bill seems very complicated; how would you assess it?”
I imagine it would be like trying to persuade my husband to remember a future engagement; I would begin with a period of calm, which would be rapidly followed by frustration, irritation and eventually violence. I do find that to keep a husband in line is much like assessing a bill – you need a firm grip, the patience of a saint, and the ability to ignore objections you disagree with.
Danielle, 29, Carlisle
“Do you think the Court of Appeal got it right in Lowins?”
Of course, it was the only logical finding based on the issue before the Court; indemnity costs do not of themselves disapply a cap to which the basis of assessment is irrelevant. However, the cap only benefits one party and it worries me that we have a cap but no method by which to escape it. I’m never comfortable when judicial discretion is done away with by the rule drafters acting on instinct rather than evidence.
Jock, 56, Norwich
“Is Harrison having an impact on costs recovery?”
Indeed. Harrison is the greatest maddest most wonderful decision on costs in the last decade. If you had told me when Woolfy was in charge, that one day a Judge with only the barest information was allowed to fix the costs of a case
at a CMC based on an MOJ crystal ball and a spreadsheet; and then the parties could only depart from this by virtue of an undefined ‘good reason’ test and if they cannot find one of these White Rhino reasons, then the costs are to be waved through an assessment subject to the Budget cap, no matter the work actually done; I’d have died laughing at the audacious madness of it all. But here we are, and it certainly makes those new e-bills less dauntingly tedious.
Omar, 50, Leamington
“What are your thoughts on recent suggestions to cap damages in clinical negligence cases?”
A government costs money. The NHS costs money. Schools cost money. Traffic wardens cost money. MP’s cost money. Lords and Ladies cost money. The Queen costs money. Corruption cost money. It is called an economy for a reason. Morally the idea is bankrupt; and back in my student days I’d have harangued it as an attack on the poor by the rich and demanded a glorious revolution; and then I’d have gone to watch the rugger; all those big boys with their thick naked thighs, broad chests, coarse chins and bloodied cheeks grunting, pushing and grinding against each
other. Nonetheless when you have 1.5 million people not contributing taxes, and another £80 billion spent on coach
e trips for the elderly, where
e
e
?
l
l
s
s
e
c
e
c
a
a
n
s
n
s
a
a
v
v
i
i
n
n
g
g
s
b
s
b
e
m
e
m
a
a
d
d
e
e
l Better training for medical
Not b****y likely!
s
?
s
f
?
t
t
a
a
f
f
f
?
I
N
D
U
S
T
R
Y
E
X
P
E
R
T
S
I
N
D
U
S
T
R
Y
E
X
P
E
R
T
S
P
P
s
a
ar
r
t
t
n
n
e
e
r
r
s
I
s
I
n
C
n
C
o
o
s
s
t
t
s