Moosey Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 junior lawyers in the backwaters of sheffield and leeds are charged out at that Really, they're not. Grade D, which is junior, is £90/hour in civil, although hourly rates are by and large a thing of the past, since fixed costs came in. Just as a side note to assist with actual figures, not Daily Mail stuff... Let's say I take on someone's car accident claim. They break their leg - it needs pinning, but will heal. They're out of work for three months, and lose some earnings, but they're self employed, so I need tax records etc. They need rehab, so I sort that. Defendants are a little tricky, but after some arguments, we agree £9,000 out of court. The whole process takes, say, 14 months. Not unusual for a PI claim. How much costs do people think we'd get for that, out of curiosity, in terms of costs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Really, they're not. Grade D, which is junior, is £90/hour in civil, although hourly rates are by and large a thing of the past, since fixed costs came in. Just as a side note to assist with actual figures, not Daily Mail stuff... Let's say I take on someone's car accident claim. They break their leg - it needs pinning, but will heal. They're out of work for three months, and lose some earnings, but they're self employed, so I need tax records etc. They need rehab, so I sort that. Defendants are a little tricky, but after some arguments, we agree £9,000 out of court. The whole process takes, say, 14 months. Not unusual for a PI claim. How much costs do people think we'd get for that, out of curiosity, in terms of costs? Assuming you wouldnt be going to court on that I reckon there's ten hours of work? Perhaps some parecelled off to a junior? For a simple case I'd expect a fee of around £100/hr, so I guess I'd be happy paying a grand. No idea what you actually get, so go on shock me with how out of touch I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manlinose Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Really, they're not. Grade D, which is junior, is £90/hour in civil, although hourly rates are by and large a thing of the past, since fixed costs came in. the firms i use - some in sheffield, some in leeds, some in birmingham, some in london charge an average of £150-£160 per hour for a "junior" and £190-£350 for partners depending on levels of experience and status within their respective firms (the london firms are higher) - this is commercial litigation mainly i accept that there are many firms out there who do not charge at these levels and i accept that different types of legal work will have different fee structures, but my initial post was in the context of a solicitor defending a high profile and wealthy client in a very complex legal case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moosey Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Assuming you wouldnt be going to court on that I reckon there's ten hours of work? Perhaps some parecelled off to a junior? For a simple case I'd expect a fee of around £100/hr, so I guess I'd be happy paying a grand. No idea what you actually get, so go on shock me with how out of touch I am. 500 quid. Regardless of case duration. Posted from Sheffieldforum.co.uk App for Android Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted January 7, 2014 Author Share Posted January 7, 2014 Rebekah Brooks isn't getting legal aid. What has cost got to do with justice? If you had a system that cut corners by cutting costs you'd just get loads of injustices which would cost money to put right. So it's a false economy. Sufficient money should be spent on the system to ensure the system is fair. Why not come up your own specific proposals rather than just moan about cost? Is it because you don't know enough about the legal system to come up with any? I never said Rebekah (thankyou) Brooks was getting legal aid, and everyone knows you get what you pay for in the legal world, (which is hardly justice is it?) I know little about the legal world, except that high profile court cases cost (taxpayers) millions, and still get the wrong result sometimes. Justice should be the right of all, as laid down in Magna Carta, but Legal aid is only for criminal cases, so civil cases are pretty much unaffordable for ordinary people. I think it's an antiquated system that could be modernised, (not the law itself, but the mechanics of it,) and the costs reduced, but is prevented by 'tradition' and barristers who like to keep up the 'mystique' and elitism of it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Lawyers should be treated the same as plumbers, electricians and any other trade. Set your own rate and let people choose who they want to hire to defend them. That's already how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfish1936 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Maybe a National Law Service, like the NHS? Naah, the lawyers are too smart to be trapped into that one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I never said Rebekah (thankyou) Brooks was getting legal aid, and everyone knows you get what you pay for in the legal world, (which is hardly justice is it?)'Justice' (or not) lies with the decision of the Court, not the quality/expense of the representation that comes before it (which representation is there to influence the Court, inasmuch as the proceedings lend themselves to it at all). <...>still get the wrong result sometimes.That can happen "the other way" just the same (£££s spent in defense in vain, resulting in undue criminal conviction). Just as with investments (and much else in life), for the instructor choosing and paying for his legal representation, past performance of the legal representative is no garantee of future performance. Justice should be the right of all, as laid down in Magna Carta, but Legal aid is only for criminal cases, so civil cases are pretty much unaffordable for ordinary people.Justice is the right of all, still: anyone has the right of self-representation in proceedings. Paying for representation is optional. By way of analogy, you can always learn about cars and engines for maintaining your car yourself, if you can't afford to pay a trained mechanic to do it for you. I know little about the legal world, <...> I think it's an antiquated system that could be modernised, (not the law itself, but the mechanics of it,) and the costs reduced, but is prevented by 'tradition' and barristers who like to keep up the 'mystique' and elitism of it all. With respect, Anna B...it shows a fair bit, so -as I previously suggested- do please educate yourself about it some more, before proferring uninformed opinions that are hardly worth the bandwidth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 I never said Rebekah (thankyou) Brooks was getting legal aid, and everyone knows you get what you pay for in the legal world, (which is hardly justice is it?) I know little about the legal world, except that high profile court cases cost (taxpayers) millions, and still get the wrong result sometimes. Justice should be the right of all, as laid down in Magna Carta, but Legal aid is only for criminal cases, so civil cases are pretty much unaffordable for ordinary people. I think it's an antiquated system that could be modernised, (not the law itself, but the mechanics of it,) and the costs reduced, but is prevented by 'tradition' and barristers who like to keep up the 'mystique' and elitism of it all. I think you are mistaking elitism for meritocracy. Most professions take a dim view to rank amateurs coming in without the skills an ability, simply because it makes it harder for them, for the public that they are meant to serve, and it aids no-one. Law is one of those things that people have a small working knowledge of, simply because it affects everyone. However that doesn't mean that everyone can be a brilliant advocate or whatever. That's not elitism though, it's meritocracy. ---------- Post added 07-01-2014 at 14:09 ---------- By way of analogy, you can always learn about cars and engines for maintaining your car yourself, if you can't afford to pay a trained mechanic to do it for you. But don't be surprised if you get charged a premium for the professional to fix it, after you've made a mess of it That's certainly the way it works in IT, where people have a PC at home and think that's enough for them then to work on commercial scale systems.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Maybe a National Law Service, like the NHS? Naah, the lawyers are too smart to be trapped into that one! Nothing stops you getting private health care though, so nothing would stop private legal advocation... Legal aid (at amounts fixed by the government) is in effect a national legal service. Unlike the NHS though, a large number of people don't qualify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.