complaints to legal services commissioner

[nose]

Has anyone used this service to complain about a solicitor? or a Trubunal ?
just wondering if its worth it or it a waste of time ?
so far my dealings with the law has been that its a "boys club" and they all look after each other .

My complaint is about how a solicitor has charged for representing his own staff member in case. I imagine that if they has lost the case she would have been charged "mates" rates, but given I lost the case. the bill that has come is at normal rates and beyond and they keep ignoring requests to send clarification of charges as I have requested.
On the other hand the Tribunal allowed a simple construction claim to become bigger then Ben Hur, it took 2 years before it went to a final hearing, allowed the respondents to build up and the case excessively, and then awarded them costs, which are now 3 times the amount of the original claim.
Its going to costs assessment but given the lack of trust I know have in the Tribunal system, I dont expect any joy in cost assessment in Supreme Court...
appreciate any comments with anyone with experience

 

[Rod]

I don't believe you have grounds for a complaint to the commissioner. You are the opposing party and the other solicitors do not owe you any duty of care. The policy reason is it prevents losing parties using this mechanism as another way to semi-re-litigate their case again. If the commissioner allowed this I'd imagine nearly every losing party would make an attempt to complain.

re: Mates rates. That's to her advantage, not yours. Your remedy is through the costs court. You need to argue that they incurred costs through their own behaviour, not yours. For instance if they asked for an adjournment or did something that caused delay that was unnecessary that should be at their cost, not yours.

Were you self-represented? It sounds like you've been done over but I have no way of knowing whether it was because of the other party or you.

And what happened, it sounded like you won part of your case going by some of your posts?

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

You'll also find that most costs orders are on a 'party and party' basis, rather than an 'indemnity' basis (or whatever equivalent description is used in your jurisdiction. The difference is 'party and party' is worked out according to a scale of costs depending on the court, rather than what was actually charged (which is 'indemnity').

Very (over) simply, it works a bit like Medicare. You pay $75 to see a GP, but Medicare only gives you $40. You may pay your solicitor $5,000, but on the scale of costs it might only come back at $2,000. On a party and party basis, your costs order would be for $2,000.

 

[nose]

You'll also find that most costs orders are on a 'party and party' basis, rather than an 'indemnity' basis (or whatever equivalent description is used in your jurisdiction. The difference is 'party and party' is worked out according to a scale of costs depending on the court, rather than what was actually charged (which is 'indemnity').

Very (over) simply, it works a bit like Medicare. You pay $75 to see a GP, but Medicare only gives you $40. You may pay your solicitor $5,000, but on the scale of costs it might only come back at $2,000. On a party and party basis, your costs order would be for $2,000.

Thanks. Does anyone know how I find a list of the scale of costs please?

 

[Rod]

What state and court?

 

[nose]

I don't believe you have grounds for a complaint to the commissioner. You are the opposing party and the other solicitors do not owe you any duty of care. The policy reason is it prevents losing parties using this mechanism as another way to semi-re-litigate their case again. If the commissioner allowed this I'd imagine nearly every losing party would make an attempt to complain.

re: Mates rates. That's to her advantage, not yours. Your remedy is through the costs court. You need to argue that they incurred costs through their own behaviour, not yours. For instance if they asked for an adjournment or did something that caused delay that was unnecessary that should be at their cost, not yours.

Were you self-represented? It sounds like you've been done over but I have no way of knowing whether it was because of the other party or you.

And what happened, it sounded like you won part of your case going by some of your posts?

Thanks for your response.
I had to stop using solicitor after I lost the initial cases and then kept on going by myself to submit on costs as per the Tribunal's direction but no joy there.
there were 2 separate cases but the 2 respondents colluded ( both local tradies, funnily hated each other, then became best mates through my case, and the girlfiend of one of them being a para-legal as well as the director of his building company ( which he was hiding behind so he didnt have to pay his ex child support) took it to do me in and quite successfully did as you can see. I managed to appeal one matter only and won,( they appealed to get costs on it but didnt) so in the end they only got costs for one case but since they ran the 2 cases combined and the Tribunal allowed it, they are now claiming costs for both but hiding them as one .Yes your right, Rod , I have been screwed . well and truly. All bevasue I dared to complain as a civilian for a bad construction costs. I mean , they own their case based on claims such a retro fitting flashing in windows when it was found that they had not put in window flashings and the windows leak !!! quite a laugh

 

[nose]

What state and court?

nsw , Consumer claims Tribunal was the hearings and the costs assessment I believe is through Supreme court

 

[Rod]

Have you read this: http://www.ncat.nsw.gov.au/Documents/ccd_guideline_costs.pdf

Check what the order from NCAT says. It should definitely tell you if it is through the NSW Supreme Court. It may be they've just said the other party needs to apply through the Supreme Court for costs.

I don't know NSW scales or methods. You can contact the Supreme Court to ask if they have information they can send to you: Contact the Costs Assessment Section

 

[nose]

Have you read this: http://www.ncat.nsw.gov.au/Documents/ccd_guideline_costs.pdf

Check what the order from NCAT says. It should definitely tell you if it is through the NSW Supreme Court. It may be they've just said the other party needs to apply through the Supreme Court for costs.

I don't know NSW scales or methods. You can contact the Supreme Court to ask if they have information they can send to you: Contact the Costs Assessment Section

thanks Rod