A question about getting Legal Aid in a court case.
Discussion
hi
this nice old guy who's my neighbour, intends to claim money back from a company who wont pay for their mistake, but still charged him, but as he dont have too much money he has to use 'legal aid' - of which he applied for an got recently.
- but he then wondered, an so asked me, that if he lost the case, what would be the consquences for himself, as like his sister owns the little bungelow he's living in, so would the other party or court make a financial claim from that property or whatever, as with him on 'legal aid' he'd have no money or calatural to fend anyone off?
now i told him, i thought he'd have to pay nothing, whatever the result, as he's on legal aid, tho i'm just assuming this as i'm no expert, but i did say i'll ask on the car forum i'm on, as in case anyone there has pratical knowledge...
so, for any one in know in here, i'll pass on your comments.
btw- he's 63 an still owns an old royal enfield
this nice old guy who's my neighbour, intends to claim money back from a company who wont pay for their mistake, but still charged him, but as he dont have too much money he has to use 'legal aid' - of which he applied for an got recently.
- but he then wondered, an so asked me, that if he lost the case, what would be the consquences for himself, as like his sister owns the little bungelow he's living in, so would the other party or court make a financial claim from that property or whatever, as with him on 'legal aid' he'd have no money or calatural to fend anyone off?
now i told him, i thought he'd have to pay nothing, whatever the result, as he's on legal aid, tho i'm just assuming this as i'm no expert, but i did say i'll ask on the car forum i'm on, as in case anyone there has pratical knowledge...
so, for any one in know in here, i'll pass on your comments.
btw- he's 63 an still owns an old royal enfield
Legal aid for a civil claim? I was under the impression that it wasn't generally available any more.....
If you have legal aid and lose, the court will generally make a costs order against you but provide that it can't be enforced without the specific permission of the court. To obtain that permission, the party with the benefit of the costs order would have to persuade the court that it would not cause undue hardship to the paying party. Which is very difficult to demonstrate if they qualify for legal aid in the first place.
It's what's commonly known as a "pools win" order (or I suppose, to bring it up to date, a lottery win order) - in other words, permission to enforce won't be given unless there's a material change of circumstances and the person suddenly has a lot more cash e.g. after a lottery win.
If you have legal aid and lose, the court will generally make a costs order against you but provide that it can't be enforced without the specific permission of the court. To obtain that permission, the party with the benefit of the costs order would have to persuade the court that it would not cause undue hardship to the paying party. Which is very difficult to demonstrate if they qualify for legal aid in the first place.
It's what's commonly known as a "pools win" order (or I suppose, to bring it up to date, a lottery win order) - in other words, permission to enforce won't be given unless there's a material change of circumstances and the person suddenly has a lot more cash e.g. after a lottery win.
lurking lawyer said:Thanks - an so we're saying here, that if this guy [the claimant], has a real low income, he'll never have to pay anything, as the court wont see the point of charging him for costs he couldn't pay?
To obtain that permission, the party with the benefit of the costs order would have to persuade the court that it would not cause undue hardship to the paying party.
ALSO - as to earlier said, regarding if the claimant wins his case, he pays for the court fees?, well if this guy is claiming only £25 on top of the money he was wrongly billed for, i wonder if the court-cost payback will be higher than whatever money he gets back, for if that costing is > £25, he'll still be out of pocket, or is there any leeway or provision for addressing this possibility into the claimants favour some how?
vlc said:
To obtain that permission, the party with the benefit of the costs order would have to persuade the court that it would not cause undue hardship to the paying party.
Nope - re-read Lurking Lawyers post above your last - that's not what he says (pools win clauses etc.) - what if he inherits the house from his sister?
As also said above, if he's been awarded Legal Services Funding then he should be getting advice from the solicitor he's instructed as he'll know all the relevant facts and figures etc.
>> Edited by Piglet on Wednesday 23 November 21:36
Piglet said:
To obtain that permission, the party with the benefit of the costs order would have to persuade the court that it would not cause undue hardship to the paying party.
[2] As also said above, if he's been awarded Legal Services Funding then he should be getting advice from the solicitor he's instructed as he'll know all the relevant facts and figures etc.
[1] oh i knwo is meant by the claimant 'later' getting much money etc an then the judge seeing him as able to pay, for i was just guessing that if this old guys circustances of lowly fiancial status 'never' change, then he'll never have to pay - right?
[2] also, i asked him about his lawyer an he said he didnt think 'small claims' cases needed one, in which case, do you think the court might appoint one?
>> Edited by Piglet on Wednesday 23 November 21:36[/quote]
[quote=vlc [1] oh i knwo is meant by the claimant 'later' getting much money etc an then the judge seeing him as able to pay, for i was just guessing that if this old guys circustances of lowly fiancial status 'never' change, then he'll never have to pay - right?
[2] also, i asked him about his lawyer an he said he didnt think 'small claims' cases needed one, in which case, do you think the court might appoint one?
[/quote]
1. Most likely, yes.
2. The court does not appoint a lawyer to act on a party's behalf. You either do it yourself or you do without. The small claims track (anything less than £5K) is handled quite informally so as to encourage litigants to deal with it themselves rather than retain lawyers. To that end, win or lose, you don't get any legal costs (other than the fee you pay for issuing the claim) on the small claims track.
[2] also, i asked him about his lawyer an he said he didnt think 'small claims' cases needed one, in which case, do you think the court might appoint one?
[/quote]
1. Most likely, yes.
2. The court does not appoint a lawyer to act on a party's behalf. You either do it yourself or you do without. The small claims track (anything less than £5K) is handled quite informally so as to encourage litigants to deal with it themselves rather than retain lawyers. To that end, win or lose, you don't get any legal costs (other than the fee you pay for issuing the claim) on the small claims track.
[quote=vlc [1] oh i know is meant by the claimant then 'later' getting much money etc, an then the judge seeing him as able to pay, for i was just guessing that if this old guys circustances of low financial status 'never' change, as then he'll never have to pay - right?
[2] also, i asked him about his lawyer an he said he didnt think 'small claims' cases needed one, in which case, do you think the court might appoint one?
[/quote]
[quote=lurking lawyer]1. Most likely, yes.
2. The court does not appoint a lawyer to act on a party's behalf. You either do it yourself or you do without. The small claims track (anything less than £5K) is handled quite informally so as to encourage litigants to deal with it themselves rather than retain lawyers. To that end, win or lose, you don't get any legal costs (other than the fee you pay for issuing the claim) on the small claims track.[/quote]
Cheers and thanks for the advice, for ive decided to accompany him on his trip as fater his wife died this year he has no one - so any last titbits of advice are welcome
Thanks again - respect.
[2] also, i asked him about his lawyer an he said he didnt think 'small claims' cases needed one, in which case, do you think the court might appoint one?
[/quote]
[quote=lurking lawyer]1. Most likely, yes.
2. The court does not appoint a lawyer to act on a party's behalf. You either do it yourself or you do without. The small claims track (anything less than £5K) is handled quite informally so as to encourage litigants to deal with it themselves rather than retain lawyers. To that end, win or lose, you don't get any legal costs (other than the fee you pay for issuing the claim) on the small claims track.[/quote]
Cheers and thanks for the advice, for ive decided to accompany him on his trip as fater his wife died this year he has no one - so any last titbits of advice are welcome
Thanks again - respect.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff