If you don’t ask, you don’t get.

On the other hand, you get what you pay for.

Two opposing sayings which are as confusing and illogical as wanting to have your cake and eat it (why would I want cake and not eat it – although I don’t eat cake, it gets in the way of my champagne consumption).  The same is true of “many hands make light work”.  No, get out of my way and let me get it done fast and right!

Nevertheless, those two sayings are an appropriate way of summarising a regular conversation I have with potential new clients who think they have a great claim, but don’t necessarily have the funds to pursue it.  The client often wants some kind of no win no fee, or payment at the end depending on results, and I point out that if you want the job done without paying for it, or only paying in certain circumstances, be prepared for the job to be substandard.

It also bothers me that having some kind of contingency fee arrangement can lead to a conflict of interest, even subconsciously.  If I know I’m only going to get paid for a successful result, and the other side make a sensible offer at an early stage, am I going to be influenced to encourage you to settle because it’s in my best interests.  I get paid my share now, and I don’t have to have the risk and expense of going to trial.  Is that in your best interests?

So, I am opposed to arrangements of this type as they are uncommercial and potentially unethical.  Some clients will say that if I won’t agree, they’ll go elsewhere, believing that they can get a better deal from another firm.   Often, they call me back saying that they haven’t found anyone, or that the firm they did go with, wasn’t able to provide a particularly fast or efficient service.  That’s undoubtedly because of the “pile it high, sell it cheap” strategy. Firms that take on multiple cases of this type often progress them slowly, relying on enough settlements occurring early to make the work cost-effective.

What has really surprised me this week is that for the first time possibly ever, the SRA and I appear to completely agree on something.  Apparently, they are investigating over 70 law firms who have been doing no win in fee work, with poor results.  They are also considering banning or significantly restricting when, where and how law firms can offer their services on such terms, citing concerns about whether clients are being let down.

Does this mean that you shouldn’t go with a solicitor on a no win, no fee basis?  Not at all.  If it’s the only way you can conduct your case, and without that deal, you’ll have to give up the claim, then clearly, it’s worth a try BUT read the contract carefully.  One of the problems seems to be with hidden charges and commissions, so make sure you are very clear both at the outset and upon settlement of exactly what you are putting in and getting out.  If in doubt, ask the solicitors to set it out more clearly, and don’t agree to anything until you’re 100% certain that everything is clear and unambiguous.

You are, of course, always welcome to ask me for a second opinion!

Kleyman & Co Solicitors.  The full-service law firm.  Only lawyers and painters can turn black into white.