Talk is cheap – but not talking isn’t always expensive.

I love to talk.

I can often be found on my feet (with a drink in my hand) talking about football (or possibly not, at the moment!), Guinness, law, politics, travel, alcohol, food, sport, champagne and why my glass is empty.

In fact, getting me to talk is easy.  Getting me to sit down and shut up is the challenge.

I’m also a big fan of getting my clients to at least consider talking to the other side.

No matter how strong or weak your case is, you should always be considering whether you should make an offer, or mediate, or at least take seriously any offers and suggestions of mediation from the other side.

It is not a sign of weakness.  In fact, it could be a sign of strength.

What’s more, if you fail or refuse to talk (and listen), you could be at risk on costs.

However, that does not mean that you MUST mediate.  Simply that you must consider whether mediation is a good idea, and if you reject it, you must have a good reason.

For example, in a recent case, where the Claimant lost, they argued that they should still get their costs, because the Defendant had refused to mediate.

Whilst this was true, they hadn’t refused to talk at all.

They had put forward alternative options to mediation.

And they had made offers to settle.

What’s more, the court found that mediation would have cost around £50,000 which no doubt was disproportionate to what could be achieved, given that their attempts to settle via other means had apparently been rejected by the Claimant.

On that basis, the Claimants were ordered to pay the Defendant’s not inconsiderable costs.

Which means that there is more than one way to try to settle, and more than one way to try and protect yourself from costs orders in court proceedings.

Kleyman & Co Solicitors.  The full service law firm. I’m listening!