Post Office: Schemes mostly come with legal fees
Legal regulators have pledged to help subpostmasters concerned about fees being charged by lawyers in their claims for compensation over the Post Office Horizon scandal.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority and Bar Standards Board responded positively to a call for assistance from the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board (HCAB), the independent advisory board which oversees the compensation related to the Post Office Horizon scandal.
Backed by the Department for Business and Trade, it is chaired by Oxford University Professor Christopher Hodges, with the other members being Lord Arbuthnot – who as MP James Arbuthnot played a critical role in exposing the Post Office scandal – Lord Beamish (former MP Kevan Jones, who also campaigned on the issue for many years) and legal ethics specialist Professor Richard Moorhead.
There are four different compensation schemes running for subpostmasters and the HCAB has previously signalled its concerns about lawyers charging for work obtaining compensation from the group litigation order scheme, given that the government pays claimants’ legal costs.
Provision is also made for covering costs under the other schemes, although in the Horizon shortfall scheme, no fees are paid for those who apply for the £75,000 fixed sum award.
Nonetheless, the HCAB said, a small number of individuals seeking the fixed award have instructed lawyers – raising “the potential for problematic charging” – while charging was occurring in the other schemes too.
In the letters to the two regulators, the HCAB said three main issues were at play: first, whether lawyers should be charging at all where the schemes provide for costs recovery; second, if the answer might be yes, whether charging agreements were reasonable in the circumstances; and third, whether the approach to any fee agreements and associated matters was appropriate, “not least given the particular vulnerabilities of claimants in these schemes which can be severe”.
These associated matters included requests for interim payments and the enforcement of fee agreements “in ways that raise their own questions”.
The HCAB stressed that only a small minority of lawyers were charging their clients.
Professor Moorhead told Legal Futures: “The board starts from a presumption that, where there is provision for fees in the schemes, then lawyers should not be charging their clients.
“Any charging arrangements that are agreed have to be fair and proper and fully consented to by the subpostmasters, some of whom are very vulnerable.”
The HCAB asked the regulators to set out how they could provide help to subpostmaters.
“We do not think high volumes of concern will be raised, but do think that the matters need sympathetic, sensitive and expeditious handling.”
In response, Solicitors Regulation Authority chief executive Paul Philip provided a dedicated contact and said: “We would be keen to hear from sub postmasters who have experienced issues around fees charged for legal services, for example in respect of the compensation scheme or other representation relating to the Horizon Post Office scandal, particularly if they have concerns about or do not understand what it is that they are being asked to pay for.”
Mark Neale, director general of the Bar Standards Board, wrote: “We shall be very happy to support the board in any way we can in addressing conduct matters that arise from the handling by barristers of compensation cases.”
