Frequently Asked Questions

The short answer is that the absolute maximum that Peter will charge a client for successfully completing a claim is 25% of the total compensation received. However, in reality, that is the worst-case scenario.  Most of the time, his client’s contribution to his fees and expenses is a lot less than 25%.

The other point to stress is that no payment is required until the compensation money has been handed over by the losing party. Just before that point – when the total amount of compensation is known – Peter will be able to calculate the precise amount of your contribution. In fact, you will probably be given this figure earlier than that, especially if the claim is settled by negotiation out of court.

It is very understandable that the subject of legal fees can be a worrying topic. Hopefully, the above assurance addresses this concern. To re-cap the basic position is:

• 25% of compensation is the very maximum fee contribution.
• There is no charge if the claim is unsuccessful for reasons beyond anyone’s control.
• The court rules protect an unsuccessful but honest Claimant from having to pay anyone else’s fees.

It is true that the 25% cap is offered by the majority of personal injury solicitors. However, that headline figure can be misleading. That is because the small print also enables some firms to deduct other fees (usually something called ‘base costs’) from a client’s damages on top of the 25% cap. More about that below.

Lying behind all of this are various rules and regulations about legal fees and expenses which can be both complex and confusing. If, however, you would like to know more about this subject, please read on but with peace of mind about the overall cap of 25%, as above.

It is true that legal fees and expenses can be very expensive, and it is usually the case that only the very wealthy can afford them. However, the good news is that personal injury and clinical negligence cases are treated differently.

Many years ago, when legal aid was all but abolished, a new method of funding was introduced in the form of ‘No Win, No Fee’. ‘No Win, No Fee’ has provided access to justice irrespective of a person’s financial position.

‘No Win No Fee’ is used in just about every personal injury or clinical negligence claim. It is designed to remove the added stress and worry of having to deal with legal fees on top of everything else that has happened.

But what does ‘No Win, No Fee’ actually mean? Well, the first thing to say is that, like most things legal, there are lots of unnecessarily complicated rules and regulations! However, once you cut through all the red tape, the overall concept is actually very straightforward.

When Peter enters into a No Win, No Fee agreement with a client, he provides 2 basic assurances.

Firstly, if the case turns out to be unsuccessful for any reason beyond Peter’s or the clients’ control, there will be no charge, and his fees and expenses will be written off. It should be added at this point that this is an extremely rare scenario because of Peter’s excellent success rate but, nevertheless, it can happen (for example, if the evidence later takes a turn for the worse which could not have been predicted earlier in the process. Extremely rare, but not impossible).

Secondly, and more reassuringly, it is much more likely that the claim will be successful, and an appropriate amount of compensation will be recovered. This is when the 25% rule comes into play. Most of Peter’s fees and expenses (barrister’s fees; medical reports fees; court fees; etc.) will be paid by the losing party. However, not everything is recoverable from the other side, and this is where the successful Claimant/client is asked to make a contribution (also known as a Success Fee). It also reflects the risk taken by the solicitor in working on a NO Win No Fee basis, together with the fact that they have had to finance everything until the case is over.

Some law firms also make a charge for other items (in legal jargon, irrecoverable base costs/fees is a good example) but as Peter doesn’t do this there is no need to explain this further.

The bottom line is that the client’s contribution to Peter’s legal fees and expenses will be no more than 25% of their compensation. In fact, the actual amount is nearly always much less than 25%. This is because of the way that the rules and regulations (referred to above) operate. They are designed to ring-fence certain items of compensation.

But what about the other side’s fees and expenses? This too is pretty straightforward. The general rule is that the losing party (car driver’s insurance company; hospital; employer’s insurance company; dentist; etc.) has to meet their own legal bill whether they win or lose. In legal jargon, this is known as ‘Qualified One-way Costs Shifting’ (QOCS). There is however one important exception. I expect that we have all read or heard about those cases where an alleged victim has exaggerated their injuries or even outright lied. The legal system calls this ‘Fundamental Dishonesty’. Nobody will be surprised to hear that these people are treated very differently, which can only be right. Their dishonesty will make them personally liable for all of the legal fees incurred in the case (often running into hundreds of thousands of pounds) and, in extreme examples, they will probably end up in prison as well! Fortunately, these types of people are a tiny minority, and it is not something that Peter’s clients need worry about.

There is also something which is best described as being legal expenses insurance protection. As the name suggests, it is a type of insurance which provides an additional layer of security to the client and to their No Win No Fee lawyers. I would always advise having insurance protection in place just for extra peace of mind.

A situation could arise during a compensation where the Claimant might have to give up some more of their compensation over and above the usual 25% cap. There are some fairly complicated court rules about who should pay legal fees if, for example, a reasonable offer of settlement had been made Defendant but not accepted by the Claimant when perhaps it should have been. There are legal expenses insurance policies that would protect a Claimant from that risk. The insurance would also cover the cost the medical evidence that is needed to support a compensation claim, plus other expenses such as court fees.

Some people might already have suitable insurance in place; it might be bolted on to existing insurance policies (house; car; credit cards; etc.).  However, it is not a problem if nothing suitable is available. Most firms can arrange an appropriate policy for you and Peter Bayliss is no exception. He frequently works with bespoke insurers who specialise in looking after the needs of Claimants in serious injury and clinical negligence cases.

It has to be said that specialist insurance like this is not cheap, but Peter Bayliss operates on the assurance that, even when the insurance premium is added, the total cost to the client will never exceed a maximum of 25% of the total compensation and, as previously stated, will probably be a lot less. It should be added that Peter does not receive any commissions or other inducements; his only interest is to do the best for his client and to protect them from nasty surprises.

The final point to make is that nothing is payable by you the client (whether it is the contribution to fees or the insurance premium) until the case has been successfully concluded and the compensation received.

The thought of starting a compensation claim might feel rather daunting. That is entirely understandable. Having already suffered a traumatic event, the thought of then taking on a legal case will very likely just add to the existing stress and anxiety. A good injury lawyer should not only be very experienced and successful, but they must also do everything possible to take the worry out of the legal process.

Peter prides himself on establishing a comfortable, reassuring and trustworthy relationship with all of his clients.  Over and above winning his client’s case, his primary mission is to make it as stress-free as possible. The feedback he has received from numerous clients over many years bears this out.

Some compensation claims can be more complicated than others, but Peter’s overall goal is to shield his clients from all of the legal toing and froing. They need the time and space to come to terms with whatever has happened to them and to be able to concentrate on their treatment, recovery and rehabilitation.

That said, there are of course some things that Peter cannot do without input from his clients. These can be things like identifying the evidence to support the claim; establishing the personal and financial consequences; and discussing key developments and guiding his clients with advice and guidance at key stages of the legal process. It is often about striking the right balance between what is really important and what is little more than legal ‘argy bargy’.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to give a simple answer to that question until all of the evidence has been collected and assessed.

That is because, until a certain stage has been reached in the compensation process, it is impossible to make a reliable prediction of what might happen to each and every person whilst their recovery takes place.

Some people will have worse symptoms than others. Some will need different types of treatment. Some people will have a better response to treatment than others. Some people might be able to carry on working. Some might not. All of these things will make a huge difference to the final calculations.

However, despite all of the uncertainty, there are 2 key points to keep in mind.

Firstly, the final amount of compensation must fully recognise every element of the overall impact on a person’s life.

Secondly, it is very important to get the right specialists working on your side in order to secure the best possible outcome.

Once again, it would be lovely to be able to give a clear unambiguous answer, but…

The difficulty with answering this question is that – just like the question about the amount of compensation – there are lots of variables.

For a start, some compensation claims take longer because the paying party wants to fight and argue about everything. That drags out the legal process.

Compensation claims also have to follow certain protocols and court rules. These often involve pre-determined timetables. Also, some courts are quicker than others depending upon how busy they are.

Most importantly, is the speed of treatment and possible recovery of the injured person.

The final amount of compensation cannot be calculated until the medical team are confident about the prognosis.

As a very rough guideline, claims for compensation for usually take about 2 years from start to finish.

The short answer is “Yes”.

Prompt and effective treatment, by specialists in their field, is vitally important. It could make a significant difference to a person’s recovery and their overall quality of life, both in the immediate aftermath of the incident but also into the future.

The NHS is a national institution which usually tries to do its best to help – and is often faultless – but it does have its limitations for a variety of reasons.

The private sector can be a wholly different ball game. Many of the country’s leading experts work for both the private sector and the NHS but, whatever your political views, there is no doubt that the private sector will deliver a much faster and more comprehensive service. This can make a huge difference.

A very important and often substantial component of a compensation claim is to provide the money to pay for all appropriate treatment and other expenses as and when needed. Some things will need to be funded now, and some will be needed well into the future depending on the final medical prognosis. The compensation system can provide for this and it should be used to its full potential.

Once the money is available, the private sector can also assist much more readily with various ancillary treatments such as:

• Rehabilitation programs
• Occupational health