How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • Go back-and-forth until satisfied
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask JimLawyer Your Own Question
JimLawyer
JimLawyer, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 6586
Experience:  Senior Associate Solicitor
97337639
Type Your Law Question Here...
JimLawyer is online now

I am the claimant in a multi track claim. Why does my

This answer was rated:

I am the claimant in a multi track claim. Why does my opponent want to meet me in person without lawyers? I have said we can do everything electronically via email but they are quite incessant that we meet. All answers warmly appreciated.
Customer: replied 10 days ago.
Forgot to say, I’m just wondering their motives. I’d have thought email would be better for them too as then everything is recorded in black and white. So why?

Hello, this is Jim and I am a dual-qualified lawyer (UK and Republic of Ireland) and happy to help you today.

I would not recommend you do this. For one, if they do this without their lawyer knowing, they will end up with their lawyers terminating their retainer with your opponent. They are legally represented and they risk breaching their agreement with their solicitors if they meet you in person. All communications need to go through their lawyer - you should notify their lawyer of their client's attempt to speak to you without their knowledge. You should not speak to them in person either, certainly not without a lawyer being present.

Your opponent may want to meet to try and settle and to reduce their legal bill but that is their problem, not yours.

I hope this helps – if you can please rate the answer by clicking the 5 stars (the top of your screen & then click “submit”), I can answer follow up Q&A's at no extra charge and I will be credited for helping you today.

Many thanks,

Jim

JimLawyer and other Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 10 days ago.
Thank you so much. I am litigating in person does that affect your answer?
Customer: replied 10 days ago.
I mean change it? Why are they doing this. They are a large firm and I’m a little person on my own. Is it purely to stop paying the lawyers?
Hi, no, it change a thing - it is probably to reduce their legal bill as they will be paying in excess of £200 per hour
Customer: replied 10 days ago.
Also, I am absolutely not being obtuse, but kinda (bluntly!) what’s the problem? They are paying so can they not tell lawyers to butt out here until they need them ‘on this bit’ ?
Yes you would’ve thought but anyway, just keep the communications formal with them and through the lawyers
Customer: replied 10 days ago.
I don’t want to name names but PRime ministers was opposed by them recently. How much do they charge?!
Customer: replied 10 days ago.
I absolutely will thank you very much. I’m just tying to source all possible reasons. Are you not allowed to discuss your case directly with opponent once you get a solicitor?

No as it undermines the whole point of having legal representation - the retainer terms will state no communications permissible unless through the solicitors.

Thanks

Customer: replied 10 days ago.
You are so helpful thank you! Ok would any of this change if I told you the CCMC has been vacated and a hearing booked in 3 months later to deal with an Applicatioon to strike out the defence - due to the defence containing 30-40 false statements and 70 odd pages of evidence to proof they are false?

No, the guidance I have stated still applies. The other side should be concerned about the application to strike out (assuming you are the claimant here).

Customer: replied 10 days ago.
I am the claimant yes. Why will they be concerned? Will the defence be struck out?

There are a few reasons :

1. the cost of opposing your application - they will probably be faced with having to pay for a barrister

2. if the court strike out the defence, again, costs are payable and you win your claim.

3. false statements - potentially the court can make a finding of contempt of court for them - a fine and in some cases, prison.

If you have further questions (e.g. about an application to strike out) may I ask that you post a new question to the main site. It will not cost extra if you have membership. If you would like me to deal with the new question please mark it “FAO:JIM” and I will pick it up as soon as I can.

Many thanks

Customer: replied 10 days ago.
Ah ok! No problems, thanks so much for your help, you’ve been amazing!

My pleasure - and thank you for using the site for your question.

I am around daily including weekends so if you have more questions please let me know.

Have a good evening.

Jim