{"id":670261,"date":"2026-10-30T21:56:09","date_gmt":"2026-10-30T21:56:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/670261\/"},"modified":"2026-10-30T21:56:09","modified_gmt":"2026-10-30T21:56:09","slug":"solicitor-ordered-to-refund-client-e11000-after-excessive-costs-complaint-upheld-the-irish-times","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/670261\/","title":{"rendered":"Solicitor ordered to refund client \u20ac11,000 after excessive costs complaint upheld \u2013 The Irish Times"},"content":{"rendered":"

A solicitor was ordered to refund a client\u2019s \u20ac11,000 fees payment after the legal services regulator upheld an excessive costs complaint over a final bill seeking \u20ac49,000 costs when the initial estimate was \u20ac37,000.<\/p>\n

The client had paid the \u20ac11,000 upfront on agreement it would be repaid if the High Court<\/a> case was successful, the regulator said in its latest complaints handling report. <\/p>\n

A mediated agreement was reached that included a \u201csignificant\u201d contribution towards the client\u2019s legal costs, but, after receiving bills seeking costs of \u20ac49,000 and being told the \u20ac11,000 up-front payment would be retained, the client complained to the Legal Services Regulatory Authority<\/a> (LSRA).<\/p>\n

It upheld an excessive costs complaint on the basis the bill did not fully account for the difference between the estimated and final fees and said \u20ac7,500, plus VAT, charged for a lawyer to attend a one-day mediation was excessive.<\/p>\n

It also directed payment of \u20ac1,500 compensation after upholding an additional complaint of inadequate legal services over the solicitor\u2019s failure to respond to phone calls and correspondence from the client. <\/p>\n

[\u00a0Review of Legal Services Regulatory Authority to follow its first decade of operation<\/a>\u00a0]<\/p>\n

LSRA chief executive Niamh Muldoon said people who needed to engage the services of a legal practitioner \u201cshould expect that their solicitor will be upfront regarding legal costs from the very outset\u201d. <\/p>\n

\u201cThe bill at the end may be costly, but there should be a rationale for the costs and no surprises,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n

The report, published on Friday, included a focused examination of complaints relating to litigation costs, fees and settlements and some anonymised case studies. <\/p>\n

It identified several recurring issues, including failures to provide clients with the required section 150 costs notice at the outset or update it when costs changed, misunderstandings about \u201cno foal, no fee\u201d arrangements \u2013 which do not mean a client will have no costs \u2013 and deductions from settlement awards without the client\u2019s written consent.<\/p>\n

The LSRA received 914 complaints, and closed a total 1,021 outstanding ones, during the six months from March to September, the report outlined. <\/p>\n

Legal practitioners were directed to pay compensation sums totalling \u20ac68,700 to clients and to waive or refund another \u20ac34,713 in legal professional fees charged. <\/p>\n

The authority noted \u201ca significant milestone\u201d in having received more than 10,000 complaints since it began investigating such grievances in 2019.<\/p>\n

Of the 914 complaints received during the reporting period, 875 related to solicitors and 39 to barristers, reflecting the higher number of solicitors and their greater contact with consumers.<\/p>\n

Of the 1,021 complaints closed, 481 were deemed inadmissible. Nine, of alleged misconduct, were referred to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal; 260 were resolved; 89 were upheld and 104 were not upheld.<\/p>\n

A complaint of excessive costs was upheld against a solicitor who charged his client \u20ac50 each for 26 emails, totalling \u20ac1,300, failed to issue a section 150 notice and charged a fee for preparation of the final account on top of fees for professional services. <\/p>\n

His final bill, said the regulator, did not explain how his preparation of the \u201cfinal account\u201d was separate from the overall fees for professional services.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A solicitor was ordered to refund a client\u2019s \u20ac11,000 fees payment after the legal services regulator upheld an…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":670262,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[72,73,61,60,59682],"class_list":["post-670261","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-business","tag-business","tag-high-court","tag-ie","tag-ireland","tag-legal-service-regulatory-authority-lsra"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/670261","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=670261"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/670261\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/670262"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=670261"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=670261"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=670261"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}