Any Clearer?

There is a moment towards the end of Pulp Fiction where Jules (S L Jackson) uses a phrase something like; “this is what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity”.
I have just had something similar in the Kafka-esque world of RMA regarding an ongoing dispute between clients and RM about appropriate proof of means. Our view, as completely impartial referees obviously, is that the LSC are entirely wrong (indeed, worryingly, we bill LH files with the very same type of proof).
This is what I call a “legitimate dispute” which once upon a time formed part of the day-to-day, rough and tumble of costs assessment. Now RMs are involved and they are clearly not fully trained in this area and have not had the experience of having to present their views, on a dispute, before Costs Committees. I’ll hazard that had they to do so, most of the stupid decision being made would disappear over night. The LSc also say that RM findings are not assessments and that they cannot even go to an Independent Costs Adjudicator – for self evident reasons.
So we have diametrically opposed interpretations of guidance. How to resolve this? – ask the firm to apply their diametrically opposed interpretation to another 20 – 50 files. Brilliant.
Am I alone in spotting this “logical incoherence”?

About Author: SP

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *