Still on Prior Authority

Here is a covering letter penned to go with an APP 8

Please find enclosed our re-presented application for prior authority.

We must apologise for this action however we are at an impasse on this matter. We accept that we have no mechanism for achieving a definitive outcome by way of appeal. We do however feel that we have a duty to the fund before we embark on the other options discussed below.

We are, obviously, the funded party in this case. The other side is without Public Funding and is ambivalent as to the progress of the matter. She will not, and reasonably could not, fund half of the proposed disbursement. In any event the Court direction on that point is clear.

We could make further application to the Court to vary the Direction. This, however, is almost certain to fail, would leave us where we are now, and will increase the cost to the fund. (Local listing practice is almost certain to result in a Unit 2 advocacy claim for this initial application). Even were we successful in such an application, this would result in further work under the certificate. The costs of this course of action, regardless of the outcome, are likely to exceed 50% of the proposed disbursement with no clear prospect of success.

The LSC have granted this Certificate. There can surely be no logic therefore in frustrating the conclusion of the matter in this way. Worst of all this could result in an increased claim on the fund, with no resolution of the matter, and the potential for a repeat of this exercise (with attendant costs) at a future date.

Could we respectfully ask that you reconsider our application?

Will keep you informed as to progress.

Share
About Author: SP

2 comments on “Still on Prior Authority

  • Dear Mr Solicitor

    Thank you for your further APP8 seeking prior authority, we note your comments; however under Legal Aid Regulations, case workers are unable to use common sense or to try to save the Legal Services Commission money, unless it under strict application of the regulations (3Eiv penny pinching provisions and 3Evii spend a tenner to save a pound provisions) on costs assessments. We therefore again reject you application. We understand this will be disappointing to you and your client; however, if they really require this report to enable them to have contact they will just have pay for it themselves. To end on a positive note, come the new contact you will not be encountering this problem as often, as most of the type of cases to which this scenario applies will no longer be within the scope of public funding.

    Yours

    A. Caseworker

Leave a Reply

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