I have just written this for a client. Once again they have had an enhanced CDS 7, Non Standard Fee claim, reduced without a single word of explanation. This may well have happened to you her is a response;
The assessment of this CDS 7 has not been conducted in line with the requirements of CRIMLA 12. These are express and not open to misinterpretation;
If there is a reduction in the claim, whether on a line-by-line, or overall, basis, reasons must always be given sufficient to enable the solicitor to identify the relevant issues.
A mere statement that the overall bill was unduly high is not enough.
We appreciate the operational difficulties faced by the LSC at this time. That said it is simply not possible to appeal this assessment on the basis that it has been made. It is not reasonable, let alone in compliance with CRIMLA 12, that the requested uplift has simply been crossed out, by hand, on the line-by-line schedule, with no further explanation. Indeed given that the firm prepared a detailed accompanying Special Features Notice it is also discourteous that this has not been addressed in any way whatsoever.
Furthermore all CDS suppliers are under a Contractual requirement to meet KPI 1, as outlined at CDS Contract Specification Part A 2.50-56. This must further oblige the LSC reasonably to conduct its assessment procedures.
Please will you respond making direct reference to CDS Contract Specification Part B 10.100 and/or Section 7 of CBAM, indicating which “Broudie” enhancement factors the Commission feels are not satisfied in this case.
We think there is a policy, routinely to reject all claims for enhancement, which the above experience would support. We are equally sure that the LSC will deny this experience.
