Regular readers will know that the enhancement of Criminal Non-Standard fees (CDS 7s) is a particular bugbear of mine.
I often make the point that these now pretty much automatically meet the threshold for 100% uplift – “out of the ordinary in comparison to the generality of criminal casework”.
Not surprisingly the LAA seem to disagree. That said they rarely properly explain why and habitually reject the claim and chuck the decision sideways to an ICA. The latter sometimes engage however the appeals process is increasingly a lottery in which the LAA are willing players.
Fail on a couple of enhancement claims and you may well fall foul of Criminal KPI 1 – the 15% assessment reduction KPI.
Now making well-reasoned CDS 7 representations and having an “appeal, appeal, appeal” appeals policy, are the obvious first protective steps.
If however you end up in a KPI 1 discussion, how about:
“We discharge out contractual responsibilities with due diligence – until you do likewise, by proper CRIMLA 12 compliant assessment of claims – go away”
You might want to phrase this more politely.
