Small Claims Mediation Service - worth it?
Discussion
I'm claiming a small amount of money back (about £165) via the small claims court. The claim has now been defended by the company and the case is suitable for allocation to the small claims track.
There is the option to refer the case to the Small Claims Mediation Service. Has anybody used this before and was it worthwhile?
If the claim goes to a court hearing, what are the costs likely to be? I don't plan on paying for any professional help.
Although the claim is only for a relatively small amount of money, I'm more than happy to work through this as I'm not prepared to be ripped off by the large company involved.
There is the option to refer the case to the Small Claims Mediation Service. Has anybody used this before and was it worthwhile?
If the claim goes to a court hearing, what are the costs likely to be? I don't plan on paying for any professional help.
Although the claim is only for a relatively small amount of money, I'm more than happy to work through this as I'm not prepared to be ripped off by the large company involved.
Are you 100% sure of your claim?
Whether it's worthwhile depends on whether you think it's beneficial. If the other party also believes they are in the right, things can be difficult, hence the mediation service.
You've got a hearing fee to pay.
You've also got to actually turn up. If you discontinue at this stage, or even worse, just not turn up to court, that would likely be classed as 'unreasonable behaviour' and you'd be hit with costs. That'd be the out of pocket costs by the other party such as their legal costs, and transport at 45p a mile to and from the court.
Whether it's worthwhile depends on whether you think it's beneficial. If the other party also believes they are in the right, things can be difficult, hence the mediation service.
You've got a hearing fee to pay.
You've also got to actually turn up. If you discontinue at this stage, or even worse, just not turn up to court, that would likely be classed as 'unreasonable behaviour' and you'd be hit with costs. That'd be the out of pocket costs by the other party such as their legal costs, and transport at 45p a mile to and from the court.
Edited by JustinP1 on Saturday 1st August 10:34
JustinP1 said:
Are you 100% sure of your claim?
Whether it's worthwhile depends on whether you think it's beneficial. If the other party also believes they are in the right, things can be difficult, hence the mediation service.
You've got a hearing fee to pay.
You've also got to actually turn up. If you discontinue at this stage, or even worse, just not turn up to court, that would likely be classed as 'unreasonable behaviour' and you'd be hit with costs. That'd be the out of pocket costs by the other party such as their legal costs, and transport at 45p a mile to and from the court.
Yes, I am 100% sure of my claim. The company has tried to charge me for something that was not detailed in any contract or reservation I made with them. I've asked them to provide me with a copy of the contract I signed that includes details stating that I may be liable for these extra charges. This has so far drawn a blank from the company.Whether it's worthwhile depends on whether you think it's beneficial. If the other party also believes they are in the right, things can be difficult, hence the mediation service.
You've got a hearing fee to pay.
You've also got to actually turn up. If you discontinue at this stage, or even worse, just not turn up to court, that would likely be classed as 'unreasonable behaviour' and you'd be hit with costs. That'd be the out of pocket costs by the other party such as their legal costs, and transport at 45p a mile to and from the court.
Edited by JustinP1 on Saturday 1st August 10:34
How much is the hearing fee?
What determines where the hearing is?
I think it is just a tick box exercise. In all my claims both as a claimant and defendant, I have always ticked this box as I was advised that not agreeing to mediation will be viewed unfavourably.
The thing is all my cases have either settled or proceeded to hearing without any third party mediation.
The thing is all my cases have either settled or proceeded to hearing without any third party mediation.
165 quid is 165 quid in anyone's money, but my point is that litigation involves a lot of hassle and use of time that might be better spent on other things. It also tends to be a bit stressful. You rarely if ever achieve emotional satisfaction from suing someone, especially when that someone is a large company that has no feelings. Principles are very admirable, but can sometimes be rather expensive.
OP, you can look up the stuff about fees and such on the Ministry of Justice website. Costs are rarely awarded to either party in a small claim, but you can recover basic costs such as the issue fee if your claim is successful. If you agree on a settlement through mediation or otherwise, then the costs can be dealt with according to whatever the parties agree.
I am in general a big fan of mediation, although you have to go into a mediation with an open mind and a genuine willingness to compromise (Take off your war face. You can always put it back on later if the mediation does not achieve a deal); and much depends on whether the mediator is any good at pro-actively brokering peace, or is just going through the motions and acting as a mailbox for each party's angry messages.
OP, you can look up the stuff about fees and such on the Ministry of Justice website. Costs are rarely awarded to either party in a small claim, but you can recover basic costs such as the issue fee if your claim is successful. If you agree on a settlement through mediation or otherwise, then the costs can be dealt with according to whatever the parties agree.
I am in general a big fan of mediation, although you have to go into a mediation with an open mind and a genuine willingness to compromise (Take off your war face. You can always put it back on later if the mediation does not achieve a deal); and much depends on whether the mediator is any good at pro-actively brokering peace, or is just going through the motions and acting as a mailbox for each party's angry messages.
My wife was setting up a business to run classes for kids: Quite a lot of spend on marketing, publicity and equipment for the specific venue she'd booked with.
Turns out their committee had double booked, and my wife had to abandon classes.
She made claim via small claims route, and chose mediation. It was over the phone with a 3rd party.
Her claim of over £2k was settled at £1k, paid over 1 year.
I think it was effective but the 3rd party entered the process not even accepting they had breeched a contract causing cost, and how my wife viewed a "loss" was open to interpretation (ie some new items purchased could have been resold to get some value back)
The saving was time and stress, but the cost was accepting less than 100% of your claim.
Only you know what value you put on those 2 things.
Hth
Ian
Turns out their committee had double booked, and my wife had to abandon classes.
She made claim via small claims route, and chose mediation. It was over the phone with a 3rd party.
Her claim of over £2k was settled at £1k, paid over 1 year.
I think it was effective but the 3rd party entered the process not even accepting they had breeched a contract causing cost, and how my wife viewed a "loss" was open to interpretation (ie some new items purchased could have been resold to get some value back)
The saving was time and stress, but the cost was accepting less than 100% of your claim.
Only you know what value you put on those 2 things.
Hth
Ian
CC07 PEU said:
JustinP1 said:
Are you 100% sure of your claim?
Whether it's worthwhile depends on whether you think it's beneficial. If the other party also believes they are in the right, things can be difficult, hence the mediation service.
You've got a hearing fee to pay.
You've also got to actually turn up. If you discontinue at this stage, or even worse, just not turn up to court, that would likely be classed as 'unreasonable behaviour' and you'd be hit with costs. That'd be the out of pocket costs by the other party such as their legal costs, and transport at 45p a mile to and from the court.
Yes, I am 100% sure of my claim. The company has tried to charge me for something that was not detailed in any contract or reservation I made with them. I've asked them to provide me with a copy of the contract I signed that includes details stating that I may be liable for these extra charges. This has so far drawn a blank from the company.Whether it's worthwhile depends on whether you think it's beneficial. If the other party also believes they are in the right, things can be difficult, hence the mediation service.
You've got a hearing fee to pay.
You've also got to actually turn up. If you discontinue at this stage, or even worse, just not turn up to court, that would likely be classed as 'unreasonable behaviour' and you'd be hit with costs. That'd be the out of pocket costs by the other party such as their legal costs, and transport at 45p a mile to and from the court.
Edited by JustinP1 on Saturday 1st August 10:34
How much is the hearing fee?
What determines where the hearing is?
It sounds very strange that a big company could be so contractually slapdash, and if they made a mistake in incorporating terms that they would bother defending the claim. I'm intrigued as to what the nature of their defence is because the two sides don't seem to match up.
My advice would be to take some external advice, even if that means running that by another person. For example, it is perfectly possible to enter into an agreement without signing a piece of paper, and even if you do, that it is also possible that that will refer to another set of terms which need not be attached to a piece of paper you sign.
What would be more useful at this stage would be ensuring that you have a claim which is likely to succeed. Otherwise spending any more time and money on this may very well be wasted.
Edited by JustinP1 on Sunday 2nd August 10:29
JustinP1 said:
...
It sounds very strange that a big company could be so contractually slapdash...
Such things happen all the time, in my experience. Having said that, without more detail from the OP as to what his claim is about, it's impossible to advise whether or not his claim is any good.It sounds very strange that a big company could be so contractually slapdash...
We have a current crop of threads that say "I won't tell you any facts but I want a 100% cast iron guarantee that I will win". Standard response attached. NB: Sweary.
http://shop.moderntoss.com/products/legal-longshot...
JustinP1 said:
As BV says, it depending on the value of the claim, the hearing fee ramps up.
It sounds very strange that a big company could be so contractually slapdash, and if they made a mistake in incorporating terms that they would bother defending the claim. I'm intrigued as to what the nature of their defence is because the two sides don't seem to match up.
My advice would be to take some external advice, even if that means running that by another person. For example, it is perfectly possible to enter into an agreement without signing a piece of paper, and even if you do, that it is also possible that that will refer to another set of terms which need not be attached to a piece of paper you sign.
What would be more useful at this stage would be ensuring that you have a claim which is likely to succeed. Otherwise spending any more time and money on this may very well be wasted.
Not so sure. I've posted here before about my experience with MCOL and the Mediation Service. The other side was also a company armed with a lawyer who was convinced the contract was in the company's favour (in respect of monies owed). I posted full details here and IIRC, not a single legal bod could understand why the company was suing. It sounds very strange that a big company could be so contractually slapdash, and if they made a mistake in incorporating terms that they would bother defending the claim. I'm intrigued as to what the nature of their defence is because the two sides don't seem to match up.
My advice would be to take some external advice, even if that means running that by another person. For example, it is perfectly possible to enter into an agreement without signing a piece of paper, and even if you do, that it is also possible that that will refer to another set of terms which need not be attached to a piece of paper you sign.
What would be more useful at this stage would be ensuring that you have a claim which is likely to succeed. Otherwise spending any more time and money on this may very well be wasted.
Edited by JustinP1 on Sunday 2nd August 10:29
However, in the end and through mediation, we got what we wanted. Which was alost exactly what we'd proposed to the company about a year before, and way before it went legal. So the company bore all of the costs.
OP, (in my one-off experience, so take with a pinch of salt) the mediator will try to find a middle ground. And will explain - as BV has - that you may go to court, lose and bear significant costs. I don't know whether this is a scare tactic, or simply an attempt to apply pressure to push both sides to compromise (compromise being, presumably, exactly how the Mediation Service achieves success - i.e. not by establishing 'justice').
At no point in the mediation did the mediator try to come to some decision/position of the likely chances of success/failure at court. In our case, the mediator seemed 'tough' (to me, subjectively) in representing the company's argument up until I cited an email that, it turned out, the other party did not have. Then there was a long pause while the mediator spoke to the other side, before she came back with the compromise.
FWIW, I don't fully agree with BV and Justin about £165 being a "walk away from it" amount. First, because £165 is £165 to me (perhaps BV spends more than this on oil to replace the leaks from his stable of sheds). Secondly, because large companies with hundreds of thousands of cash-cow customers should not be able to get away with imposing unagreed charges simply because it's too expensive for customers to sue.
So... think it over and good luck. Please report back.
EskimoArapaho said:
FWIW, I don't fully agree with BV and Justin about £165 being a "walk away from it" amount.
Just to make this clear, I don't think I've ever said that. I'd be a hypocrite because I've sued for the same amount before.However, critically, I knew for 100% that the defendant had already admitted fault, and was a FTSE100 company that I'd already wasted hours asking for them to refund me charges they'd admitted were due.
So, I knew my claim would not be defended, and actually the £30 to file was not a waste, as it took me 20 minutes to file the claim online, and ten minutes on the phone taking a call from the company solicitor while we negotiated what my wasted time was worth.
That situation was very satisfactory, and much easier than speaking to new monkeys on the phone each week. The difference between our relative situations (and the OP's) is that it was known that the outcome would be positive.
The OP may very well be in the same boat, however, Occam's Razor would indicate that if I know that either a solicitor for a large company is wrong, or a random PHer, knowing nothing about the situation, a betting man would not bet. But if they had to, it would be on the non-professional making the error in legal analysis.
I didnt bother with ticking the Mediation box when I had to take a car dealer to small claims. I had tried talking to them , emailing then writing to them and drew a blank apart from initially a not so polite 'f
k off' then a slightly more polite lawyers letter from them telling me to do one.
As it happens , as soon as the MCOL papers hit their doorstep their lawyer was on the phone telling me to give up now, I didnt have a case, there was nothing to talk about and that they would counter sue me for their legal costs , time wasted blah blah. I just said no.
Next call he just asked me for my bank details so they could send me the money.
My understanding (and it seems to be backed up by other posters) is that mediation may result in a lower award. I wanted all my money, plus expenses, plus costs of going to MCOL, I wasnt prepared to accept a penny less so mediation seemed pointless.
k off' then a slightly more polite lawyers letter from them telling me to do one.As it happens , as soon as the MCOL papers hit their doorstep their lawyer was on the phone telling me to give up now, I didnt have a case, there was nothing to talk about and that they would counter sue me for their legal costs , time wasted blah blah. I just said no.
Next call he just asked me for my bank details so they could send me the money.
My understanding (and it seems to be backed up by other posters) is that mediation may result in a lower award. I wanted all my money, plus expenses, plus costs of going to MCOL, I wasnt prepared to accept a penny less so mediation seemed pointless.
Mediation does not result in an award or judgment. If mediation produces an agreement, it obviates the need for a judgment. Mediation affords an opportunity to compromise, and is pointless if there is no appetite for compromise. Taking an uncompromising stance can, however, be risky. Sometimes it pays off, sometimes not. A good mediator can produce agreement even when the parties start at daggers drawn, but mediation goes nowhere if one or both parties are dug in and/or the mediator is no good. Of course, you can settle a case by direct negotiation and without a mediator, but a mediator can sometimes broker a deal that didn't appear to be achievable through direct negotiation.
I did mediation for a claim through MCOL it was for £900 - 1000 not including costs for setting it up.
they say you need to go in with an open mind and willingness to compromise.
personally I think the mediator just wants to get through the process as quickly as possible and move onto the next one.
me as the claimant and the defendant both had our time to discuss and even with a paper trail documenting all the issues and proof that they accepted liability the defendant came back with an offer of £350 to settle which the mediator said was a good deal.
all he kept saying is for this to work you need to be willing to compromise !!!
I did end up getting back £850 ex costs but the mediator was taking the piss
I hind sight I should of just gone to the courts. I think they put that bit in that it looks unfavourable if your not willing to mediate to reduce the amount going to court.
they say you need to go in with an open mind and willingness to compromise.
personally I think the mediator just wants to get through the process as quickly as possible and move onto the next one.
me as the claimant and the defendant both had our time to discuss and even with a paper trail documenting all the issues and proof that they accepted liability the defendant came back with an offer of £350 to settle which the mediator said was a good deal.
all he kept saying is for this to work you need to be willing to compromise !!!
I did end up getting back £850 ex costs but the mediator was taking the piss
I hind sight I should of just gone to the courts. I think they put that bit in that it looks unfavourable if your not willing to mediate to reduce the amount going to court.
Breadvan72 said:
Such things happen all the time, in my experience. Having said that, without more detail from the OP as to what his claim is about, it's impossible to advise whether or not his claim is any good.
We have a current crop of threads that say "I won't tell you any facts but I want a 100% cast iron guarantee that I will win". Standard response attached. NB: Sweary.
http://shop.moderntoss.com/products/legal-longshot...
Update: I won my case this morning. The judge agreed that the terms and conditions on the company website weren't completely clear for the consumer. However, what really swung it in my favour was that the company wasn't able to prove that I was the driver of the vehicle at the time the penalty was incurred. The contract I had with them at the time of the penalty being incurred was also closed off and therefore I wasn't responsible for any penalty charges. Good news then. I get back the fines I had to pay, court costs, and loss of earnings while attending the hearing. We have a current crop of threads that say "I won't tell you any facts but I want a 100% cast iron guarantee that I will win". Standard response attached. NB: Sweary.
http://shop.moderntoss.com/products/legal-longshot...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff