Guideline Hourly Rates 2021 & Other Changes Impacting COP Costs

From 1st October 2021, the new Guideline Hourly Rates will come into force. This means that from this date, subject to your retainer/client care letter, you will be able to claim the new hourly rates. The new rates are as follows:

 Grade AGrade BGrade CGrade D
London 1£512£348£270£186
London 2£373£289£244£139
London 3£282£232 £185£129
National 1£261£218£178£126
National 2£255£218£177 £126

The new Guideline Hourly Rates will displace Master Whalan’s decision in PLK & Others (2020). The new GHR differ across geographical locations, but overall, they are increased from the outdated 2010 GHR. For most junior fee earners, the increase is less than those awarded in PLK & Others.

In respect of Court of Protection costs specifically, the report quotes Master Whalan in the decision of PLK & Others, where he concluded that ‘ultimately I am not satisfied that the evidence supports Mr Wilcock’s contention that COP firms have experienced a significant increase in hard and soft overheads’.

It was also noted that ‘in general, however, COP assessments can be conducted by costs officers utilising the GHR as the reasonable hourly rate. The issue as to the appropriate status or grade of fee earner for the work in question will always be a matter for discretion of costs officers and/or costs judges’. When considering the PLK rates, the decision was made that ‘the GHR rates (if approved) are the rates to be used, not the PLK rates’.

The impact of this for Court of Protection practitioners is that the rates stated in the PLK & Others judgment dated 30 September 2020, as set out below, will no longer apply to costs to be assessed by the Senior Courts Costs Office, and that the new GHR will instead be applicable.

As well as this, there will also be an increase to Court fees which will also impact COP matters. The new Court fees will impact all COP matters, with the COP assessment fee increasing from £85 to £87. The cost of a costs appeal in COP matters will increase from £65 to £70.

Alongside policy change, there have been many changes at the SCCO too with several experienced Costs Officers leaving or retiring, creating inconsistent assessments and large delays.

In addition, the proposed COP E-Bill is almost ready for consultation and once approved, will create a more streamlined assessment process. The SCCO are also now accepting electronic PDF bundles for assessment, which is positive news for the environment. However, electronic systems are not without their flaws and it’s likely to take some time for the SCCO to adapt fully.

If you have any questions about any of the issues raised, please contact Laura Gillin at Laura.Gillin@clarionsolicitors.com

Increased Guideline Hourly Rates approved by Master of the Rolls

Following the publication of the Civil Justice Council working group’s final report on guideline hourly rates, the proposed changes have now been accepted by the Master of the Rolls.

The revised rates are as follows and are expected to come into force on 1st October 2021 together with the revised Guide to the Summary Assessment of Costs.

For more details see the recent video on our youtube channel where Professor Dominic Regan and Stephanie Kaye discuss the report, including the practicalities and potential issues going forward for both COP practitioners and commercial litigators.

You can find out more about our services here or you can contact the Costs and Litigation Funding team at CivilCosts@clarionsolicitors.com.

Final report on guideline hourly rates published – what is the impact on Court of Protection practitioners?

On Friday, the Civil Justice Council published their final report on guideline hourly rates (GHR).

Key recommendations made within the final report include:

  • That the Guideline Hourly Rates proposed in the Interim Report should be implemented in full
  • That National Band 3 should be abolished
  • That the counties of Kent, East Sussex, West Sussex and Surrey should become National Band 1 areas
  • That existing National Band 1 counties and other identified Band 1 centres will remain within Band 1
  • That all other areas will fall or remain within National Band 2

In respect of Court of Protection costs specifically, the report quotes Master Whalan in the decision of PLK & Others, where he concluded that ‘ultimately I am not satisfied that the evidence supports Mr Wilcock’s contention that COP firms have experienced a significant increase in hard and soft overheads’. It was also noted that ‘in general, however, COP assessments can be conducted by Costs Officers utilising the GHR as the reasonable hourly rate. The issue as to the appropriate status or grade of fee earner for the work in question will always be a matter for discretion of Costs Officers and/or Costs Judges’. When considering the PLK rates, the decision was made that ‘the GHR rates (if approved) are the rates to be used, not the PLK rates’.

The impact of this for Court of Protection practitioners is that the rates stated in the PLK and Others judgment dated 30 September 2020, as set out below, will no longer apply to costs to be assessed by the SCCO, and that the new GHR, if approved, will instead be applicable.

What are the proposed guideline rates, and how do these compare to the PLK rates?

PLK Rates

 Grade AGrade BGrade CGrade D
London 1£490£335£271£165
London 2£380£290£235£151
London 3£275-£320£206-£275£198£145
National 1£260£230£193£142
National 2£241£212£175£133

Proposed GHR

 Grade AGrade BGrade CGrade D
London 1£512£348£270£186
London 2£373£289£244£139
London 3£282£232 £185£129
National 1£261£218£178£126
National 2£255£218£177 £126

One key observation is that the proposed rates for National Band 1 are lower than the PLK Rates, for Grade B, Grade C and Grade D fee earners.

The overall position from the final report is that there was no compelling evidence found that additional attention should be given to Court of Protection work, and as such that said work should be subject to the same rates, the new GHR, if approved, as other areas.

You can access the full final report here: Civil Justice Council publishes final report on guideline hourly rates | Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

You can find out more about our services here or you can contact the Costs and Litigation Funding team at costs.support@clarionsolicitors.com

Guideline Hourly Rates – Final Report

The Civil Justice Council working group has now published their final report on guideline hourly rates following the consultation that took place between January and March 2021.

The report responds to the concerns raised during the consultation process, however, the working group’s recommendations remain as per the interim report and will now be considered by the Master of the Rolls.

The recommended revised rates are as follows:

The full report can be found here.

You can find out more about our services here or you can contact the Costs and Litigation Funding team at CivilCosts@clarionsolicitors.com.

COP hourly rates – the wait is over!

Following a Hearing on 26 May 2020, the judgment by Master Whalan was handed down today, indicating a 20% increase to the rates payable in Court of Protection cases. After 10 years of no pay rise, the judgment is welcomed by professionals nationally.

The case was brought by 4 professional deputies from 4 different law firms as applicants collectively, namely Wrigleys Solicitors, Freeths LLP, Boyes Turner LLP and Gillhams Solicitors. The issue brought before the Senior Courts Costs Office was that of hourly rates and the fact that the Guideline Hourly Rates (GHR) had not changed for 10 years, but factors like inflation, increasing workload and growing responsibility on professional deputies had caused concern as to the sustainability of Court of Protection work. Clarion prepared the 4 bills of costs for submission, claiming the GHR of 2010 plus a percentage uplift to reflect RPI inflation (of approximately 31%) between 2010 and 2019.

A Directions Hearing took place on 17 April 2020 and the parties were asked to produce evidence in support of the claim. All four deputies, Clarion and instrumental resources from willing members of the Professional Deputies Forum produced evidence, further reinforcing that the 2010 rates were not fit for purpose.

Richard Wilcock of Exchange Chambers represented the parties at the Final Hearing, and relied on the  relevant factors in the Civil Procedure Rules, the GHR Review Committee and recent case law in his submission, all pointing to the fact that changes to the rates payable were essential. He made two key arguments; the first being that COP work is specialised, combined with the fact that deputies carry, in general, higher overheads, including increasing overhead time, which should mean that the current rates are paid with an uplift. His second argument was presented as an alternative solution, in that if the SCCO wanted to rely on the GHR as a starting point, then it must apply an empirical uplift to reflect the incidence of inflation between 2010 and 2019.

Due to inconsistencies in the evidence produced relating to overheads, Master Whalan was not convinced by the first argument. He said that the findings “do not, in my view, demonstrate that the burden is one that is exclusive to COP work or that it is atypically high in comparison with that experienced by practitioners in comparable areas of practice.” He confirmed that the approach set out in Re: Smith and others [2007] and Yazid Yahiaoui and others [2014] was still correct and applicable.

Maser Whalan then moved on Counsel’s secondary argument. He emphasised that he had no power to review the GHR, but recognised that they couldn’t provide “reasonable remuneration unless these rates are subject to some form of periodic, upwards review.” Importantly, Master Whalan states in his judgment, “I do not merely express some empathy for Deputies engaged in COP work, I recognise also the force in the submission that the failure to review the GHR since 2010 threatens the viability of work that is fundamental to the operation of the COP and the court system generally.”

On the topic of inflation, Master Whalan questioned whether CPI was more appropriate than RPI. He  said “I am satisfied that in 2020 the GHR cannot be applied reasonably or equitably without some form of monetary uplift that recognises the erosive effect of inflation”. He further specifies that “If the hourly rates claimed fall within approximately 120% of the 2010 GHR, then they should be regarded as being prima facie reasonable” and provides a suitable table of the GHR with a 20% uplift to assist the Costs Officers undertaking future COP assessments:

  Guideline Hourly Rates
Bands A B C D
London 1 £490 £355 £271 £165
London 2 £380 £290 £235 £151
London 3 £275-320 £206-275 £198 £145
National 1 £260 £230 £193 £142
National 2 £241 £212 £175 £133

Master Whalan concludes by saying that the rates above are applicable to all outstanding assessments, regardless of the year the work was undertaken. He also advised that the recommendations of the GHR Working Group must be adopted in preference to his findings.

This outcome is brilliant news for COP practitioners, providing overdue ratification for the work they conduct. Importantly, the outcome will mean that this area of work continues to be sustainable.

Clarion are delighted to have been a part of this case. We will be applying the 20% uplift to all cases going forward, and are happy to revise existing bills which have not yet been assessed to reflect the changes. Please contact stephanie.kaye@clarionsolicitors.com for further information and queries.