The first six months of 2024 has been an unusually busy time, both in the Court of Protection costs world, and for the Paramount Legal Costs Limited Private Client Team.
Practice Direction 19B
On 1 April 2024, Practice Direction 19B was updated, applying to all remuneration periods ending on or after that date. This saw long-awaited increases across all categories of fixed costs that can be taken by professional deputies, as well as an increase in the hardship threshold below which they are not permitted to apply for assessment of their costs. Greater flexibility regarding interim payments was also granted, meaning that interim payments may be taken at any time throughout the annual management period, provided that the cumulative sum does not exceed 75% of the work in progress, or 75% of the estimate provided to the Office of the Public Guardian, whichever is the lower.
Court Fees
Court of Protection court fees were increased on 1 May 2024, meaning an application is now £408, an appeal costs £257, and the fee for a detailed assessment of a Court of Protection bill of costs is now £96.
Pre-Appointment General Management Costs
At a Court of Protection Court User Group Meeting on 23 April 2024, one of the attendees advised that they had received directions from the SCCO to advise that the usual deputyship order does not authorize the recovery of general management costs incurred before the date of the deputy’s appointment. Many deputies will have been in the position where they need to deal with urgent general management issues before the order is received, particularly given the length of time it is currently taking to receive the deputyship order from the Court of Protection, but it seems that these costs are now not recoverable under the usual deputyship order. This appears to be a new stance taken by the SCCO as previously this has not been an issue. HHJ Hilder confirmed that this stance was correct, and advised that an application for retrospective authorization can be made. Pending determination of the main application for appointment, if (genuinely) urgent issues arise, the usual urgent COP9 route is possible. District Judge Mullins confirmed that, if the delay was due to the Court, a retrospective application may be more likely to be successful.
Post-Death costs
On 13 May 2024, Costs Judge James and Costs Judge Whalan, following consultation with the Court of Protection, issued a note regarding costs following the death of P. Costs incurred up to the date of P’s death are covered by the deputyship order and can be assessed in the usual way. However, since the Court of Protection’s jurisdiction ends with the death of P, the Court has no jurisdiction to make orders about costs incurred after P’s death, and therefore the SCCO has no jurisdiction to assess those costs. The SCCO also stated that they were not in a position to give guidance on how to go about recovering costs incurred after P dies. This is also a new stance taken by the SCCO as, previously, they were prepared to assess such costs, and had indicated that a sum of approximately £1,500 plus VAT would be reasonable for work involved in notifying the relevant parties of P’s death, and concluding their involvement as deputy. Now it seems to be a case of trying to agree costs with those administering P’s estate.
Final thoughts
Our Private Client Team has been alert to all of these changes, and has had a very busy six months as a result. The Team continues to grow, having welcomed two new members since January, and we have been delighted to welcome several new clients to Paramount Legal Costs. Hopefully the remaining six months will be just as exciting!
For further information, contact Julie Fitzpatrick here.
