Our Blogs

Fiona Shackleton can count Prince Charles, Sir Paul McCartney and John Cleese amongst her clients and it’s no surprise that she’s considered to be one of the UK’s highest-profile divorce solicitors as a result. Now, though, the media spotlight is not shining on Shackleton because of her actions in a divorce court, but the unexplained fees that have appeared on her client’s bills. Both the Daily Mail and the Telegraph have reported that bills issued by Shackleton’s firm, Payne Hick Beach, contained additional charges – some amounting to hundreds of thousands of pounds – within a column labelled ‘mark-up.’ Shackleton has claimed that these fees are present as a result of a large amount of billable work relating to each case not being recorded. Considering the contentious nature of some of the cases in question, the difficulty in accounting for every minute spent on a client’s divorce and the fact that two of Shackleton’s affected clients – Sir Paul McCartney and Madonna – have both confirmed that they were happy with their final bills, this would appear to a reasonable explanation. The fact that clients have not been provided with definitive – or at least clearer – reasons for these charges, however, is significant. According to a recent study, 20% of all complaints received by the Legal Ombudsman concerned a lack of clarity concerning solicitor’s fees. This indicates that many people are unsure of what they are being charged for and signifies the importance of ensuring that bills are as transparent as possible. Solicitors are required to provide their clients with an estimate of costs before commencing work and are also required to contact and inform their client if this estimate is subject to significant change whilst their case develops. Adam Sampson, the chief Legal Ombudsman, recently informed the Daily Telegraph that some firms were not following these rules, however. Whilst Sampson also stated that he believed that changes were needed to the way in which solicitors billed their clients, however, he also noted that the vast majority of firms were doing their utmost to be transparent when informing their clients of their fees and the charges that they were likely to accrue. Sampson also noted that there have been many instances when people have been charged far more than they were initially quoted, nevertheless. As Des Hudson – chief executive of the Law Society – also told the Telegraph, the vast majority of solicitors provide their clients with the information required and that the bulk of clients are content with the service that they receive from the solicitors they instruct. Whilst Quickie Divorce is in no doubt that the vast majority of solicitors adhere to the prescribed codes of conduct, the actions of a small minority are still a real reason for concern. Have you been subjected to suspicious solicitor’s charges? If you have, please leave a comment below.