Costs Chaos: Is detailed assessment worth it?

The case arose following the death of Roger Steven Howe in 2020, whose will excluded his daughter, Jenna Howe, as a beneficiary. Probate proceedings led to the appointment of a professional administrator of the estate pending the outcome of the dispute. As is standard practice with professional administrators, the administrator was authorised by the court to charge their reasonable professional fees for their work.

After the probate proceedings were resolved, the named executors under the will, Tina Tucker and Rosina Howe, challenged the professional administrator's costs claiming overcharging and poor performance. The professional administrator's costs totalled £147,436.33, involving both contentious and non-contentious work. 

The executors challenge led to a detailed assessment under section 71 (3) of the Solicitors Act 1974, where nearly every aspect of the bill was disputed in a 67-page document. After 9 days in court, Costs Judge Leonard ultimately assessed the bill at £129,686.76, which was an 88% recovery rate for the professional administrator.

The claimants, were found to have pursued the detailed assessment with a combative approach, rejecting settlement offers and persisting with proceedings unnecessarily. This conduct was deemed unreasonable by the court, which ordered them to pay the professional administrator's costs of the detailed assessment on an indemnity basis, amounting to £132,400 in addition to the assessed estate administration costs of £129,686.76. 

This case highlights the importance of proportionality in estate disputes. Beneficiaries should carefully assess the risks of pursuing detailed assessments, and acts as a stark warning to engage constructively with settlement offers. 

This case also raises questions about whether the detailed assessment process is fit for purpose. While the system is designed to ensure scrutiny and accountability for legal costs, the process can often spiral into a costly and time-consuming ordeal which can make the process counter-productive. 

Ultimately, Tucker v Howe is a cautionary tale for beneficiaries and executors, emphasising the need for a pragmatic approach to disputes over costs. Without careful consideration, the financial consequences can far outweigh the sums contested.

For information, or advice, please contact Rebecca Stapleton in our Contentious Probate team.