Judge slams ‘shameless padding’ by injury lawyers in child farm case

District judge accuses personal injury firm of “costs padding” in no win, no fee farm injury case

A no-win, no fee law firm has come under fire from a judge for potentially inflating legal costs in a personal injury case involving a toddler’s minor injury at a Dorset farm. Oxford County Court heard that Express Solicitors, based in Wythenshawe, Greater Manchester, claimed nearly £30,000 in legal costs while securing just £3,600 in damages for a three-year-old boy who suffered a cut lip.

The child was hurt at Sopley Farm, near Christchurch, prompting a claim against the owners. While the farm swiftly agreed to pay compensation, the spotlight shifted to the law firm’s questionable billing practices.

In a stinging judgment, District Judge Richard Lumb highlighted that 14 fee earners logged close to 90 hours of work—far above what’s expected for a low-value personal injury case. Even more concerning was that the hourly rates used were “very significantly higher” than those outlined in the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO) guidelines for Manchester.

“Any objective observer would consider that to be a very odd way for solicitors to conduct business,” the judge remarked, adding that there was “considerable duplication” and “non-progressive work” found in the case files.

Although the £1,860 costs payable by the defendants were capped, Express Solicitors submitted £29,641.80 in incurred costs. Judge Lumb expressed suspicion that the firm had overstated its workload just to hit a capped recovery level and secure a £900 success fee from the boy’s damages.

The judge stopped short of ruling on professional misconduct, but his language was unequivocal: the case involved “costs padding,” and it raised concerns about how contingency-fee cases are billed.

Despite the strong criticism, the firm denied wrongdoing. In a statement, CEO James Maxey said:

“An awful lot of work was done, but the contract limited the total charges to the client to an amount which ultimately the judge approved. The judge awarded the deductions but was somehow unhappy that the costs exceeded the pitifully low fixed costs.”

He added that Express Solicitors had not received any complaint from the family and stood by its client-first approach, insisting that value and transparency were maintained throughout.

The case throws a spotlight on the under-regulated world of no-win, no fee injury claims, and raises uncomfortable questions about whether law firms are exploiting billing practices in low-value child claims to bolster profits.