A solicitor can agree to continue to act for you on the understanding that you will discharge fees from your financial settlement. This can go wrong if the intention is to sell the former matrimonial home but the client later decides to stay in the property (particularly if the property is the only asset).
There are different ways to document an agreement like this, one of which is a Sears Tooth agreement which is not often used whereas a more common agreement is simply a solicitor and client agreement where the client agrees to pay the outstanding fees from the settlement, usually by any settlement monies being paid directly to the solicitor and the balance being forwarded to the client.
There can be an informal arrangements where the solicitor and client ''just agree'' that a bill will be delivered at the end of the case when the settlement is received. This does not assuage the solicitor of his/her responsibility to keep you informed as to the level of your costs or provide you with revised costs estimates.
Charles, this is a case where the we got divorced and then the ex went back to court to say he doesn''t remember signing the financial settlement. Now his solicitor is not charging him fees but will collect from the settlement. Is this not contrary to 58A? Does 58A not prohibit this altogether? Thanks so much.
It would be prohibited if it was conducted under a CFA but it seems unlikely that this is the case. There is no problem agreeing to postpone payment of fees until settlement is received although this is foolish if there is any prospect of losing as the client will have no money from which to pay their solicitor.