Irama v Formark
Record + CommentaryPoint 5: Costs Escalation: Nearly £500,000 Costs in a £65,000 Rent Dispute
Summary
Irama reports that the underlying dispute concerned an alleged rent debt of
approximately £65,000, yet the proceedings have generated nearly £500,000 in costs.
Irama contends that the scale of costs is disproportionate to the substantive issue in
dispute and that procedural tactics and billing practices materially contributed to the
escalation of costs.
The purpose of this point is to set out the procedural timeline that drove cost
accumulation and to link that escalation to costs schedules and costs orders on the court
record.
Evidence
Irama relies on the following categories of evidence:
- Costs schedules and costs orders generated in the proceedings
- Procedural history demonstrating the drivers of cost escalation
- Clearly labelled external sources, including public employee commentary on Glassdoor, relied upon for contextual commentary only
Commentary
Under this same heading, Irama also draws attention to public employee
commentary published on the reputable platform Glassdoor, together with
external accounts describing billing pressures within Irwin Mitchell as a
potential systemic risk factor.
Irama requests that this issue be subject to timely institutional review before
further harm occurs.
An article reported that a former employee of Irwin Mitchell experienced
suicidal thoughts. The matter includes reference to the Solicitors Regulation
Authority in connection with disciplinary proceedings.
This material is presented as commentary supported by sources, and not as a
finding of misconduct.