Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
In July 1995, a change to the law allowed lawyers to enter into conditional fee agreements with their clients for the first time. Those schemes are commonly referred to as "No Win, No Fee". The phrase is potentially misleading, however, because it can imply that the client will be liable for no costs whatsoever. In fact, under such schemes, the client could be liable for one or more of: disbursements, indemnity insurance or the other side’s legal costs in the event of a lost case.
If they use the claim "No Win, No Fee" or similar, marketers should ensure that the commitment is genuinely without cost (Claims Direct, July 2000, and Savas & Savage Solicitors, 9 June 2004). Marketers who require payment for their services may still use the claim "No Win, No Fee" if they explain the client’s liability for certain costs. That explanation, for example "Subject to insurance. Other costs are be payable", may appear in a footnote if it is asterisked to the “No Win, No Fee” claim. Charges may be made by marketers or by any firm to whom the client’s claim is referred. The marketer should ensure that all such potential charges are taken into account when indicating costs to their client. Generally, though, “No Win, No Fee” should not be used unless the service is genuinely free of cost to the claimant.
More information and a list of suitable qualifying statements can be found in the CAP Help Note on “No Win, No Fee” Claims.
Marketers who offer a "No Win, No Fee" service but charge so-called high rates if the case is successful do not need to state the fee upfront (Claims Direct, November 2000). The ad should not mislead in other ways and should not, for example, encourage frivolous or spurious claims (See ‘Litigation: Specious claims’).
Marketers should be mindful of the impression given by the ad. Sometimes the placement or wording of ads can mislead the intended audience. In 2005, the ASA upheld a complaint about the placement of a solicitor’s telephone number among other helplines. Because there was no clear distinction between the solicitor’s telephone number and other numbers offering impartial, non-commercial helplines, the ASA considered the placement of the ad was misleading (Hospital Information Services, 14 September 2005).
Claims Management Firms are regulated by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) under the Compensation Act 2006 and are required to use the claim “No Win, No Fee” in accordance with the CAP Help Note on “No Win, No Fee”.
See “Help Note on “No Win No fee” Claims
See ‘Litigation: Claims Management’.
Last modified : 03 August 2010