In the recent two cases, we secured the following:

• £6,500 in wasted costs - The claimant pursued a weak claim. The relevant works were completed within a few months; negotiations were repeatedly frustrated by unclear pleadings and ongoing issues regarding notice. The claimant continued to pursue fast‑track level offers throughout, rejecting reasonable proposals and requests to withdraw their claim and thereby unnecessarily escalating what should have been a straightforward dispute.
• Our submissions led to the claimant’s solicitors making a £2,000 offer in an attempt to avoid a likely wasted costs order. This was another plainly weak claim, compounded by the claimant’s failure to comply with court orders, which unnecessarily escalated costs and reinforced the strength of our position.

These outcomes demonstrate the value of strategic, proactive use of the cost rules in disrepair litigation. 

Where does the court’s power come from? 

Section 51(6) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 gives the court authority to disallow costs or order a legal representative to personally pay wasted costs where their conduct has caused unnecessary expense.  

What counts as wasted costs? 

Section 51(7) defines ‘wasted costs’ as costs incurred because of any improper, unreasonable, or negligent act or omission by a legal representative, or costs that it would be unreasonable to expect a party to bear in light of such conduct. This ensures that innocent parties (tenants or landlords) are not left carrying the financial burden of avoidable litigation activity. 

How are wasted costs orders made? 

CPR 46.8 sets out the procedure for making wasted costs orders against solicitors or other legal representatives. Before any order is made, the court must: 

• establish a prima facie case; and  

• allow the representative a fair opportunity to respond.

The court must be satisfied that the conduct caused unnecessary costs and that it is just to impose personal liability. A witness statement from the landlords’ solicitors will be required to set out the history.

Costs for unreasonable behaviour in the small claims track 

Although the small claims track usually limits cost recovery, CPR 27.14(2)(g) provides an important exception. Where a party has behaved unreasonably, the court may award ‘such further costs as it considers appropriate.’

Caselaw confirms that unreasonable behaviour is conduct which cannot be reasonably explained, going beyond simple mistakes. 

In housing disrepair claims, unreasonable behaviour may include: 

• Pursuing weak or unsubstantiated claims 

• Repeatedly frustrating access 

• Failing to comply with court directions 

• Conduct causing unnecessary hearings or procedural delays 

When applied effectively, these CPR provisions can unlock meaningful cost recovery in cases where costs are normally heavily limited. 

Need advice on recovering costs? 

If you are dealing with an unreasonable disrepair claim or believe unnecessary costs have been incurred due to the actions of a claimant or their lawyers, our specialist disrepair team at Anthony Collins is here to help.  We can guide you through your options and work with you to safeguard your organisation’s position. Please contact me for more details.