London city council's expensive decision to hire a high-priced Toronto law firm was not run by city lawyers beforehand.

The Corporate Services Committee also learned on Tuesday that at least two of the councillors represented by the Toronto firm never read or signed the contract.

Jim Barber, the solicitor for London, says "The fees were in this circumstance reasonable based on the retainer agreement that had been entered into."

Barber told the committee the $97,000 legal bill to defend the mayor and six councillors during the ombudsman's investigation was fair, based on the contract with a Toronto law firm.

But he was quick to point out that the terms of that contract were never run by him first, "I would have been prepared to offer advice had somebody consulted me. But no one did, in relation to the retainer."

Councillor Joe Swan was among those investigated by the ombudsman and says he assumed Barber had taken part in the negotiations, so he didn't.

"At no time was I consulted on fees, scope of service. I guess I had assumed that was undertaken by the legal staff.  You are now telling me Mr. Barber you were not consulted?" asked Swan during the meeting.

So who negotiated the contract that included a fees and a workload that ultimately reached $97,000?

With the mayor's executive assistant watching from the gallery, Councillor Bud Polhill suggested Joe Fontana may have done it - but he didn't see or sign the contract for the legal services he used.

"I didn't sign the contract. I am not sure who did. Probably the mayor on our behalf as councillors. I don't know, it wasn't me," says Polhill.

Polhill didn't feel it was important to read the contract, which would have indicated the upset limit.

An upset limit in the contract could have capped expenses at a lower amount.

"No we didn't know what the upset limit might be," says Polhill.

Londoners may never learn the details of that contract, nor see a breakdown of the $97,000 bill, as both are protected by solicitor-client privilege.