header-logo header-logo

01 October 2009
Issue: 7387 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Agreement reached on fixed costs for road accidents

Three-tier streamlined process to apply from April 2010

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has brokered an agreement between claimants and insurers to set fixed costs and time limits for road accident claims.

The agreement, reached following a lengthy process of discussions and mediation, sets up a three-tier streamlined process, and will apply from April 2010. Only claims that can be settled for £10,000 or less will be included. Fatal accidents, accidents involving children, and accidents where contributory negligence is alleged, will be excluded.

The agreed fixed costs will be: £400 for Stage 1 (the claimant solicitor completes the claim notification form and sends it to the insurer who may admit/deny liability); £800 for Stage 2 (where liability is admitted, the claimant obtains a medical report and the process continues with offers and negotiation of a settlement to a strict timetable); and £250 paper hearing/£500 oral hearing for Stage 3 (where the parties cannot agree a settlement and the case goes to court).

Craig Butler, solicitor in charge of motor accident claims at Bond Pearce, says: “I’ve breathed a sigh of relief at what’s been agreed. The concern was that, if fees were driven too low, then claimants’ access to independent legal advice would disappear, but this is not a situation where claimant lawyers will have to shut up shop.

“I think there are gains to be made on all sides here. Insurers will make savings because of the reduction in litigation. The claimant may get speedier and fairer settlements, and has retained access to independent legal advice. For claimant’s representatives, the deal is not as bad as we feared, it is sustainable.”

Robert Musgrove, CJC chief executive, adds: “These predictable costs, together with the previously agreed costs and success fees, allow a significant proportion of the less complex injury claims to be resolved more quickly and proportionately.”

Issue: 7387 / Categories: Legal News , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll