header-logo header-logo

21 November 2012
Issue: 7539 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Fees to be cut for RTA cases

PI lawyers “appalled” by Ministry of Justice RTA portal proposals

Lawyers’ fees for road traffic accident cases are to plummet from £1,200 to £500 for claims worth up to £10,000, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has said.

The change is due to be introduced to RTA portal claims in April. RTA cases worth up to £25,000 will have a maximum fee of £800.

Fees for employers’ liability and public liability cases—due to be handled through the electronic portal from April onwards—will be capped at £900 for claims worth up to £10,000, and £1,600 for claims worth up to £25,000.

Justice minister Helen Grant says: “We are making changes so claims are handled quickly and efficiently and accident victims with genuine cases can be compensated as soon as possible.

“These changes, along with our wider reforms, will bring more balance to the system, make lawyers’ costs proportionate and in turn create an environment where insurers can pass on savings to their customers through lower premiums.”

She asked for responses to be made by 4 January 2013.

However, Karl Tonks, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), says: “We’re appalled by these proposals, which are wholly damaging to the interests of injured people.

“A fee of £1,600 for an employers’ liability case valued up to £25,000 is not at all reflective of the work involved and serves to cut independent legal advice from the system. Alternatively, injured people will have to pay for legal advice out of the compensation that they need.

“Consultation on how the new employers’ liability and public liability systems will operate is still underway and cases have not been openly costed, so how these fees could have been fairly calculated is a mystery.”

APIL has instructed Kingsley Napley solicitors and issued a letter before action to the MoJ with a view to launching a judicial review over the extension of the RTA claims process. The MoJ has until the end of this week (23 November) to respond.

APIL chief executive Deborah Evans said: “We are extremely concerned that the mechanisms which will make the portal extensions work efficiently cannot be put in place in time.”

Issue: 7539 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll