header-logo header-logo

19 March 2014
Issue: 7599 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Jackson: impact on experts

Survey reports reduction in workloads & experience of “bullying”

Expert witnesses have voiced their concerns over the impact of the Jackson reforms, including “bullying” solicitors and reduced fees.

In a survey by legal training company Bond Solon, experts said their fees were falling, with some solicitors trying to “haggle”. They also reported difficulty in setting an overall fee for work from the outset as this in itself often required a lot of research. 

One psychiatrist has experienced a 60% reduction in his workload, with about 30% of quotes now turned down by solicitors, often where the patient bringing the claim had a complex pre-existing medical history. He has noticed an increase in agencies asking him to see clients without prior access to their notes, which he refuses to do.

“In these cases the history needs to be recorded in detail and there are complex issues to discuss in relation to causation,” he says. 

“In most cases the size of the claim is too small to warrant the cost of my report but I am not in the position to cut corners as these are the cases most likely to be challenged. In contrast, clients with no pre-existing psych history can still be seen within acceptable budget. This obviously does raise issues about equitable access to justice/compensation.”

A cardiologist reports: “Solicitors are bullying and even threatening experts that cases will collapse and it is our fault if deadlines aren’t met.” He says he sat up until 3am with a fever to finish a report when he had flu after the instructing solicitor told him he would be held responsible for costs if he was late.

A consultant says: “Cases are poorly defended or argued because of time limits as well as cost limits, medical experts are moving out of my area back into private or NHS work because of draconian time limits and fears of litigation against them if not complied with.”

However, he added that he personally wrote to the judge to ask for more time in his case, after the instructing solicitor refused, and was given an extra six weeks to write his report.

NLJ will publish the second of its exclusive online litigation trends surveys in partnership with the London Solicitors Litigation Association in early April, a year after Jackson.

 

Issue: 7599 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll