header-logo header-logo

Referral fees may aid access to justice

20 November 2008
Issue: 7346 / Categories: Legal News , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Profession

Despite the controversy surrounding the payment of large referral fees to solicitors acting on behalf of miners suffering from mesothelioma, such payments may be in the public interest, provided regulation is up to scratch.

Darren Werth, chairman of the Claims Standards Council says that the payment of fees is acceptable, as long as they are reasonable, proportionate and transparent. “Fees are a common and usual part of everyday business and simply put, they should be regarded as marketing expenditure.”

Werth says that it should not be of concern how solicitors market themselves, whether it be by purchasing advertising space or buying in vetted claims, as long as solicitors adhere to their professional rules.

He continues, “Since the changes in the Solicitor’s Referral Code at the end of 2004, the industry has finally enjoyed a welcome period of transparency and stability and that cannot be ignored.

“A ban on referral fees would undoubtedly send the industry back to a time of convoluted business practices full of technical challenges by insurers, which clearly would not be in the public’s best interests. The rules aren’t wrong, it’s the policing that needs to be better,” he adds.

Werth’s comments come in the same week that two solicitors, Jim Beresford and Douglas Smith, are facing allegations of professional misconduct arising from miner’s compensation claims.

It is claimed that their firm, Beresfords, earned £115m from its handling of the scheme in which the average payout to victims was just £2,000.

If found guilty, the solicitors could be struck off .

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll