header-logo header-logo

06 March 2013
Issue: 7551 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

RTA portal: the latest

Justice secretary sets dates & confirms cuts

Fixed costs for road traffic accident (RTA) portal cases are to be reduced at the end of April, while the expansions to the portal scheme will take place in July, Justice Secretary Chris Grayling has confirmed.

As well as reducing fixed costs, the reforms include expanding the RTA portal scheme to claims for up to £25,000, and extending it to employers’ liability and public liability claims.

Fixed costs for claims below £10,000 will be cut from between £400–£1,200 to between £200–£500.

Claimant solicitors will be able to recover fixed costs of £200-£800 for claims valued at between £10,000–£25,000, £300–£900 for employers’ and public liability claims up to £10,000, and £300–£1,600 for employers’ and public liability claims up to £25,000.

Last week, the High Court rejected an attempt by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) and the Motor Accident Solicitors Society (MASS) to bring a judicial review against the decision to cut fixed costs.

APIL and MASS argued the decision was unfair because the government consulted insurers but not claimant lawyers and those representing victims when it reached its decision.

However, Lord Justice Elias said it was not the government’s duty to give equal weight to both sides.

“If people deem it to be unfair that is a matter for the ballot box not the court,” he said.

Rod Evans, president of the Forum of Insurance Lawyers, said: “It is pleasing to have a decision that ends the hiatus which has gripped the industry.”

However, MASS and APIL said in a joint statement: “This is a dark day for people who are injured through no fault of their own.”

They warned that injury victims may now find it “impossible to obtain independent legal representation” as a result of the judgment, and that negotiations would “inevitably be biased in favour of insurers”.

According to a Ministry of Justice impact assessment published last week, claimant personal injury lawyers will lose £200m per year when reductions to fixed recoverable costs for RTA portal claims up to £10,000 are introduced.

It stated that if caseloads remained at existing levels then claimant solicitors would lose about £200m in income, as well as “possible” loss of income from lower conditional fee agreement fees. It said the savings to insurers could be passed on to consumers through lower premiums.

About 750,000 claims valued at £10,000 or less were made last year, accounting for 90% of RTA claims.

Issue: 7551 / 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