header-logo header-logo

Whiplash backlash

13 December 2012
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Injured will have to go “head to head” in court

The small-claims threshold for whiplash and road-traffic claims could be raised from £1,000 to £5,000, under Ministry of Justice (MoJ) proposals to curb the number of fraudulent claims. The MoJ consultation, Reducing the Number and Costs of Whiplash Claims, also proposes setting up independent medical panels to determine whether claims are genuine.

According to James Dalton, head of motor and liability insurance at the Association of British Insurers, 1,500 whiplash claims are made each day, adding £90 to the average annual motor insurance premium. He says: “More effective diagnosis of whiplash will help genuine claimants get paid out quickly and reduce the scope for fraud.”

However, Iain Stark, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers, says the proposals “could spell disaster for both consumers and the legal profession. Access to justice will be the ultimate victim. I foresee a whole new unregulated industry being created to handle claims below £5,000. Furthermore, the courts will be flooded with litigants in person, which will put huge strain on their already limited resources”. He adds: “It is said that we all pay an extra £90 on our insurance because of whiplash claims and so the government must hold insurers to account if premiums do not fall as a result. And maybe the authorities should do more to prosecute those bringing fraudulent claims.”

Claimant lawyers also oppose the plans. Mark Grover, chief executive of personal injury firm Antony Hodari & Co, says: “Though fraud is a problem, the vast majority of claims are legitimate; raising the small-claims limit will just mean that an injured person will have to go head to head in court against the insurer’s lawyer. How many of us would want to do that?”

Issue: 7542 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll