header-logo header-logo

Whiplash reforms postponed (again)

21 April 2020
Issue: 7883 / Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Personal injury , Insurance / reinsurance
printer mail-detail
Reforms to whiplash claims are to be delayed for a third time, to April 2021, due to COVID-19, the Lord Chancellor has confirmed

The reforms would increase the small claims track limit to £5,000 (making costs unrecoverable for many more claims), introduce a fixed tariff of damages and ban the making or accepting of a settlement without a medical report. The start date had previously been extended to August 2020.

In a written statement to the Commons this week, Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland said: ‘It is apparent that the current COVID-19 pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on the medical, legal and insurance sectors.

‘As a result, the government… agrees that now is not the time to press ahead with significant transformational change.’

Association of Personal Injury Lawyers president Gordon Dalyell said: ‘Delay is welcome, but another arbitrary date for these reforms to be implemented is meaningless unless critical issues are addressed.

‘Without alternative dispute resolution the portal will leave unrepresented injured people in a very vulnerable position if liability or the value of the claim is disputed. Injured people will be expected instead to switch to the small claims track, which is simply not designed for these types of disputes. But before this could even be considered a viable solution, issues like the need for explicit permission from the court to allow expert evidence must be resolved.’

Law Society president Simon Davis said he welcomed the decision but would continue to ‘challenge the government to ensure the portal is fit for purpose and those with low-value road traffic injuries have access to justice.

‘There are still important policy decisions to be made about how the portal will work in practice, and solicitors―for both claimants and defendants―as well as the general public will need time to adapt to these changes.’

NLJ columnist Dominic Regan said: ‘The supreme irony is that insurers will see a slump in claims because hardly anyone is driving. There is much to do. Judges are very keen to see ADR as part of the reform package. Might it be resurrected? It should be.

Anthony Baker, President of FOIL and Partner at Plexus said: ‘With the current UK wide lockdown it is welcome, albeit unsurprising news that the Government has announced that the Whiplash Reform Programme will be delayed from August 2020 to April 2021. 

The pandemic has had an unprecedented impact on the insurance, legal, judicial and medico-legal sector and everyone’s priorities must lie in elsewhere in getting through this turbulent period.  The industry will welcome this news and the delay will allow more time for the outstanding required work by the CPRC and MIB to be completed and for insurers and representatives to fully prepare operationally for the reforms within the Official Injury Portal.  

The Lord Chancellor has confirmed that the Government is still committed to delivering the reforms which is again positive news at a time of such uncertainty.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll