Lawyers tell woeful tales about insurers unjustly prolonging litigation but experts can delay proceedings too, says David Locke
- The case for independent expert adjudication.
- Reducing delays & costs through early disclosure.
In the now seemingly annual consultation regarding the cost of civil litigation, tales of legendary claimant solicitors’ fees are countered with myths about insurers and their panel solicitors who deliberately set out to prolong litigation. The latter is a curious accusation, since there seems to be little to be could be gained by from such a tactic. Presumably there are very few cases, if any, that are discontinued as a result of the mere passage of time, whereas there is no doubt that costs and interest increase with delay. It therefore seems counter-intuitive for insurers to delay settling any reasonable claim. Nonetheless, without pausing to opine on the motivation, it is frequently said, and with some vigour, that proper admissions are withheld sometimes until the door of court.
It is surely too simplistic to say by way of serious contribution to this debate that if defendants just admitted liability
