header-logo header-logo

Fixed costs for clinical negligence?

04 May 2017
Issue: 7744 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers attack government proposals but survey shows overwhelming public support

Government proposals for fixed costs in clinical negligence claims worth up to £25,000 would make only the most straightforward cases commercially viable, leaving many vulnerable patients without a legal remedy, lawyers say.

About 34% of the £1.5bn paid out by the NHS in clinical negligence costs in 2015/16 went on legal costs. The Department of Health (DoH) proposals are contained in its consultation, Fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence claims, which closed on 2 May.

In its official response to the consultation, law firm Hodge Jones & Allen said the proposals were ‘based on inaccurate cost estimates, fanciful time analysis and flawed logic, including the false premise that lower value claims are by nature less complex, the view that sufficient expert evidence in such cases can be obtained for under £1,200 and that particulars of claim in complex cases can be drafted by junior fee earners’.

Association of Personal Injury Lawyers president Neil Sugarman said: ‘Taking an axe to how much the Department of Health pays does nothing to tackle the factors which drive costs, such as the ludicrously long waiting times for the recovery of medical records, or arduous expert reports.’

However, a survey commissioned by the Medical Protection Society (MPS) found that three-quarters of the public want the government to reduce the amount of money lawyers can claim from the NHS in legal costs, and 81% supported ‘fixed costs’.

The MPS has called on the government to go further to preserve NHS funds, and to impose fixed costs on cases valued at up to £250,000.

Emma Hallinan, director of claims at the MPS, said: ‘In lower value claims it is not unusual to see lawyers’ costs exceed the compensation awarded to claimants.

‘In a recent case involving a delayed diagnosis of a pituitary tumour which settled at £3,250, legal costs of £72,320 were sought. That was reduced to £24,600 after a provisional assessment last summer, which found that the bill was disproportionate.’

Any official response to the consultation will be decided by the new government formed after the 8 June election.

Issue: 7744 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

An extra bit is being added to case citations to show the pecking order of the judges concerned. Former district judge Stephen Gold has the details, in his ‘Civil way’ column in this week’s NLJ

The Labour government’s position on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is not yet clear

back-to-top-scroll