header-logo header-logo

27 July 2012
Issue: 7524 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

RTA portal plans hit the skids

Fenn report recommends a fuller review of the road traffic accident process

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plans to expand the role of the road traffic accident (RTA) portal for RTA claims need further review, according to government-commissioned research.

Next April, the MoJ is due to extend the portal to include all personal injury claims valued at less than £25,000, including employer and public liability cases.

Professor Paul Fenn, of Nottingham University, compared data from three claimant firms and two defendant insurers before and after the May 2010 introduction of the portal scheme for claims valued below £10,000.

He found an average six per cent reduction in damages awarded to injured claimants and a fall of three to four per cent in average costs awarded to claimant solicitors. There was a five to seven per cent rise in the speed of settlements, but half of all cases dropped out of the portal system altogether.

He recommended that the MoJ undertake a fuller, joint review of the RTA process and the fixed recoverable costs scheme.

Tom Jones, partner at Thompsons Solicitors, says the report shows there is “no justification” for extending the scheme, and accuses the government of being “hell-bent” on continuing with its plans.

The chief executive of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, Deborah Evans, says “the government must now stop and think rather than extend the portal in haste”.

Don Clarke, president of the Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL), says FOIL supports Prof Fenn’s call for a joint review.

However, he added: “We do not support the call for a delay of a further year.

“The report has been so delayed in its release that the timeframe has already expired, with the portal having been in operation now for more than two years. The government should move to fix and control costs as planned and there should be no further delays.”

An MoJ spokesperson says: “The government is reviewing fixed costs as part of its commitment to extend the RTA protocol and has undertaken an evidence-gathering exercise that has included a call for evidence and workshops with the major claimant personal injury solicitor law firms, insurers, and the Law Society, to examine some of the issues identified in Prof Fenn’s report.”

Issue: 7524 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll