header-logo header-logo

20 June 2013 / Theo Richardson-Gool
Issue: 7565 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Too high a price

rexfeatures_1374584a

Plans to reform whiplash claims will marginalise victims, says Theo Richardson-Gool

Later this year, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is likely to come to a decision over its plans to increase the small claims threshold from £1,000 to £5,000, for victims of road traffic accidents. The government has made a commitment to tackle fraudulent whiplash claims and reduce consequent legal costs. More recently, there has been speculation that this limit could be raised as high as £15,000 for all personal injury claims.

By raising the claims threshold, the government believes most whiplash claims will go through the small claims court, and thus prevent rising insurance premiums and reduce costs for defendants (often insurers) when challenging fraudulent whiplash claims. The impetus is for personal injury victims to either represent themselves or bear the costs of legal representation, as opposed to insurers paying for such costs under the current rules.

The MoJ has been spurred on by estimates from insurers that whiplash claims add £90 a year to the average motor insurance policy, although the basis on which the insurance companies have made this

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

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