header-logo header-logo

13 December 2012
Issue: 7542 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Whiplash backlash

Injured will have to go “head to head” in court

The small-claims threshold for whiplash and road-traffic claims could be raised from £1,000 to £5,000, under Ministry of Justice (MoJ) proposals to curb the number of fraudulent claims. The MoJ consultation, Reducing the Number and Costs of Whiplash Claims, also proposes setting up independent medical panels to determine whether claims are genuine.

According to James Dalton, head of motor and liability insurance at the Association of British Insurers, 1,500 whiplash claims are made each day, adding £90 to the average annual motor insurance premium. He says: “More effective diagnosis of whiplash will help genuine claimants get paid out quickly and reduce the scope for fraud.”

However, Iain Stark, chairman of the Association of Costs Lawyers, says the proposals “could spell disaster for both consumers and the legal profession. Access to justice will be the ultimate victim. I foresee a whole new unregulated industry being created to handle claims below £5,000. Furthermore, the courts will be flooded with litigants in person, which will put huge strain on their already limited resources”. He adds: “It is said that we all pay an extra £90 on our insurance because of whiplash claims and so the government must hold insurers to account if premiums do not fall as a result. And maybe the authorities should do more to prosecute those bringing fraudulent claims.”

Claimant lawyers also oppose the plans. Mark Grover, chief executive of personal injury firm Antony Hodari & Co, says: “Though fraud is a problem, the vast majority of claims are legitimate; raising the small-claims limit will just mean that an injured person will have to go head to head in court against the insurer’s lawyer. How many of us would want to do that?”

Issue: 7542 / 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