PIBULJ
PI Industry update: referral fees, small claims limits, general damages and discount rates - Tim Kevan
16/08/12. The personal injury industry is in a state of extreme flux and this article highlights just a few of the recent changes of which everyone should be aware. For anyone who’s been living on the planet Mars, then they may not have heard that the payment of referral fees for cases is going to be banned from next April. This will be regulated for solicitors by the SRA and you might think that since it’s only a few months away there would be very clear guidelines as to what’s what and how to comply etc. Not so, sadly and solicitors are still waiting to see exactly what the SRA will decide. Indeed, at this stage they are...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/studiocasper
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
How to Litigate and Win an RTA Case with an Allegation of Fraud - Andrew Mckie, Clerksroom
10/08/12. Insurance fraud is on the increase. Undetected general insurance claims fraud total £2.1billion a year adding on average £50 to the annual costs individual policyholder’s policy, on average, each year (Source: Insurance Fraud Bureau).
This is a problem not only for insurance companies but for the Claimant Solicitors who represent Claimants, involved in these type of collisions, where a case has to be dropped due to an allegation of fraud or in the rare instance that a finding of fraud is made at Trial. This results in wasted costs for the Claimant’s Solicitor who has sometimes expedited considerable expense to progress the matter to Trial in both the fee earner’s time and disbursements that are unlikely to be recovered from the Claimant’s ATE insurer or the Claimant himself.
In my experience, it is not unusual to see a Claimant’s base profit costs for an RTA case to Trial with an allegation of fraud to exceed £15,000. The question therefore is, how does one ensure that an RTA case, with an allegation of fraud, can be given the best possible opportunity to succeed at Trial?
This article will look at both investigations that can be undertaken where an allegation of fraud has been made, as well as tactical and procedural considerations for RTA claims where an allegation of fraud has been made or intimated by the Defendant.
Image ©iStockphoto.com/bagi1998
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
August 2012 - Industry News
Judiciary of England and Wales
Written Ministerial Statement on the implementation of Part 2 of LAPSO Act 2012...
Politics Home
MoJ publishes report evaluating new low value RTA claims process...
Ministry of Justice
Costs lawyers predict that Jackson reforms will lead to an increase in disputes between solicitors and their own clients...
Legal Futures
NHS pays out £1.2bn in litigation bills in one year...
Health Service Journal
Four arrested in crash-for cash fraud investigation...
Insurance Post
Never Say Never: the Import of the Fairclough Homes v Summers Decision - Helen Tinkler, BPP & Central Law Training
06/08/12. The recent decision in Fairclough Homes v Summers [2012 UKSC 26] has provided a ideal opportunity for all parties to consider tactics. Although the overriding objective (CPR 1.1) enjoins the parties to co-operation (see Hertsmere Primary Care Trust v Administrators of Balasubramanium’s Estate [2005] 3 All ER 274), this presupposes that the parties are playing fair. The reality is that the parties, particularly in personal injury claims, are enjoined in a fight. So, how might the Fairclough decision referee future legal fisticuffs?
The number of claims now scrutinised for fraud has increased many times over and will no doubt continue given the 18% rise in the number of personal injury claims made arising from RTA’s despite the 11% fall in the number of the accidents – according to the actuarial profession (July 2012).
The rules of fair play, otherwise known as the Civil Procedure Rules, may be pored over more keenly by parties keen to get the “ref” on side. One weapon in the CPR armoury is an...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/webphotographeer
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
When Is an Accident Just an Accident? - Julie Carlisle, Henmans LLP
01/08/12. In a local paper in May, it was reported that a young boy was involved in an incident with a bus which ended with him being airlifted to hospital. The journalist used the word “accident” to describe the event. So far, so understandable. One reader however was so incensed that he was prompted to leave an online comment which read:
“Accidents don’t just happen. Someone is to blame for this wee lad’s crushed foot”
Whilst the commentator’s very human response to the news of a small boy suffering a painful injury is admirable, why is his instant reaction to assume that someone has to be to blame? Or that an accident cannot ever be precisely that – an accident pure and simple for which no-one can be held responsible?
This sort of comment is in danger of...
Image ©iStockphoto.com/RapidEye
Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...
![Appeal judge rules that credit hire company has no costs liability following a finding of fundamental dishonesty in personal injury case: RSA v. Fastrack Solutions Limited [2023] 4 WLUK 92 - David Bowden, Erimus Chambers](/content/images/resized/images/stories/carkeys_72_72.jpg)
