RTA portal launch runs into trouble
The new road traffic accident (RTA) information exchange, which is designed to handle hundreds of thousands of low-value RTA claims, has been dogged by problems since its belated introduction last week, the Gazette has learned.
Many solicitors have still not received access codes for the new RTA claims portal, which is intended to act as a secure electronic data exchange for claims and was introduced as part of Ministry of Justice reforms to speed up claims and reduce their cost.
Meanwhile, delayed computer testing has meant that some solicitors cannot take a claim from start to finish using the portal.
Nicholas O’Neill, a partner at national firm The Specter Partnership, described the development of the portal as ‘like the blind leading the blind’ and said he has written to the MoJ to complain. O’Neill said his firm has not received login details despite requesting them four months ago. ‘The portal people have been fobbing us off forever, saying it’s all in hand,’ he said. ‘Our entire organisation has to be on the money for our clients, yet we can’t even log in to the system.’
Solicitors can access the portal via their web browser, or via their existing case management software if it has been upgraded. In each case, user IDs and passwords are required.
Solicitors who opted to plug their existing case management software into the portal – typically those who handle a high volume of claims – had not received user IDs as the Gazette went to press. Fraser Fundell, chief executive at Insurance Database Services Limited (IDSL), which manages the portal, blamed a ‘slight glitch’ and said that user IDs will be sent out shortly.
Solicitors who opted to use the portal via their web browser – typically those handling a small volume of low-value RTA claims – said that while they have received a user ID, they cannot log in to the system. Fundell said that solicitors who have user IDs should be able to access the portal if they follow the instructions on their registration email or call the support line.
At present, solicitors who access the portal via their case management software can only complete ‘stage one’ of the claims process, where they submit a claim to an insurer. However, they cannot use the portal to progress the claim to ‘stage two’, where, if the insurer accepts liability, the solicitor and insurer agree on the level of damages.
Fundell said that while stage one testing is complete, stage two testing by claimant solicitors has not yet been completed, but should be signed off by Monday.
A statement on the portal information website, rtapiclaimsprocess.org.uk, reads: ‘Due to a large volume of late portal registrations, processing is taking longer than normal. Consequently it may be several working days after registration before user-id and passwords are received.’
Meanwhile, a survey of 56 companies from the insurance industry by national firm Berrymans Lace Mawer in early April revealed that 63% were ‘unsure’ about whether the new portal would be an effective means of processing claims. Some 28% were confident that it would, while 9% thought it would not.
The new process is for RTA personal injury claims between £1,000 and £10,000. It was scheduled to go live on 6 April, but its introduction was pushed back to 30 April.
The MoJ said the running of the system was a matter for the industry as the portal is an industry-led IT solution.
Comments
What did we really expect...
I suspect the reason they didnt want to delay the start any further was because of the huge pressure to ensure it started on time.
I understand Aviva are not entering into the new system - is this correct?
Moj!!
Months of specualtion,anticipation, the dizzying highs, the terrifying lows!!! and for what!! something that left us all feeling dissapointed and deflated!!...No I am not talking about the Millenium!! I am talking about the MoJ refroms!!! thanks guys..!! if anything you have made I.T departments up and down the country look blameless for once!!!!
NEW RTA REFORMS
I totally agree it was rushed through and i believe this system is a complete farce and should be scrapped with immediate affect i spent an hour going through a form with a client to tell her i cant
process your claim because i cant get onto the system and advised her that i cant arrange the repairs or a hire car this must now be done by your insurers.
Now this client will lose her No Claims will be faced no doubt with a dodgy repair and will be given a
rubbish courtesy car and at some point when i can process her claim evenually she receive a token amount for her injuries! Because god forbid she may actually be injuried.
If i calulated the time i spent on that case to inaffect doing nothing the cost so far would be at £650 and ive not sent out our paperwork (because the SRA need something to do). Ive not put the case on the system because i cant get on it ! Ive not done anything to help her (because i dont get paid for it and the system not designed for all that client care) so shes without a car and her car stuck on the drive.
Now if this is designed to assist none fault victims receive there compensation quicker i will eat my hat its an absolute JOKE.
BY THE END OF THIS CASE I WOULD HAVE INCURRED AT LEAST 3K IN COSTS AND A VERY UNHAPPY VICTIM!
Progress i dont think so! its totally unfair to every one but the insurers and the people who have received very health pay insentives to implement this abortion of a new system!
MOJ RTA PROCESS
I do not understand why this new system has been brought in. The net effect is a saving to the insurers and what for, they will no doubt reduce the costs of everyone's motor insurance, like hell they will. How is this new system any better than the RTA fixed fee system pre 30.4.2010, save that Solicitors have been mugged by the Ministry of Justice in the name of access to justice to do it all for nothing. In economic recession, this is not needed at all.
The whole system is a complete farce and what is more its been forced upon Solicitors, the effect of which is they really cannot be properly paid for the work actually required. At best they can earn £3000.00 profit costs and not before a potential risky quantum assessment in which there is at least 50% risk they will receive a cost order which will most possibly write off all the costs they earn from stage 1 and 2, with Counsels fees to pay for the pleasure of it.
How are Solicitors to be paid for contentious hire claims and PAV claims, oh, of course there are industry agreements outside the scheme to settle them, what a joke that is.
Solicitors should really gang up on the powers that be and simply refuse to deal with the new claims process as it simply is wrong in practice and grossly effects the heart of a Solicitors business, RTA claims are by far the most important part of a solicitors income stream. We should not allow this to happen, when there is no need for it.
Pointint the finger?
1. Use of the portal is not mandatory. You must only ensure you comply with the requirements of the DPA when sending info electronically.
2. MASS, APIL, FOIL and the Law Society were are part of the pre-development consultation and remain contributors to the Portal Steering Committee. If you don't like the mean, ask who cooked it.
Pointing the finger? (with spelling corrections)
1. Use of the portal is not mandatory. You must only ensure you comply with the requirements of the DPA when sending info electronically.
2. MASS, APIL, FOIL and the Law Society were are part of the pre-development consultation and remain contributors to the Portal Steering Committee. If you don't like the meal, ask who cooked it.
3. If you feel you can't follow the new scheme for any reason, ask the Law Society/SRA for guidance (but my advice? Don't hold your breath)
Manual website user here...
Manual website user here... finally received log on details 4 days after the system went live.. entered admin screen to set up the rest of the firm and was greeted by "Admin screen unavailable". Very helpful.
If this was an MOD / Government project there would be an inquiry. Word of warning to all... when you tender and offer to the lowest bidder - this is what you get!
No communication, no management, no direction - basically no clue.
Sorry Mr Client....we have no idea how to progress your claim!
...is the way we are having to deal with all new clients who are seeking advice and progression of a claim following the 'new rules'. It is getting more and more frustrating by the day. Not only am I having to incur a massive £10,000 to update our CMS to comply, but the damn thing isn't working from the MOJ end.
It is absolutely ridiculous that we as lawyers are having to put up with this situation. We are employed to advise our clients and act in their best interst but this system is preventing any advice being given because we simply cannot run the claims.
I now have a number of claims piling up and waiting to be put onto the system. These are all effectively at a standstill.
No emails are responded to regarding the required log on details despite the fact that these were requested 3-4 months ago.
We really need to be making a stand.
From a very perplexed and dissatisfied PI Lawyer!
Difficult times - but it is a government project after all...
We have to face the fact that government projects are beasts which rarely run smooth, if ever.
You only need to look at the NPfIT or NIRs Programmes for the NHS and HMRC. However, compared to those Programmes the pain on this one is mild considering.
Yes, logins are late, yes comms was dreadful (and continues to be), yes software is changing on a regular basis but the system will not be scrapped and we all have to work with it (A2A or Portal).
Our systems are plugged into the A2A solution and it works (stage 1 for now at least) - CNFs are flowing out and notifications back in. It was a pain waiting for logins but we processed claims offline (completed the CNFs which takes time; they are not instant) and looked for alternative ways as risk mitigation management (PGP email, SafeDrop, etc).
I worked extensively on the NPfIT and you have to work with the ambiguity and roll with the punches - I'm not excusing the delivery of this project but accepting it as typical to be expected.
For us, CNFs we're stock piled for the days, we waited for the login IDs and everyone could/can do the same (not forever mind and you need to determine your escape routes/methods for the risks - these should have been in your planning from the beginning and hopefully not when things start to go wrong). You can still service the Client - hire, as a gent mentions, isn't instructed out of this system?.
I suppose my main point is that it has been a difficult, ambiguous project (and will continue to be into Stage 2) and if you are lucky enough to have Project Management working for you that understands that - the road will be rocky but ultimately will work.
This system is here to stay and we still have Stage 2 to come but we just have get on with it as best we can - that, in my experience of government projects, is the best we can hope for.
Rules and process
What I find confusing is the assumption everyone made (and continues to make) that the portal is the required way to comply with the rules. Using the portal is not mandated by the rules. The rules only require communication of the forms and associated content to be by electronic means. The MoJ has officially confirmed that the portal is not the only way this can be done and simply asserts that the portal is the only way it knows of that is DPA compliant. If the portal does not have Ts&Cs of use and has no SLA, how can any firm be certain what hey are doing now in the portal is DPA compliant? Have all firms given their clients a DPA warning that their info will be held in a commercial portal? Communication by PGP email direct with the insurer is an alternative to the portal not a workaround.
New reforms
I have recently spoken to at least 5 different insurers about the New reforms and it was amazing
to hear that none of them had a clue what i was talking about and i was asked to send a letter of claim in the old way and they would deal with the claim as liability wasnt an issue anyway!
How bizarre Now thats progress!!!
Insurers on board
As far as I am aware, only AXA insurance and its subsidiary companies are on the panel.
Aviva insurane have requested that all new claims are faxed to them on the CFN RTA1 form.
What a total waste of TIME and Money.