Amid the furore surrounding the compensation culture, Huw Ponting explains that those caught up in railway crashes desperately need legal help


So-called claims farmers were criticised last week by the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, for exacerbating Britain's 'compensation culture' and for falsely raising compensation hopes.



Against this background, it is important to remember that there are genuine victims of serious accidents such as the Ladbroke Grove and the recent Berkshire train crashes, whose rehabilitation and compensation must remain a priority. After traumatic events like these, compensation is often far down the list of need for those involved. Helping them understand the investigation process and what they might expect by way of answers to their questions can be all consuming in the aftermath.



When first instructed by the survivors of these types of incidents, a solicitor's initial focus should be on helping their clients to understand the process, making them aware of what answers they can reasonably expect. When liability is admitted early on, as it was following the rail incident at Ladbroke Grove, it is necessary to get copies of all the various reports to ensure clients receive as many answers as possible. In my experience, the more information they have, the better the long-term prognosis for the individual's psychological recovery.


If liability is not admitted, the circumstances of the incident will be investigated and the relevant experts appointed to deal with the issues. While individual solicitors' firms can do this, it is often preferable to pool resources and collectively deal with the issues.



In the case of the Ladbroke Grove tragedy, a steering committee of several firms, including my law firm, Thring Townsend, was established to give the victims and their families a voice at the inquiry, as well as to help co-ordinate the multi-party litigation process. This included agreeing with the insurers a list of expert witnesses that firms could call on without first having to approach the insurers for permission; the potential sharing of information relating to the settlement of claims; and clarification of the approach the insurers were taking in the assessment of quantum in case.



Where psychological injuries are concerned, an early emphasis must be on securing funding for counselling and treatment.



Following the Ladbroke Grove incident, for example, the rail industry and its insurers made a comprehensive counselling service available to all parties. This is a much-needed and long-term service - particularly as similar incidents such as the Berkshire crash can, and do, trigger painful memories and disrupt recovery. Immediately after Ladbroke Grove the rail industry made provision for those who wanted to undergo counselling and, in some cases, this continued for years.



This collective approach is essential in instances such as these and provides a powerful forum for victims and their families.



Lawyers who accept instructions following these events must have the requisite expertise themselves and defer to the lead firms under the multi-party provisions. Only then can we provide our clients with best advice and help redress the balance in the compensation culture argument.



Huw Ponting is head of personal injury at west of England law firm Thring Townsend, which represented clients involved in both the Southall and Ladbroke Grove rail disasters