Hodge Jones & Allen may be deemed to have more expertise in personal injury cases than I, a retired sole practitioner and generalist. Nevertheless, I find its modelling technique to predict outcomes counter-intuitive. Witnesses and reliable evidence are surely more relevant than demographics, age or the working status of the claimant.
The model would just create an average client who is successful and another different average who is not.
The demographics could lead to ‘postcode justice’; age and working status might, for example, discriminate against the young and benefits claimants.
Nobody is average or complies with all the supposed attributes of a class of person in which they may conveniently – and lazily – be grouped. Our job and duty as lawyers is to look at clients as individuals; it is certainly not to discriminate against whole classes of society.
This practice sounds most unwelcome and one wonders whether it might infringe upon Lexcel diversity requirements. If Hodge Jones & Allen feels this letter is unfair or misses the point, it may need to explain all this in greater detail.
Ian Craine, London N15