ONLY PLAINTIFF FIRMS WITH SUBSTANTIAL EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD SHOULD ACT FOR CLIENTS IN DISASTERS, WRITES JON ROBINSThe disaster of last month's train collision between two crowded rush-hour trains in west London - which claimed its 31st victim last week - once again brings the role of claimant solicitors in fatal accidents under scrutiny.All solicitors who have been involved in catastrophes - from the King's Cross fire to the sinking of the Herald of Free Enterprise - know that their job is about more than financial compensation.

They help organise medical treatment or counselling for survivors, arrange funerals and financial support for the bereaved, and even represent victims' interests at public inquiries.Ian Walker, president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), says solicitors can do a lot more for those who have been hit by disaster than just get them a big cheque at the end of the day.

As a partner at personal injury specialists Russell Jones & Walker, he has been helping with the financial affairs of the widow of a Paddington victim.On a practical level, Mr Walker says that suddenly the husband is gone and nobody is there to pay the bills.

Very soon reality hits home, he says.

So far, the firm is acting for the families of two people who died in the crash and a number of other injured victims.Sally Moore, a partner at London firm Leigh Day & Co, says that at this stage the problems are 'more practical than personal'.

She has arranged for clients to have an upgrade to business class on a flight to South Africa because of injuries caused by the crash.

Her first questions for clients are aimed at finding out their immediate needs.Despite the importance of legal help at this stage, there is a need for sensitivity from practitioners.

Leigh Day & Co has five Paddington clients, all referrals from other solicitors, and the firm is not approaching passengers and their families.

Ms Moore says that it is not an appropriate time for aggressive law firm marketing.

She also handles hospital visits with care.

'I've been very cautious to make sure that it was appropriate that they would need to see a solicitor and, at this time, want see a solicitor,' she says.Mr Walker says solicitors first have to address 'quality of life' issues, such as finances, bereavement counselling, welfare benefits and the appropriate treatment for injured passengers.

In the case of fatalities, solicitors will have to liaise with the coroner over inquests.

The claims will also have to be registered - in this case with the US insurer St Paul Companies - and dealt with in accordance with a pre-action protocol.According to Ms Moore, liability is not an issue and consequently claims are 'begging to be sorted out as quickly as possible'.

The only reason for delays would be because of the complexity of injuries, she says.Like many practitioners in this area, she is mindful of the expected litigation against those law firms which acted on behalf of the victims of the 1989 Hillsborough football stadium disaster and their families.

The Solicitors Indemnity Fund has set up a £5m disaster fund to meet litigation over allegations of routine under-settling by solicitors representing the Hillsborough families (see [1999] Gazette, 21 July, 1).Not waiting to see whether clients are going to develop psychiatric illnesses over time is bad practice, Ms Moore says.

The appalling scenes in the Paddington disaster mean that conditions could be ripe for post-traumatic stress disorder claims, she says.

She is advising clients that it is not in their interests to settle unless such issues are properly resolved.Huw Ponting is an assistant solicitor at Townsends' Swindon office and has four Paddington clients.

He represented victims of the Southall rail crash, in which seven passengers died and 147 were injured two years ago.

He is concerned about the consequences of inexperienced solicitors acting for clients in the aftermath of disasters.

He has been helping a client arrange finance for the funeral of her husband, who died in the Paddington crash.

The expense was met immediately by Railtrack.

He knew that this would be the case through his work on Southall cases - but other solicitors, he argues, might not know.Inexperienced practitioners could send acrimonious letters to insurance companies, damaging relationships with insurers.

Experience has taught those involved in previous rail crashes that a brusque approach is unlikely to benefit clients, he says.

He notes that in the past insurers have behaved honourably and ethically.More disturbingly, there have already been reports of opportunistic solicitors cashing in on Paddington, according to Des Collins of Watford-based firm Collins.

Some local papers are refusing to place advertisements from law firms because of concerns about ambulance-chasing, he says.

He has acted for more than 100 clients in connection with the train crashes at Watford in 1996 - in which one person was killed - and at Southall, and he has 50 Paddington clients.He says he is aware of a number of solicitors who have failed train crash victims in the past.

In his experience of three major train crashes in as many years, there has been plenty of evidence not only of shoddy legal work but also of overcharging.

When cases have been passed on from other solicitors he has been surprised by 'fundamental errors'.He has seen paperwork considering liability at a time when it was 'clearly' not at issue.

He has also heard of cases being conducted on conditional fees with a 100% uplift.

Again, when liability was not at issue, he says such arrangements were, at the least, 'overambitious'.Compensation aside, it is vital for those whose lives have been blighted by such tragedies to know what went wrong and to receive an assurance that history will not repeat itself.

Emotions are running high, particularly because the circumstances of Paddington were strikingly similar to the events of S outhall in that there were questions over signalling.

Yet the findings of that inquiry have yet to surface.Mr Walker says: 'What we can't do at the moment is give people the information that they want.

People want to know what happened and why it happened.

But no one is going to know that until the public inquiry.' Victims have the right to be represented at inquiries by a legal team, and soon those solicitors instructed will have to organise joint representation for the Paddington inquiry.In light of last month's disaster, APIL has renewed its call for the creation of an Accident and Disaster Investigation Bureau to streamline the investigation of major accidents.

According to Patrick Allen, an APIL committee member and lawyer for the victims of the Marchioness riverboat disaster on the Thames, as well as the King's Cross fire, it is time for radical reform.Mr Allen says: 'It's time that we put an end to a system in which several different enquiries or procedures are conducted at the same time, duplicating efforts and resources and increasing distress to survivors and bereaved.' Such a body would ensure a consistent approach by co-ordinating the process through a full-time secretariat, he adds.Martin Staples, the new president of the Forum of Insurance Lawyers, is unconvinced, and questions whether the creation of a new quango would deliver any real benefits.

It is not a bad system, he contends, adding that the delays over the Southall inquiry were a result of criminal prosecutions, not issues of liability.Mr Collins, who represents a group of 35 victims at the Southall Rail Inquiry, says that when claimant solicitors are involved in an inquiry, they are there to represent their clients and bring their concerns about rail safety into the public eye.

He says the railway industry has a '19th century approach' to such issues.

And when a driver goes through a red light, the industry blames the driver, he says, adding that it is particularly important for the lawyers to move the argument beyond what he calls 'first causes'.With regard to Paddington, Mr Collins says he hopes the professionals involved can work together so that the inquiry can report back as soon as possible.

It must not become side-tracked down the path of criminal prosecution or lost in the midst of a political debate, he contends.

'We have to stand back and prioritise,' he says.

'I think our priorities are to find out what is wrong with the system and how we can best adapt to ensure that we don't have the same thing leading to another disaster.'-- The Law Society's multi-party action information service has set up a database of law firms instructed by, or interested in acting to help survivors and the families of the deceased (tel: 0870 606 2522 for solicitors; 0870 606 6575 for the general public).INSURANCE COMPANIES MAY BENEFIT FROM INVOLVING PRIVATE PRACTICE LAWYERS IN DAMAGE LIMITATION, WRITES MARTIN BRUFFELLDisasters, by their very nature, strike at any time without warning.

No one can anticipate the loss of life, the extent of injury or the extent of property damage or the expense involved in dealing with liability claims and the repair of property.Most organisations involved in the insurance industry have disaster units on 24-hour call.

There are regular articles in the insurance press from loss adjusters, brokers and insurers talking about the way they deal with disasters.

These could be as a result of hurricanes, explosions at factories, floods or any of the other natural and man-made disasters that can occur at any time.Most of these artic les address the insurers working with their brokers, their local loss adjusters on standby and of course the insured.

But few, if any, talk about the role of private practice lawyers and how they can bring about the early resolution of the problems or disputes which will inevitably arise.

Very few insurers have in-house legal teams of claims specialists, and private practice firms would normally be their first port of call for legal advice in the aftermath of a disaster.

However, few insurance companies call on their panel firms in these circumstances, whereas defendant businesses with in-house legal teams call on their in-house lawyers.

If businesses think there is added value in lawyers' involvement, why does the insurance industry not appear to think the same?The reason for this is no doubt that lawyers are, or were, seen as an unnecessary evil, being expensive while bringing nothing to the party.

But insurance lawyers are experts in information gathering, in making early and positive decisions on liability, in the valuation of claims and dispute resolution based on commercial pragmatism.

The traditional view was that lawyers only needed to be involved when proceedings were commenced - but times and the rules have changed and the traditional way may not now be the best way.With the new civil procedure rules coming through, with the new philosophy of claims handling, and perhaps with the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998 next year, there is a need for insurance lawyers to be involved in the claims handling and litigation avoidance process before court proceedings are commenced.Around 90% of claims (normally brought by solicitors acting for the claimants) are settled by insurers or loss adjusters without any involvement of lawyers acting for the insurers or the insured.

This means that maybe 90% of the insured population who have a claim made against them in law have no legal representation.

This has been the case for many years but perhaps it now needs reviewing.Of course, private practice lawyers will not be welcome unless they can give added value and value for money.

It is no good lawyers moving in to duplicate the work of others, and to date lawyers may not have provided the service that insurers and their insured require when disaster strikes.

Most large insurance-based law firms have disaster units, but how many of them have been called out in the middle of the night to deal with an explosion at a factory or a transport disaster? Probably very few, and perhaps the reason is the service those lawyers have been offering.As we have a growing claims/blame philosophy in society nowadays it is probably true to say that any disaster will result in claims and litigation.

With the pressure on speed, early decisions on liability, rehabilitation and so on, it is important that the investigations carried out into any disaster are carried out correctly - from the court's point of view - right from the start.There are many formal legal proceedings that will inevitably follow disasters in any event, in addition to claims for damages.

There will be coroners' inquests, health and safety prosecutions, public enquiries, disciplinary and employment tribunals, and criminal injuries compensation claims.

While the investigations and approach might be slightly different for all of them there are nevertheless common threads.Involving private practice lawyers from the start might avoid the need for duplication and re-evaluation of the evidence if matters have to be reinvestigated and statements retaken for the specific tribunal.

And solicitors for the claimants - be they introduced through unions, adverts in hospital accident and emergency departments or press releases - will be on the scene quickly, and might have stolen a march already, prejudicing the defendants' position.

So the question is: can the insurers or the employers or the owners of property respond appropriately without the support of defendants' lawyers up front?Insurance lawyers can go far in encouraging a victim-centred approach to the claim and can pull together the professionals required to help speed up the settlement process.

Identifying and bringing together the necessary members of the disaster unit for early liability and quantum decisions is a vital role for lawyers.

Solicitors, barristers, doctors and rehabilitation specialists, working together, can make the difference in the speed at which claims proceed.

Working as one will dramatically cut down unnecessary delay and improve the victim's recovery.If liability can be agreed at an early stage, the disaster unit can act quickly and arrange interim payments to fund rehabilitation.

It is often the case that doctors know exactly what the patient requires for a speedier recovery.

If lawyers are made aware of this, this treatment can be provided.

This improves the victim's long-term prognosis and quality of life, and reduces the financial liability for the defendants and their insurers.If adaptations are required to victims' homes, this work may be undertaken while they are hospitalised, and will give them a favourable impression of the defendants.Experts are essential in any personal injury claim.

Lawyers, by nature, are distrusting of their opposition, so each party instructs its own team of experts independently, causing delay.

With better co-ordination by lawyers, all experts could be asked to assess the victim on the same day and come to agreement as to their findings.

In some cases, the joint instruction of a single expert would be suitable.

Eliminating medical issues at this stage will allow the claim to progress.A holistic approach is called for when disasters occur, and while we still have a legal system for dealing with claims arising from them it is common sense and cost effective to involve private practice insurance lawyers early.

We can help to reduce duplication of investigation, encourage early decisions on liability and quantum, set up medical rehabilitation and vocational retraining, and so reduce costs and damages - to the benefit of all.In cases where liability will have to be admitted, effective teamwork involving insurance lawyers will enable this to be done early, so reducing the cost of - and the damage caused by - these dreadful events.