Let the claims begin

I do not agree that the Law Society should ask for a clamp down on claims assessors (see [2000] Gazette, 28 April, 1).

Many people who would three or four years ago have been able to get legal aid for a claim with a 50/50 to 75/25 prospect of success are now unable to get either legal aid or a conditional fee agreement, because the insurance companies insist, for most purposes, that they want a 75% prospect of success and most solicitors operating a CFA want at least that degree of success.But just because a case has only a 51% prospect of success does not mean that nobody should bring it.

After all, the victim of the accident (if that is what it was) may be entitled to hundreds of thousands of pounds if he wins.

There should be a system to allow him to seek justice whether he can afford it or not.

Now, there is no such system.

Three or four years ago and earlier than that, the Legal Aid Board provided such a system.Now, at least some of these people may be able to get a claims assessor to try to do something with their claim and whether the claims assessor is insured or not is going to be the last thing on the mind of a potential claimant who cannot get a lawyer to do it.In the end, the existence of the claims assessor, good or bad, does not harm the profession.

If he gets somebody compensation in a case we did not want, why should we complain? If a claims assessor fails to get them compensation through his own negligence, that may help to prove that solicitors are better at the job.

Putting claims assessors out of business is not going to do us any good and won't help the people who won't get help from a solicitor anyway.Finally, why should Lord Irvine care? After all, his real aim is to stop the public going to court altogether.

Why on earth the profession is so keen to co-operate with him I simply do not understand.

The availability of justice to every member of the public is a mark of a really civilised democracy.T G Stanton, Wintle Stanton & Co, Selsey,West Sussex