No-fault call shunned

A no-fault compensation scheme for clinical negligence claims would be the wrong way forward in reforming the system because it is not in the best interests of the victims, solicitors and campaigners argued last week.

Speaking at a seminar held at the House of Commons - hosted by Action for Victims of Medical Accidents (AVMA), the Consumers Association and clinical negligence specialist law firm Leigh Day & Co - AVMA chief executive Arnold Simanowitz said no-fault would not provide patients with what was most important - an apology, explanation or reassurance that the situation would not arise again.

'Most people don't contact us screaming for compensation,' Mr Simanowitz, a solicitor, insisted.

Russell Levy, clinical negligence head at Leigh Day & Co, voiced fears that reforms might be driven by concerns about costs to the taxpayer, although the 400 million paid out annually by the NHS was only 'equivalent to two Harrier jump jets'.

He added: 'Much of the current pressure for reform doesn't come from patient groups but from those who have always enjoyed access to information and justice.'

He suggested that the way forward was adopting a periodic payment scheme and reversing the burden of proof.

But Dr Evan Harris, Liberal Democrat MP for Oxford West and Abingdon, said a no-fault scheme might help eradicate a growing culture of 'defensive medicine', which prevents negligence from being reported or admitted.

'We have to make complaints easier, but we also have to make confessions easier,' he said.

Paula Rohan