Report comment

Sorry, I have read this article with a suspended state of belief, literally shouting at the screen. Sorry, have I read this right? Someone from an insurance company wants to rid injured claimants of damages - and maintains a straight face whilst suggesting it?

Can you imagine Defendant's counsel's submissions at the end of a running down action at the local county court?

"Your Honour, a bloke called Mr Dalton says that he thinks common law should change, and we should all ignore the well trodden case law.... because he says insurance companies need to make more money and most claimants are liars (and their experts) and that we're all just frankly a bit fed up of this. So, in my respectful submission I suggest the Claimant shouldn't be compensated"

The suggestion is quite simply so daft, I can hardly believe the cheek of it.

Lets not talk rhetoric, but get some facts straight then shall we?

1. Claims have gone DOWN - this isn't rhetoric, this is fact - the CRU / DWP figures are absolute. The 'compensation cultire' clap trap is so Daily Mail / Jeremy Kyle, it's frankly embarrassing.

2. Damages have NOT increased in line with interest rates / RPI for decades - the ridiculous suggestion that there's now a 10% increase in damages is just not bearing out. Try negotiating with the 18 year old kids at XYZ insurance co who are still tied to Colossus type modelling that routinely offer damages at a fraction of the true value.

3. Costs have been absolutely decimated to a fraction of sums that were once claimed - has your insurance premium plummeted with the huge windfall? No, thought not. Have a look at the record profits insurers are making, ignore the Daily Mail quotes,

4. An insurance company has a duty to it's shareholders, they couldn't give two hoots about claimants that are simply pigeon holed as liabilities. Look at the disgusting practice of 'third party capture'. Who are these people assisting? Really? We routinely see offers at £1,000 pre-medical, only to recover much, much more in percentage terms because of the involvement of 'legals'. Small wonder the insurers don't want solicitors involved, they help an injured person recover their proper entitlement to damages,

5. Insurance companies are largely double handed. Insurers cried foul about referral fees... while they charged..... referral fees.

6. Insurance companies routinely aggressively lobby parliament - MASS. APIL and the like are excellent, but their budgets are a drop in the ocean compared to the sums thrown at lobbying companies. It's a real David and Goliath fight. Thank God there are those willing to fight though.

7. The government on the one hand talks about "access to Justice" then raises the 'small' claims limit from £1,000 to £10,000 for civil cases - and tells us that we all ought to be very lucky the personal injury claim limit stays at £1,000 - the trade off is a ridiculous automated portal system with the threat that the £5,000 limit is on the horizon. Anyone with a civil claim under £10,000 can jolly well sort it out themselves - because £10,000 is 'small' apparently.

8. The Government suggest that claims are far too expensive - so lower RTA costs to ridiculously low thresholds - then massively increase court fees, and build in a whole new raft of fees; allocation fees, listing questionnaires, hearing fees.... ironically these can add up to three or four times the costs you are expected to recover on stage two RTAs.

9. Government bows to secret meetings with insurers (remember the aggressive lobbyists?) and are caught red handed by claimant's lawyers - a Judicial Review fails because apparently this sort of thing isn't an abuse, and it's all part of the process.

10. Legal Aid is abolished - solicitors take the risks - but Solicitors get paid for those risks by the insurers under carefully thought out proposals.... that fail 5 times and are eventually abolished because they're creating massive satellite litigation.


11. Insurers moan and whinge about success fees - and they're rewarded...yet again.... first success fees are restricted....then suddenly they're not recoverable - and neither is the insurance to fund this...

Is it me, or is it time the Government should stop pandering to the utter nonsense continually spouted by the insurer lobbyists? The situation is so patently and blatantly unfair - every single time, insurers come out on top - yet never do the premiums fall in line with the windfall after windfall bestowed on them.