Report comment

For the sake of Claimants generally I hope some of these contributions aren't by practising Med Neg solicitors as they show an incredible lack of understanding of the difference between complexity and value. A fault shared with LJ Jackson of course.

Yes - on the face of it the costs appear high in this case when considering the settlement but these cherry picked stories by Defendant Insurers and the NHSLA are exactly that...cherry picked and self serving.

In the absence of early admissions and cooperation from an ever obstructive NSLA or MDU etc (a common scenario as a catastrophic injury claimant solicitor I can assure you) why should Claimants face a scenario whereby their solicitors are reluctant to act or prepare their case fully because, to an outsider, their claim isn't high value enough to justify it? Establishing liability and causation in lower value med neg claims can be extraordinarily complex as equally as they can in very high value claims.

Value is just one consideration when assessing costs - even post LASPO. I accept claimant solicitors must now consider and monitor proportionality being an important factor but please..... stop lapping up the relentless Defendant rhetoric without at least questioning how you'd feel if that pensioner was you or your family member who couldn't access a decent solicitor because it wouldn't be viable for any business to pursue it ....