Report comment

Your posts are all perfectly valid, Rayner. And now the ultimate irony, they justify high ATE etc. insurance premiums because the cases they win have to subsidise the ones they lose. On that basis you take on, say, 100 cases, lose 99, but the one you win has to pay for the other 99..

You only have to set that out to see how absurd the proposition is. But still they try to pull the wool over our eyes telling us how we don't understand what they do and how they do it. "The Smartest Guys in The Room", springs to mind. They 'did for' Arthur Andersen and the NHS could go the same way.