Report comment

14:40

Your suggestion of the claimant representatives creating somthing is nonsense (I do not mean "nonsense" to create offence). There are a wealth of reasons why it is not feasible including:

Confidentiality
Time
Cost
Lack of vested interest
Lack of data

As a claimant solicitor I personally rely on my own objective assessment (and subjective assessment) of my client. If one is dodgy I sack them and make a note that no instructions will ever be taken from them again on anything.

What I cannot do is then farm that client's information out to all and sundry.

Claimant solicitors act on instructions given. The only time we get to look behind the instructions is when we receive some other form of evidence or an indication from the defendant that something is wrong. We do not have fraud teams or databases correlating data to identify suspicous activity. We do not liaise with police about investigations that we may not know about.

On the flip side I appreciate that there are 100,000s of such claims and insurers start to see patterns. I will wholeheartedly support the insurers if they targeted the dodgy claimants, dodgy firms and dodgy CMCs, but they haven't. They've targeted everyone.

Personally I am ambivalent about this as low value RTA is a very small component of my work and to be honest they aren't worth the hassle to me, but I do dislike that innocent claimants have been royally shafted.