Q&A: Howard Dean, Forum of Insurance Lawyers

How did you first get into law?

I didn’t start out as a lawyer. I followed my father into a career in retail management, joining a trainee management programme. 

By the time I was 21, I was a branch manager at Millets Leisure Shops in Stratford-upon-Avon. Then I thought, ‘Hold on a second, is this all life has to offer me?,’ So I began looking for something else. 

I took a decision to change career and applied to do business law at university, and got in.

I then worked for a firm which did both defendant and claimant personal injury work, and started doing claimant work. Eventually I switched to doing defendant insurance work when I joined DAC Beachcroft in 1999 which is where I first met Pete Allchorne, and Duncan Rutter, both former Foil presidents. 

What can you tell me about how you got involved with Foil?

I joined what is now Tomorrow’s Foil around 1995 or 1996, it was called Junior Foil at the time. I’ve been a member of Foil ever since.

We’re still dealing with global uncertainty – ongoing issues like the war in Ukraine, the conflict in the Middle East, and potential tariffs coming out of the US, which will have implications for the UK in the years ahead.

I became interested because I wanted to understand how the various legal reforms coming down the track would affect me. Initially, it was from a personal perspective – how it would affect my career, to be perfectly blunt. 

Then it became about how it would affect my firm and, ultimately, my clients.

What are your plans and ambitions for the role?

There’s a lot to consider. It’s an enormous privilege to lead the organisation, but it’s a challenging time. 

Last year was incredibly busy, and that pace has continued. We’re still dealing with global uncertainty – ongoing issues like the war in Ukraine, the conflict in the Middle East, and potential tariffs coming out of the US, which will have implications for the UK in the years ahead.

Domestically, we’ve experienced significant political shifts. The last Conservative government slowed progress on many policies as they focused on re-election and managing perceptions. 

When Labour came into office, I had high hopes, and they’ve certainly moved quickly to establish their cabinet. However, they’ve faced a series of crises – riots, challenges in the prison system, and now a tough budget. 

That said, the Ministry of Justice has remained active, particularly in areas such as medical report fees for lower-value portal cases and consultations on litigation funding.

Looking ahead, the expansion of digitisation within civil justice is a key focus, covering both pre-action and post-action claim processes. In the Road Traffic Accident space, we’ve seen some clarity with the latest Official Injury Claim update and the Supreme Court’s decision on mixed injuries, but there’s still work to do.

Over the next year, I anticipate ongoing reforms around costs, litigation funding, and Alternative Dispute Resolution in the pre-action space. 

For example, the Civil Justice Council has released an interim report on pre-action protocols, exploring the idea of mandatory mediation to prevent claims from escalating into litigation. 

While I welcome efforts to resolve disputes earlier, we need to recognise that some claims –particularly those addressing key legal principles – must be decided by the courts to provide clarity and guidance for the industry. 

Transparency and certainty are essential, and Foil’s role is to champion both for the benefit of all parties.

What are your thoughts on the governments priorities regarding the sector so far?

It’s still difficult to discern a clear direction. 

However, we’ve seen initiatives such as the Motor Insurance Task Force, which is scheduled to meet in January to address fraud, claims inflation, and market dynamics. 

The FCA is also conducting a review of premiums, examining their composition and whether insurers are treating customers fairly.

Foil should be actively engaging with these initiatives. For example, I’ve written to Heidi Alexander - the new Secretary of State for Transport – requesting Foil’s involvement in the stakeholder meetings for the Motor Insurance Task Force. 

I haven’t received a reply yet – but she’s new to the role, and my letter was sent shortly after my tenure began. I’m hopeful for a response in due course, though I recognise it might not be an immediate priority.

How do you feel about the shift in the Odgen rate?

From Foil’s perspective, we are firmly committed to ensuring full compensation for injured claimants. 

The Lord Chancellor setting the discount rate for England and Wales at +0.5%, aligning it with Scotland and Northern Ireland, provides consistency and simplicity, which is a clear benefit.

Looking ahead, Foil must start preparing for the next set of reviews in 2029. One topic likely to resurface is the consideration of multiple discount rate models, which were on the agenda previously under Peter’s tenure. 

What’s your opinion on a dual discount rate for personal injury claims?

That will only add layers of cost to the litigation process. Lawyers will need to determine the applicable rate for specific heads of damage and particular periods, which could complicate matters. What we need is a simple model, not a complex one.

It’s like Christmas for lawyers because it gives us something to argue over. From the perspective of Foil members – it’s not something we want. There are more substantive and meaningful issues to debate than this.

What challenges are you expecting the sector to face this year?

There are several developments on the horizon that are likely to increase the cost of personal injury claims. 

The planned increase in the National Living Wage, set to take effect in April, will significantly impact care costs, particularly in complex injury cases. 

Similarly, the Fair Work Agency, which is expected to be established under the proposed Employment Rights Bill, will consult on working conditions. This could lead to higher costs for care-related claims, something that must be carefully considered.

At the same time, the NHS is facing a critical shortage of care workers and nurses. We’re in the bizarre situation where agency nurses can earn significantly more than those directly employed by NHS trusts, with hospitals effectively buying back staff at one-and-a-half to twice the cost. 

This kind of profiteering within the NHS is deeply frustrating and highlights inefficiencies that need urgent attention.

We’re nearly four years on from the launch of the OIC portal, what are your reflections on those four years?

I believe the OIC will remain in the spotlight. There’s growing pressure on the Ministry of Justice, the Motor Insurers’ Bureau, and insurers to prove that the platform can deliver on the original promises of the whiplash reforms. 

It must provide tangible improvements and benefits for both represented and unrepresented claimants.

It’s on a journey where some good progress has been made, but it’s not where it should be at this point. It’s very much a work in progress and needs a stronger push to drive further improvements.

I’m not sure whether the Ministry of Justice has bigger priorities that prevent it from pressuring the MIB to make those changes, or if the MIB and the insurers funding it are content with the current state and simply thinking, “That’s good enough.”

Ultimately, the proof is in the results. Have we achieved the original objectives? And if some of those objectives are unattainable, why is that the case? We need a proper review to address these questions and ensure the platform fulfils its purpose.

What are you hopeful about in the year ahead?

I’m optimistic about the progress in pre-action portals and pre-action protocols. 

These protocols, currently under discussion, are designed to facilitate the exchange of sufficient information and evidence between parties, allowing them to better understand each other’s positions. 

A significant number of claims are issued because there’s a lack of clarity about the strengths and weaknesses of the opposing side’s case. If this information can be shared before proceedings are issued, I believe we’ll see many more claims resolved early.

Foil has also contributed to this conversation. 

We conducted a project examining what we referred to as the “privatisation of civil justice.” The idea is that civil justice shouldn’t be limited to what the courts provide but should extend to pre-action processes that encourage parties to fully understand and evaluate their respective cases.

This approach allows them to step back, recognise the strengths and weaknesses of their positions, and engage in meaningful dialogue.

Unfortunately, popular culture, particularly television, often portrays disputes as battles where claims or defences are weaponised, with an immediate escalation to legal proceedings. 

In reality, having an adult conversation about the problem can often lead to resolution without the need for litigation. That’s what I hope we’ll see more of in 2025.

How would you encourage more young people into insurance law?

What I would say to anyone looking at insurance law is that you need to look behind the word insurance. 

Once you open that door, you’ll find insurance impacts on all aspects of life, all aspects of business, and there are varied, interesting and challenging  legal roles in insurance.

In terms of what Foil is doing about it, the president’s charity this year is the Insurance Museum, which was set up to recognise insurance, but also to nurture new talent into the insurance industry.