Injury claim issues need addressing

One or two crucial issues are being overlooked in the current debate about the possibility of the financial limit for small personal injury claims being raised in the county court.

Firstly, before-the-event insurance providers of road traffic motor policies will perhaps have to admit that they would not be able to sustain their current business models and commercial bargains with panel solicitors where their indemnity is illusory. This is because they never, in reality, expect to pay anything out to those solicitors.

If insurers want to attract panel solicitors to undertake work on small personal injury claims and to pay them something, premiums for motor cover would probably need to be nearer to £75 than the nominal premiums being charged at the moment.

They will not regard this as marketable, so will withdraw cover, raising 'access to justice' concerns and, at the same time, making their product less attractive.

Secondly, if claims management companies or their like were to be permitted to 'assist' a claimant on a contingency-fee basis (payment by a percentage of damages), then the appropriate changes to the law and our professional regulations would have to be made to ensure a level playing field for solicitors.

This is in addition to the many other widespread consequences of making such a change (courts log-jammed with litigants-in-person, injustice of lay claimants fighting against professionally represented insurers, for example).

One wonders about the extent to which the legislators actually sit down and think about the real consequences of such radical proposals.

Neil Sugarman

Managing partner, GLP Solicitors, Bury.