Keep up to date with Salmons Solicitors using our news section for the latest information.
Law Society responds to Government consultation
We report today that The Law Society has responded to the Government’s consultation on banning compensation claims for whiplash injuries and requiring all personal injury claims worth less than £5000 to be dealt with in the small claims track where there is no real possibility of obtaining the payment of realistic costs from the losing opponent thus denying access to justice for thousands of injured claimants.
Their response deals mainly with four headline proposals set out in the consultation and their likely consequences.
A) Removal of damages for 'minor' whiplash claims or set a fixed rate of compensation of £400 [ or £425 if the claim includes psychological injury ]
The Law Society writes that it “wholly opposes any attempt to remove the common law right to compensation for injuries caused by the negligence of others. The level of compensation must reflect the severity of the injury that the individual claimant has suffered. Rates of compensation have been established though the common law over a number of years and are now enshrined in the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG). For these reasons we do not agree with setting a fixed rate of compensation particularly at the proposed low rates of £400, or £425 where the claim includes a psychological injury.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers has pointed out that a commuter can claim £30 of compensation when a train is 30 minutes late yet £25 is offered for what can be a debilitating psychological injury.
B) Reduce injury compensation for whiplash injuries of a longer duration through introduction of set tariffs
The Law Society does not support the tariff principle for the reasons stated above and in any event they consider the proposed tariff rates, which are in the main substantially lower the than the normal compensation rates, to be unacceptably low.
We add that one only has to look at the mean and dispirited tariffs in the Criminal injuries Compensation Scheme which were introduced in 1996 and have become meaner and meaner over the years since.
C) Raise the Small Claims Track (SCT) limit to at least £5000 for the injury element
The Law Society writes “ We oppose the proposal to increase the SCT limit to at least £5000 for all personal injury (PI) claims. This would prevent claimants from recovering legal costs which means that many would not be able to obtain legal representation for claims where invariably defendants are insured (motor and employer’s liability are compulsory insurances) and thus well resourced. The insurance companies employ experienced, specialist claims handlers to deal with pre-issue work and will also have easy access to legal representation. There will therefore be no equality of arms with the Claimant who may never have had to deal with a legal procedure before. We are also concerned that the SCT is not designed to deal with the more complex issues of law that can arise in PI cases, especially when liability is disputed. If Claimants are not in fact simply deterred from exercising their legal rights as a consequence of this, the Court will not have the resources to deal with an influx of hundreds of thousands of cases presently handled every year in the Portal which get nowhere near a court.”
Latest News Articles
Has the tide has finally turned in social services failure to remove cases? Read More
Stephen Brookes, Assessor of the Personal Injury Panel of the Law Society, looks at the recent decision in Crawley v Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council Read More
The long running saga concerning the entitlement of an estranged adult child cut out of a deceased's parent's will is finally resolved, writes Donna Riley of Salmons Solicitors. Read More
The Government is still deluding itself in thinking that denial of access to justice will cause insurance premiums to fall. Read the full report here - Read More
Latest Government attempts to deny access to the courts are responded to by the Solicitors' profession. Read More
Association of Personal Injury Lawyers calls for a complete ban on nuisance calls about accident claims
APIL have issued recently a press release to try and persuade the Government to put an outright ban on intimidating cold callers pestering members of the public to make accident claims for accidents which they have never had. Read More
The Government's plans to prevent irritating claims being brought against their friends in the insurance industry continue to attract criticism. Read More
Stephen Brookes looks at two personal injury cases on either side of the fence; in the former case the claimant won but in the latter case the claimant failed. Read More
If ever there was a minefield in the application of applicable rules it is in the area of discrimination law. Stephen Brookes reviews the recent case of Griffiths v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions ( 2015) Read More
A recent case on the duty of swimming pool lifeguards confirms 1999 guidance Read More
Supreme Court decision changes the meaning of an unlawful penalty charge in contract law - Beavis v Parking Eye reviewed Read More
Working time might now include travel to and from the first and the last job for employees who are based at home. Read More
Following the decision of Salmons Solicitors to withdraw from all legal aid work upon the grounds of unsustainable remuneration levels, there is increasing pressure for criminal defence legal practices. Read More
Stephen Brookes reviews two recent personal injury claims where the claimants both failed. Read More
There can be few more fun pursuits than taking your off roader into difficult and challenging off road terrain, but before you do so, a cautionary word about a recent change of insurance law, writes Stephen Brookes. Read More
Stephen Brookes reviews the recent case of Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton on the inclusion of overtime into holiday pay calculations. Read More
Stephen Brookes reviews the decision of the Supreme Court in Coventry and Lawrence (2014) Read More
High Court Judge rules Government's Motor Insurers Compensation Scheme for uninsured drivers unlawful. The case is reviewed by our personal injury specialist Stephen Brookes Read More
Stephen Brookes reviews two recent cases dealing with the question of when an employer can be liable for injuries inflicted by a member of the workforce on another person Read More
Farah Gilani reviews a January 2014 case involving a prosecution over an unguarded piece of machinery. Read More
Stephen Brookes reviews a recent case involving an injury compensation claim brought by one friend against another arising out of the use of loaned leisure equipment. Read More