We use cookies to improve this site and enable full functionality. You can change your cookie settings at any time using your browser. Our cookie policy.


Insurance Business forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Notify me of new replies via email
Insurance Business | 17 Nov 2016, 11:25 AM Agree 0
A breakdown of the proposed measures and a flood of reaction, both for and against
  • Anon | 17 Nov 2016, 12:58 PM Agree 0
    Genuine claimants are the rarity. How can it be that people increasingly suffer whiplash as car safety improves, and where accident numbers decline.Newer cars typically include anti-whiplash seating. It's a nod and a wink amongst many that you stick in a claim for whiplash whenever an accident happens and GP reports all too frequently repeat parrot fashion the nonsense that an injury is suffered without any understanding of whether the impact involved in the accident was sufficient to precipitate an injury. Such reports from GPs are themselves just for a part of the compensation gravy train as they provide a prognosis that is no more than a finger in the air but in return for which they shall receive their fat fee for a 5 minute exam and a prepopulated report suggesting physiotherapy that typically does not take place. The whole thing has become a sham.
  • Tong Lang | 17 Nov 2016, 01:52 PM Agree 0
    Interesting that the voices of objection to reform only seem to be from the self-interested professions associated with perpetrating this gravy train. I cannot recall ever hearing a motorist or (premium paying) policyholder raise even a murmur of complaint.
  • Stuart | 17 Nov 2016, 02:53 PM Agree 0
    Unfortunately all of you celebrating the proposals needs to consider exactly how many of your legal rights you are selling for the imaginary £40. If your injured at work due to employer negligence - fracture your wrist and lose £3000 earnings - good luck learning the health and safety at work regulations and paying to pursue your employer for compensation. That's right - that injury is worth around £4000 - well under the £5000 small claims track. You'll be left to fight the employer's solicitor and pay the court fees out of your own pocket - and by the way - the courts fees on that claim would be £455.
    Oh and if you go on holiday and your tour operator put you in a shoddy hotel and you happen to suffer salmonella poisoning - I hope you can brush up on the Travel Package Regulations 1992 and the Sale of Good Act. Oh and all the best finding a food hygiene expert when the holiday company provide their blanket denial - their reports cost in the region of £2000.
    So I'm pleased you will be able to put away that £40 because that's the price not just of reforming whiplash but of withdrawing access to Justice for all types of injury claims.
  • Anon | 17 Nov 2016, 04:19 PM Agree 0
    The fractured wrist claim would surely have a reasonable expectation of securing more than £5000 in damages wouldn't it(and should do if a lawyer is worth his salt)? We all know how the game is played where a borderline case is concerned and that wont change ☺. Join a trade union if you want legal representation, they'll sue an employer.

    In terms of representation generally it may well be the chance for the before the event and legitimate insurance that once was available to play a part and be sold as a genuine product again. Could be an opportunity for the market to sell real legal expense products/insurance rather than trade in fatuous money making clap trap that are just a charade. I just don't buy the idea of a loss of access to justice, if it's a small claim just handle it yourself if you cant afford a lawyer that's the point of it. You will still be able to get a lawyer to represent you if you sign away part of your damages as so many do now.
  • Brian | 18 Nov 2016, 02:40 PM Agree 0
    Its just not true. The insurers previously pledged to reduce premiums following earlier reforms introduced in 2010. However, year on year my car insurance has increased. In fact I have just received my renewal quote and it is a 35% increase on last year and a 60% increase on two years ago. I have made no claims, it is the same car, the same drivers and the same risk and so what is the justification?

    Apparently the motivation behind the proposals for change are to reduce claims fraud and the cost of car insurance premiums.

    According to the Government’s Insurance Fraud Taskforce final report dated January 2016 the majority of claimants are honest and their insurance claims are legitimate.

    It has always been the case that if an insurer suspects fraud they can and they do challenge the claim in the courts.

    According to a recent report produced by confused.com the cost of motoring insurance continues to rise and based on the car insurance price index the year-on-year price increase is 17%.

    The proposals are not in the interests of justice and will only serve to remove or reduce the rights to compensation for the majority whose claims are legitimate, destroy the personal injury sector resulting in significant job losses (not only for lawyers but also insurers) and increase the insurers profit margins.

    The changes previously implemented have resulted in reduced legal costs for the insurers and claimants unfairly losing up to 25% of their compensation to pay their legal costs.

    One of the proposals is to increase small claims limit to capture all whiplash injury claims where general damages do not exceed £5,000. What this means is that claimants that have suffered a minor to moderate whiplash injury will have to pursue their claims without legal representation and the insurers will be quick to take advantage and exploit that situation by making low settlement offers or avoiding the claim altogether.

    Why should the majority who have a legitimate claim suffer?
Post a reply