Government plans to crack down on bogus whiplash claims could see successful legitimate claims left out of pocket

New government plans to crack down on fraudulent whiplash claims could see those with legitimate injuries not able to recover legal costs, even if their case is successful.

Introduced into the House of Lords on 20 March, the Civil Liability Bill also aims to ban the settling of claims without medical evidence, whilst introducing a fixed compensation tariff for whiplash injuries of up to two years.

The government also plans to increase the small claims limit for personal injury claims: road traffic accident related personal injury claims would rise to £5,000, and for all other personal injury claims to £2,000. Below these levels, people will not generally be able to recover their legal costs, even if their case is successful.

Joanne Ali, of John Poyser solicitors in Littleborough, explained what the changes could mean for the general public.

She said: “Essentially the changes mean a few things. If you have a whiplash-type injury from a car accident, the changes propose you would recover compensation damages from £225 and no entitlement to recover costs of a solicitor to help you make that claim.

“The damages would not be negotiable like they are now, but fixed according to a tariff and around a fifth of what current compensation levels awarded by the courts are.

“For all other types of injuries following a road accident, you would not be entitled to claim the cost of a solicitor helping you from the party at fault – even in circumstances with drink drivers or where the victim is a child.

“There seems to be little sense in the exceptions: for example, motorcyclists suffering the same injury would be exempt from the fixed compensation.

“The reforms are stated to be due to ‘rising insurance claims’ and that any savings from reduced insurance premiums would be passed on to consumers, reducing premiums. Claims are reducing year on year and the government will not do anything to force insurers to reduce insurance premiums. The justification for taking away people’s rights therefore based on insurers’ claims and factual data has been ignored. Residents are urged to voice their concerns to our local MPs to ensure their rights remain. ”

She continued: “Having been in business in Littleborough for ten years, we have helped hundreds of local people secure thousands in compensation following accidents where they have been the victim of poor driving, and, in many cases, criminal activity. These clients are often working people on lower incomes who are forced off work and subject to weeks or months of pain.

“Being able to secure reasonable compensation for people in these situations, and for the party at fault to be required to pay for this to be done, is what we as a civilised society expect to happen: it is a basic principle enshrined in our law. Current government appear to want to erode these rights.

“Furthermore, it is really galling when insurers continue to report all-time record profits and bonuses whilst people are paying hundreds of pounds in premiums per year, yet are prevented from claiming on them for proper compensation when needed.”

“We employ nine people within our firm and we simply face closure in the event of changes implemented as clients will not be able to pay for legal costs when they receive minimal /no damages and the party at fault is no required to pay them either.”

Andrew Twambley, spokesperson for Access to Justice, which is campaigning against the proposals, said: “Whiplash claims have fallen sharply in the last twelve months, and the cost of claims has also fallen sharply.

“The government’s own figures show that the savings accruing from these reforms are likely to be £16-18, not £35, as the MoJ contends, and only three insurers have said they’ll give those savings to their customers. Nearly 80% of the public say the insurers will not hand back any money.

“For the sake of £18, the 600,000 people injured in road traffic accidents each year will be denied access to legal advice if they want to go to court and claim for their injuries, but if they do go to court, insurers will have continue to be able to call on a battery of lawyers to defend their interests.

“MPs will now have the chance to look at the government’s proposals in detail, and they will see that that there is little substantive reason for reform, beyond keeping the insurance industry happy.”

Rochdale MP Tony Lloyd said: “Most of us who have car insurance would want to see the bogus claims cut, but they would not want people who have been genuinely injured unable to pursue legitimate claims.

“I will be listening to the debate very closely when the Civil Liability Bill is brought before Parliament to make sure the balance is right.”

A second reading of the Civil Liability Bill is due on 24 April, the first opportunity for the Lords to debate the main principles and purpose of the bill. It then goes to committee and a third reading before being heard at the House of Commons in a similar process.