Claimant firms face uncertain future after MoJ sees off reform challenge
Claimant law firms could be forced to rethink their business models after the Government saw off a challenge to reform its forthcoming overhaul of the low-value claims system – changes that could cost personal injury (PI) lawyers an estimated £200m a year. The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers and the Motor Accident Solicitors Society last Friday (1 March) failed in a High Court challenge to the Ministry of Justice's (MoJ) plans to cut fixed fees for claims processed via the Road Traffic Accident (RTA) Portal from £1,200 to £500.
March 07, 2013 at 07:03 PM
3 minute read
Claimant law firms could be forced to rethink their business models after the Government saw off a challenge to its forthcoming overhaul of the low-value claims system – changes that could cost personal injury (PI) lawyers an estimated £200m a year.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers and the Motor Accident Solicitors Society last Friday (1 March) failed in a High Court challenge to the Ministry of Justice's (MoJ) plans to cut fixed fees for claims processed via the Road Traffic Accident (RTA) Portal from £1,200 to £500.
The RTA Portal – set up in 2010 as a fast-track for low-value PI claims – will be opened up to employer's liability and public liability claims this summer and rebranded as the 'Claims Portal', with the maximum size of claims raised from £10,000 to £25,000.
DWF occupational health head Simon Denyer thinks the changes could force claimant lawyers to reconstruct their business models to adapt to the new system.
"These reforms will prove to have a significant impact on the claimant business model. We are now in the territory where claimant lawyers need to reassess – if they haven't done so already – their business practices and look inventively at how a profitable business model can be constructed.
"It's possible some firms may look to trim their claimant practices. But on the flip side, there'll be others that will seek to expand as they adjust to the new fee levels."
But Kennedys insurance partner Tracy Head believes the simplicity of the Claims Portal will reduce the need for more expensive senior lawyers to get involved in low-value claims.
"Motor claims require the completion of a questionnaire, which is a tick box exercise with only a small amount of free text, so its completion can now be passed down to a more junior lawyer – although I appreciate some of the smaller firms with less resource, particularly IT, may struggle," she commented.
Weightmans claims partner Kate Lotts (pictured), who helped design the original RTA scheme, does not believe the reforms will impact on access to justice, as some within the claimant lobby have argued.
"The combination of changes, including the referral fee ban, should see some modest reduction in claims frequency, particularly around the more frivolous claims but I don't think there'll be an issue of access to justice.
"Over the past ten years the motor claims market has undergone significant change yet claims have gone through the roof – firms reinvented themselves and they will do again."
The reforms of the current system are part of the MoJ's 'compensation culture' crackdown, with the legal fee cuts intended to enable insurers to pass on savings to customers through lower premiums.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCanadian Media Giants Sue OpenAI Over Alleged Copyright Violations in ChatGPT Training
3 minute readFormer Head of Finance at DLA Piper and Freshfields Quietly 'Struck Off'
2 minute readAshurst Bolsters Singapore Offering With A&O Shearman Hire
Trending Stories
- 1In-House Moves of Month: Discover Fills Awkward CLO Opening, Allegion GC Lasts Just 3 Months
- 2Delaware Court Holds Stance on Musk's $55.8B Pay Rescission, Awards Shareholder Counsel $345M
- 3'Go 12 Rounds' or Settle: Rear-End Collision Leads to $2.25M Presuit Settlement
- 42 Federal Judges Rescind Senior Status After Trump Win. Might More Follow?
- 5Japan Highlights Burr & Forman Director's 'Body Of Work' With Highest Honor
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250