PI Brief Update

Whatever Next for the PI Claimant? - Julie Carlisle, Boyes Turner

12/05/13. So, here we are, post 1 April and still feeling around in the dark. New clients are being told that the daytime TV promise of “You get to keep 100% of your compensation” no longer necessarily applies, and the cost of ATE insurance premiums is being carefully explained. The world hasn’t ended and we lick our wounds and press on. Sadly of course, the worst is yet to come as the Claims Portal is to be extended sideways and upwards and fixed fees will apply to most claims worth less than £25,000 in July, a short 3 months away.

This next stage in the reforms is going to be interesting. What to tell those whose injuries were caused by potholes, to give but one example? From July this year many claims of a relatively modest value will become uneconomical to run, and this will apply particularly to accidents on the public highway.

Contrary to the commonly held belief that you can “sue anyone for anything nowadays” claims against the council or highway authority for injuries sustained on pavements and roads have never been terribly straightforward and there can’t be many PI solicitors whose hearts sing when such a potential client hobbles into view. These claims require a lot of work and have an uncertain outcome with most local authorities automatically denying liability and refusing to even contemplate pre-proceedings settlements. Add to that the draconian system of fixed fees to be imposed and some firms are going to have no choice but to turn such work away. The man hours required to properly investigate and then vigorously pursue them will simply not be covered.

Of course the public understand that in these straitened times funds are not unlimited. They know that the bad weather which causes so much damage to the roadways is beyond the control of their local authorities. Many of them are concerned about the development of a “compensation culture” and genuinely want to see the number of claims reduced ... until it happens to them.

Once that same member of the public has had the misfortune to step into a pothole and suffer injury it’s a whole different story. They may have fallen heavily, perhaps suffering a fracture. Unable to work for a few weeks they also face increased costs due to their inability to drive, or to care for their children. Quite apart from the pain, they are left out of pocket and outraged that this happened to them. Why should they carry the cost?! Imagine then their dismay when firm after firm tells them that, sorry, there may well be a claim but they are no longer able to take on such cases.

Up until this year the individual practitioner has been free to devote as much time to each client as they thought the claim merited. Of course, they may not have recovered for all of the time spent on each case, but they were allowed to present their bill and argue their corner. From July, the fixed fee regime could see a firm recovering no more than £900, regardless of the labour required to achieve that result.

Only volume legal services operations will have any hope of streamlining their processes sufficiently to allow them to make a profit on claims of modest value – and even then will they want to take on highway slips and trips?

As Lord Justice Elias commented when dismissing the judicial review brought by APIL and others against the government’s decision to cut RTA Portal fees, this is “a matter for the ballot box, not the court”. It will take time, but the public will slowly become aware of their predicament. It will be interesting to see how they react.

Julie Carlisle
Boyes Turner

Image cc flickr.com/photos/new_and_used_tires/6842127640/