A Diss man won compensation from a leading sportswear manufacturer after suffering injuries from the same sort of high tech boot which caused Wayne Rooney to break his foot.
Mike Ellis, 46, was playing in a football match in Eye in 2007 when one of the studs snapped. His leg twisted and he ruptured his achilles tendon.
As a result his leg was cast and in a splint for 12 weeks and he subsequently had to undergo intensive physiotherapy.
After the injury, Mr Ellis sent his boots back to Adidas, the manufacturers, and they confirmed that they were faulty. He was offered £50 and a new pair of boots by way of compensation.
But he was unhappy with the offer and instead he consulted personal injury lawyers comercrawley of Diss. They commissioned a report from an independent medical expert and, after lengthy negotiations with the Adidas insurers and the beginning of court action, the case was settled for a four figure sum.
In a statement, Mr Ellis says: 'The original offer from Adidas was derisory, given the inconvenience, pain and suffering i went through for 18 months.
'They must have known that at the time, but fortunately my solicitor was able to achieve a much more equitable outcome.'
Emma Crawley is a director of comercrawley and a specialist in sports injuries. 'The problem with the design of boots arises with the demand for greater and greater performance,' she explains.
'Research into the stresses on an athlete's body show that the improved physique of the player, the increasingly technological design of the boot and the close weave of the pitches all place enormous stress on an athlete's bone structure.
'These days there is no 'give' in either the pitches or the studs, so you could say that the studs actually engage too well with the surface.
'As a result, all of that pressure will be put on the human skeleton, as illustrated by the Wayne Rooney injury and perhaps what happened to Luca Civelli at Portman Road.
'Their boots may not have been made by Adidas but they use the same kind of technology. In the case of Mike Ellis, it was the boot which suddenly gave way and all that pent up stress was released catastrophically.'
There is increasing concern over the futuristic design of sports footwear following injuries to high profile players such as Wayne Rooney and David Beckham, though major sportswear brands defend their products robustly. The boot which failed Mr Ellis was an Adidas Predator Pulse, and its designer is Craig Johnstone, the former Liverpool player.
In an interview with Reuters, the international news agency, he has admitted that: 'It's only a matter of time before a player gets so seriously injured that he sues a major sportswear company'.
The problem does not merely affect footballers. Already, tennis player Martina Hingis has filed a $40 million action against Italian sporstwear company Sergio Tacchini alleging poor design of the shoes she wore on court.
Tuesday, 24 May 2011
Monday, 23 May 2011
Suffolk pedestrian wins damages for road collision injuries
comercrawley helped a Suffolk man win damages for the significant injuries he sustained when he was knocked down close to his home.
Brian Harding, who is in his 70s, was struck by a car in a narrow lane near his home in Wetherden.
Mr Harding suffered very serious head, leg and internal injuries and was airlifted to West Suffolk Hospital by the East Anglian Air Ambulance.
He spent 10 days in intensive care and a total of seven weeks in hospital followed by two weeks of further rehabilitation. Although he can't walk as far or as fast as he used to, he has otherwise made a good recovery.
comercrawley was recommended to Mr Harding by a friend and he was delighted to learn of our sponsorship of the East Anglian Air Ambulance.
Ian Comer, director of comercrawley, said; "It was the initial treatment from the air ambulance doctor and the vital minutes saved that made the difference. It's thanks to them and the West Suffolk Hospital that Mr Harding has made such a remarkable recovery."
Brian Harding, who is in his 70s, was struck by a car in a narrow lane near his home in Wetherden.
Mr Harding suffered very serious head, leg and internal injuries and was airlifted to West Suffolk Hospital by the East Anglian Air Ambulance.
He spent 10 days in intensive care and a total of seven weeks in hospital followed by two weeks of further rehabilitation. Although he can't walk as far or as fast as he used to, he has otherwise made a good recovery.
comercrawley was recommended to Mr Harding by a friend and he was delighted to learn of our sponsorship of the East Anglian Air Ambulance.
Ian Comer, director of comercrawley, said; "It was the initial treatment from the air ambulance doctor and the vital minutes saved that made the difference. It's thanks to them and the West Suffolk Hospital that Mr Harding has made such a remarkable recovery."
Sunday, 22 May 2011
Young East Harling mother wins damages after head-on smash
A young mother from East Harling was awarded five figure damages for injuries she received when her car collided head-on with a van.
In 2006 Claire Seager, 32 at the time and on maternity leave from her job as a pharmaceutical technician, was returning with a friend and her children from visiting Planet Zoom in Dereham. On the Hingham Road near Great Ellingham a Mercedes van which was travelling in the opposite direction crossed the road and collided with her car.
Ms Seager was trapped and unconscious and had to be cut free by the emergency services, then airlifted by the East Anglian Air Ambulance to the Norfolk and Norwich hospital.
She had broken both arms and her right leg and underwent extensive surgery. She also suffered injuries to her back and various lacerations. Ms Seager spent three days in intensive care and remained in hospital for three weeks. When she left hospital she was confined to a wheelchair for six weeks, and had to undergo physiotherapy until the end of 2007.
Ms Seager has no memory of the accident, nor of anything after leaving Dereham before the accident until three days afterwards. Details of the accident were provided by witnesses.
During her time in hospital Ms Seager was separated from her baby daughter, Ella. She found she could not breast-feed Ella without assistance because she could not hold her, owing to her broken arms.
The inability to hold her baby even after discharge from hospital continued to cause Ms Seager great distress.
'I will never get that time back,' she says.
Although her injuries have healed she is left with conspicuous scars both on her arms and her leg. Her movement is still slightly restricted and she is not expected to make any further recovery, though she has been able to adapt. She has developed travel anxiety as a result of the accident.
She decided to seek damages for her injuries from the driver of the Mercedes. She approached Diss-based lawyers and personal injury specialists comercrawley. Director Emma Crawley, who managed her legal case, explains the circumstances of the damages award.
'This has been an enormously traumatic episode in Claire's life,' Emma Crawley explains.
'She had only just given birth to her child, so the horror of the accident had an especially big impact on her. It also interrupted what had been a precious time for her, the first weeks spent with her new child. So it has inevitably been an extremely traumatic period for her.
'Fortunately we were able to negotiate Claire's claim against the other driver's insurers without recourse to a trial.
'In spite of her injuries, in many ways Claire had a lucky escape because those injuries could have been much worse. She was fortunate in having the service of the East Anglian Air Ambulance, who may have made a difference in the long-term outcome by being able to get her to hospital that much quicker and so reduce any potential complications.'
Claire Seager was eager to acknowledge the part played in rescuing her from the accident by the East Anglian Air Ambulance. 'Although I have no memory of the circumstances of the collision or what happened afterwards, I'm aware that the situation was considered serious enough to call out the air ambulance,' she says.
'It's not generally recognized that the air ambulance is not paid for by the NHS and is entirely supported by charitable donations, so I consider myself very fortunate to live in a part of the country which enjoys such a marvellous service.'
20.08.2009
In 2006 Claire Seager, 32 at the time and on maternity leave from her job as a pharmaceutical technician, was returning with a friend and her children from visiting Planet Zoom in Dereham. On the Hingham Road near Great Ellingham a Mercedes van which was travelling in the opposite direction crossed the road and collided with her car.
Ms Seager was trapped and unconscious and had to be cut free by the emergency services, then airlifted by the East Anglian Air Ambulance to the Norfolk and Norwich hospital.
She had broken both arms and her right leg and underwent extensive surgery. She also suffered injuries to her back and various lacerations. Ms Seager spent three days in intensive care and remained in hospital for three weeks. When she left hospital she was confined to a wheelchair for six weeks, and had to undergo physiotherapy until the end of 2007.
Ms Seager has no memory of the accident, nor of anything after leaving Dereham before the accident until three days afterwards. Details of the accident were provided by witnesses.
During her time in hospital Ms Seager was separated from her baby daughter, Ella. She found she could not breast-feed Ella without assistance because she could not hold her, owing to her broken arms.
The inability to hold her baby even after discharge from hospital continued to cause Ms Seager great distress.
'I will never get that time back,' she says.
Although her injuries have healed she is left with conspicuous scars both on her arms and her leg. Her movement is still slightly restricted and she is not expected to make any further recovery, though she has been able to adapt. She has developed travel anxiety as a result of the accident.
She decided to seek damages for her injuries from the driver of the Mercedes. She approached Diss-based lawyers and personal injury specialists comercrawley. Director Emma Crawley, who managed her legal case, explains the circumstances of the damages award.
'This has been an enormously traumatic episode in Claire's life,' Emma Crawley explains.
'She had only just given birth to her child, so the horror of the accident had an especially big impact on her. It also interrupted what had been a precious time for her, the first weeks spent with her new child. So it has inevitably been an extremely traumatic period for her.
'Fortunately we were able to negotiate Claire's claim against the other driver's insurers without recourse to a trial.
'In spite of her injuries, in many ways Claire had a lucky escape because those injuries could have been much worse. She was fortunate in having the service of the East Anglian Air Ambulance, who may have made a difference in the long-term outcome by being able to get her to hospital that much quicker and so reduce any potential complications.'
Claire Seager was eager to acknowledge the part played in rescuing her from the accident by the East Anglian Air Ambulance. 'Although I have no memory of the circumstances of the collision or what happened afterwards, I'm aware that the situation was considered serious enough to call out the air ambulance,' she says.
'It's not generally recognized that the air ambulance is not paid for by the NHS and is entirely supported by charitable donations, so I consider myself very fortunate to live in a part of the country which enjoys such a marvellous service.'
20.08.2009
Monday, 25 April 2011
Asbestos Campaign
comercrawley supports HSE asbestos campaign
comercrawley has voiced its support for an ongoing campaign by The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which is aimed at tradesmen who work with asbestos.
In the UK around 500,000 non-domestic buildings contain asbestos. About 20 workers - including plumbers, joiners, and electricians - die every week from asbestos-related diseases in Britain.
The ‘Hidden Killer’ campaign aims to increase awareness of the risks posed by asbestos and how workers can best protect themselves. It is supported by unions, employers’ representatives, health charities, sufferers and victims’ groups.
David Snowball, HSE regional director for Yorkshire and Humber, said: “Asbestos is Britain’s biggest industrial killer. Contrary to what many people believe, the risks are not a thing of the past. Asbestos-related illnesses claim the lives of 4,000 people every year – more than die in road accidents.”
Ian Comer, director of comercrawley, said: “Unfortunately we are still dealing with the results of careless handling of asbestos in the past.
“There is a tendency to believe that, because we now know much more about asbestos, the risk has been much reduced or almost eradicated.
“But there are still a great many buildings and situations in which asbestos remains, and it is still of the greatest importance that those working where asbestos may be found should think of that possibility before they disturb the material.
“Otherwise the dreadful long-term toll of asbestos is likely to continue for decades to come. And that it why comercrawley fully supports the HSE’s Hidden Killer campaign.”
Click here to visit the ‘Hidden Killer’ campaign website.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/asbestos/hiddenkiller/index.htm
comercrawley has voiced its support for an ongoing campaign by The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) which is aimed at tradesmen who work with asbestos.
In the UK around 500,000 non-domestic buildings contain asbestos. About 20 workers - including plumbers, joiners, and electricians - die every week from asbestos-related diseases in Britain.
The ‘Hidden Killer’ campaign aims to increase awareness of the risks posed by asbestos and how workers can best protect themselves. It is supported by unions, employers’ representatives, health charities, sufferers and victims’ groups.
David Snowball, HSE regional director for Yorkshire and Humber, said: “Asbestos is Britain’s biggest industrial killer. Contrary to what many people believe, the risks are not a thing of the past. Asbestos-related illnesses claim the lives of 4,000 people every year – more than die in road accidents.”
Ian Comer, director of comercrawley, said: “Unfortunately we are still dealing with the results of careless handling of asbestos in the past.
“There is a tendency to believe that, because we now know much more about asbestos, the risk has been much reduced or almost eradicated.
“But there are still a great many buildings and situations in which asbestos remains, and it is still of the greatest importance that those working where asbestos may be found should think of that possibility before they disturb the material.
“Otherwise the dreadful long-term toll of asbestos is likely to continue for decades to come. And that it why comercrawley fully supports the HSE’s Hidden Killer campaign.”
Click here to visit the ‘Hidden Killer’ campaign website.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/asbestos/hiddenkiller/index.htm
Monday, 18 April 2011
No Win No Fee
It means what is says. If your lawyer represents you under a proper no win no fee agreement (also called a conditonal fee agreement) you should not have to pay your lawyer anything if your claim is unsuccessful.
Why would a lawyer be prepared to do work and risk no getting paid? Well there are a number of reasons:-
(i) The lawyer would want to be satisfied that there was a reasonable prospect of succeeding with your claim and the claim was not fanciful or doomed to failure from the outset.
(ii) The vast majority of injury claims taken on by lawyers are successful – it is reasonably easy to pick a straightforward winning claim, the art of our work is to select the wining cases where the liability issues are not so clear cut.
(iii) Your lawyer will be entitled to recover a "bonus" or success fee (currently paid for by the Defendant insurer). This is meant to compensate the lawyer for running a case where there is a risk of losing and not getting paid. This success fee is capped in the majority of cases such as road traffic accidents (12.5% of basic costs) where the liability issues and risks of litigation are meant to be more straightforward and easier to call or an accident at work (25% of basic costs) where usually the liability issues are not so clear cut.
In other cases, for example slipping and tripping accidents, involving claims against the local highway authority the Claimant’s solicitors can set there own success fee in accordance with the perceived risk of litigation although if the Defendant is required to pay the Claimant’s costs in due course the Defendant is entitled to challenge the level of the success fee.
In the event that a claim ends up at trial (when clearly there is going to be highly contested issues) then the success fee will normally increase to 100% of the Claimant’s basic costs i.e. the lawyer can double their fee if they succeed at a final hearing. This sounds all very well but very few cases end up at trial and if they do then these are claims where there is a major dispute on the issues. Therefore while a Claimant’s lawyer might recover substantial costs if the claim is successful at trial the lawyer will also receive nothing by way of costs if the claim fails, it is therefore usually high risk at this stage.
There is currently a proposal that the Government is looking at introducing that the success fee payable in the event of a successful claim should no longer be paid for by the Defendant insurer but by the Claimant out of damages recovered. The proposal protects the Claimant in terms of the level of the success fee by capping the success fee at a maximum of 25% of the Claimant’s compensation, essentially this would guarantee a Claimant recovered 75% of the damages that were recovered on his behalf. On the basis that the Claimant is not at risk and can bring a claim at the moment without any thought of contributing to the costs of a claim this is probably a reasonable proposal. If this proposal is introduced then it is likely that market forces will drive down the level of success fees and Claimant’s will shop around to obtain the best deal from a Claimant personal injury lawyer.
Contact: www.comercrawley.co.uk
Why would a lawyer be prepared to do work and risk no getting paid? Well there are a number of reasons:-
(i) The lawyer would want to be satisfied that there was a reasonable prospect of succeeding with your claim and the claim was not fanciful or doomed to failure from the outset.
(ii) The vast majority of injury claims taken on by lawyers are successful – it is reasonably easy to pick a straightforward winning claim, the art of our work is to select the wining cases where the liability issues are not so clear cut.
(iii) Your lawyer will be entitled to recover a "bonus" or success fee (currently paid for by the Defendant insurer). This is meant to compensate the lawyer for running a case where there is a risk of losing and not getting paid. This success fee is capped in the majority of cases such as road traffic accidents (12.5% of basic costs) where the liability issues and risks of litigation are meant to be more straightforward and easier to call or an accident at work (25% of basic costs) where usually the liability issues are not so clear cut.
In other cases, for example slipping and tripping accidents, involving claims against the local highway authority the Claimant’s solicitors can set there own success fee in accordance with the perceived risk of litigation although if the Defendant is required to pay the Claimant’s costs in due course the Defendant is entitled to challenge the level of the success fee.
In the event that a claim ends up at trial (when clearly there is going to be highly contested issues) then the success fee will normally increase to 100% of the Claimant’s basic costs i.e. the lawyer can double their fee if they succeed at a final hearing. This sounds all very well but very few cases end up at trial and if they do then these are claims where there is a major dispute on the issues. Therefore while a Claimant’s lawyer might recover substantial costs if the claim is successful at trial the lawyer will also receive nothing by way of costs if the claim fails, it is therefore usually high risk at this stage.
There is currently a proposal that the Government is looking at introducing that the success fee payable in the event of a successful claim should no longer be paid for by the Defendant insurer but by the Claimant out of damages recovered. The proposal protects the Claimant in terms of the level of the success fee by capping the success fee at a maximum of 25% of the Claimant’s compensation, essentially this would guarantee a Claimant recovered 75% of the damages that were recovered on his behalf. On the basis that the Claimant is not at risk and can bring a claim at the moment without any thought of contributing to the costs of a claim this is probably a reasonable proposal. If this proposal is introduced then it is likely that market forces will drive down the level of success fees and Claimant’s will shop around to obtain the best deal from a Claimant personal injury lawyer.
Contact: www.comercrawley.co.uk
Sunday, 17 April 2011
What is a Claimant Personal Injury Lawyer?
- Well we act for the injured victim of an act of negligence, breach of duty or deliberate act, and recover compensation for that person’s injury and loss.
- The injured victim who brings the claim is called a Claimant.
- The person or body a claim is brought against is a Defendant.
- A Claimant will always be an individual person whereas a Defendant can be an individual, an incorporated company, or business or partnership, a local authority, a club etc.
- The injury can comprise or involve mental harm as well as physical damage.
- The Claimant if successful in a claim in negligence or breach of duty can recover damages (compensation) for a wide range of losses which may flow from the injury. A non exhaustive list is:-
- general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity.
- loss of earnings.
- damage to clothing and property.
- care and assistance.
- medical / rehabilitation treatment costs.
- A Claimant can recover damages non only for past losses but also future losses, for example if the Claimant’s earning ability has been affected or if future medical treatment is likely to be required.
Why use comercrawley to deal with your personal injury claim?
- Our lawyers are all specialist in injury claims.
- It is the only work we do.
- Two of our solicitors, Ian Comer and Emma Crawley, are on the Law Society Specialist Personal Injury Panel. Panel membership is only achieved if you can demonstrate a a high level of specialist knowledge and suitable experience in dealing with the most complex and demanding of cases and an ability to run claims in an effective and straightforward manner.
- We give our advice and talk to you in plain language, we do not try and hide behind the jargon.
- We are on both the Headway (acquired brain injury) and Spinal Injuries Association Panel of Solicitors which acknowledged the firm’s ability to deal with the most complex of cases.
- We respond promptly to all communications from our client, we give clear, straightforward advice and will make sure your claim is progressed as swiftly as possible.
- We will make sure you understand what we are doing for you.
- We will come and see you at home, even in hospital if you can’t get to see us.
- Best of all our service is at no cost to you.
- We carry out all our work on a "no win, no fee" basis (see later blog) and give our client three assurances at the outset of their claim:-
(i) The client will pay no cost win or lose.
(ii) We will not take any compensation from a client, they will receive 100% of what we recover for them.
(iii) We will front all expenses of running the claim.
So rest assured it will be a "no cost to you" service.
How can we do this?
The answer is straightforward, in the event of a successful claim we are able to recover our costs and expenses from the Defendant insurers. If we are unsuccessful we do not charge you. Our interest in a claim is the same as yours – we want to succeed otherwise we don’t get paid.
We will only take on a claim with a reasonable (better than 50%) prospect of success – we are not interested in pursuing cases with no realistic prospect of succeeding and would give you clear advice at the outset on how we rate your claim.
If you have a claim to make, if you have a question to ask, if you are not satisfied with your existing legal advisors contact us to discuss matters – you have absolutely nothing to lose.
Contact: www.comercrawley.co.uk
- The injured victim who brings the claim is called a Claimant.
- The person or body a claim is brought against is a Defendant.
- A Claimant will always be an individual person whereas a Defendant can be an individual, an incorporated company, or business or partnership, a local authority, a club etc.
- The injury can comprise or involve mental harm as well as physical damage.
- The Claimant if successful in a claim in negligence or breach of duty can recover damages (compensation) for a wide range of losses which may flow from the injury. A non exhaustive list is:-
- general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity.
- loss of earnings.
- damage to clothing and property.
- care and assistance.
- medical / rehabilitation treatment costs.
- A Claimant can recover damages non only for past losses but also future losses, for example if the Claimant’s earning ability has been affected or if future medical treatment is likely to be required.
Why use comercrawley to deal with your personal injury claim?
- Our lawyers are all specialist in injury claims.
- It is the only work we do.
- Two of our solicitors, Ian Comer and Emma Crawley, are on the Law Society Specialist Personal Injury Panel. Panel membership is only achieved if you can demonstrate a a high level of specialist knowledge and suitable experience in dealing with the most complex and demanding of cases and an ability to run claims in an effective and straightforward manner.
- We give our advice and talk to you in plain language, we do not try and hide behind the jargon.
- We are on both the Headway (acquired brain injury) and Spinal Injuries Association Panel of Solicitors which acknowledged the firm’s ability to deal with the most complex of cases.
- We respond promptly to all communications from our client, we give clear, straightforward advice and will make sure your claim is progressed as swiftly as possible.
- We will make sure you understand what we are doing for you.
- We will come and see you at home, even in hospital if you can’t get to see us.
- Best of all our service is at no cost to you.
- We carry out all our work on a "no win, no fee" basis (see later blog) and give our client three assurances at the outset of their claim:-
(i) The client will pay no cost win or lose.
(ii) We will not take any compensation from a client, they will receive 100% of what we recover for them.
(iii) We will front all expenses of running the claim.
So rest assured it will be a "no cost to you" service.
How can we do this?
The answer is straightforward, in the event of a successful claim we are able to recover our costs and expenses from the Defendant insurers. If we are unsuccessful we do not charge you. Our interest in a claim is the same as yours – we want to succeed otherwise we don’t get paid.
We will only take on a claim with a reasonable (better than 50%) prospect of success – we are not interested in pursuing cases with no realistic prospect of succeeding and would give you clear advice at the outset on how we rate your claim.
If you have a claim to make, if you have a question to ask, if you are not satisfied with your existing legal advisors contact us to discuss matters – you have absolutely nothing to lose.
Contact: www.comercrawley.co.uk
Monday, 4 April 2011
Insurers are behind clampdown on ‘no win no fee’ services
Ian Comer, director of comercrawley, responds to George Osborne’s proposed restrictions on ‘no win no fee’ services – and to David Cameron’s view that there is a damaging personal injury culture in the UK.
“The government in their wisdom removed legal aid for personal injury work in the mid 90s, allowing solicitors to take these cases on under a ‘no win no fee’ arrangement.
“They effectively wanted to save money and said that members of the public could have access to justice - the right to make a claim - by solicitors taking the risk of litigation, rather than the State.
“In return for taking that risk solicitors were allowed to charge a success fee - a bonus on their basic costs - to compensate them for the risk of losing and not getting paid.
“Initially the success fee was payable by the client out of their damages but this was capped at 25% so the client was always guaranteed 75% of their compensation, which was highly acceptable to everyone.
“Then, for some bizarre reason, the government decided that the success fee would be paid by the defendant’s insurer. So when the defendant lost, the insurer would pay compensation, legal costs and then the other side’s success fee as well. This didn't go down at all well with the insurers and so they lobbied to get the government to cap success fees in certain types of cases.
“For instance in road traffic accidents - which make up the vast majority of all personal injury cases - the success fee is capped at 12.5%. In work-related accidents the success fee is capped at 25%. The exception is where the claim concludes at trial ( very few do) in which case, if successful, the solicitor can receive a 100% success fee i.e. double their costs.
“Over the past 10 years or so, at comercrawley we have operated all our claims on no win no fee and do not charge clients a penny, win or lose. We fund (to the tune of several hundred thousand pounds) all the ongoing expenses of running clients’ claims including the cost of medical reports, other experts’ fees, police reports, the cost of accessing medical records etc. On one case alone we have over £50,000 outstanding on disbursements we have funded for the client.
“Firms like comercrawley have lifted the burden of funding personal injury litigation off the State and now insurers are saying they don't like it. They say there is a litigation culture but in fact the number of claims made is not increasing.
“David Cameron talks about personal injury lawyers jumping to take on a claim on the slightest pretext – but the whole point about no win no fee is that you don't get paid if you don't win the claim. If you took on any old rubbish you would soon be out of business. Who wants to work on a ‘no win no fee’ basis on something where there is only a slim prospect of success?
“If the current proposal was just that the success fee should once again be paid by the client out of damages - subject to the same safeguards as before - then I don't see too much of a problem.
“In fact, as I am sure that the government is well aware, some personal injury solicitors will cut their own throats by offering to do cases for lower and lower success fees until we get back to where we are – clients not paying anything towards the litigation.
"However, this is just the thin end of the wedge. Over the last seven years personal injury lawyers have seen insurers and the government force through costs changes which have meant that the vast majority of claims are now dealt with on fixed costs - and we have seen a significant reduction on these costs during this period. For example, seven years ago a straightforward road accident claim valued at £5,000 would attract fixed costs of £1,800 - now such a claim would attract costs of just £1,200.
“I am sure that the government and insurers’ game plan is to drive solicitors out of the market for modest value claims. There is already a new electronic portal system which covers road traffic accident claims up to £10k, which has been designed for use by the public - and I am sure this is the forerunner of excluding costs altogether so the public have to pursue their own claims, and we all know what will happen then.
“The insurers will bank on members of the public getting worn down by the process of delay and prevarication and I am sure the vast majority just won't bother if they have to take on the insurers on their own.”
http://www.comercrawley.co.uk/
“The government in their wisdom removed legal aid for personal injury work in the mid 90s, allowing solicitors to take these cases on under a ‘no win no fee’ arrangement.
“They effectively wanted to save money and said that members of the public could have access to justice - the right to make a claim - by solicitors taking the risk of litigation, rather than the State.
“In return for taking that risk solicitors were allowed to charge a success fee - a bonus on their basic costs - to compensate them for the risk of losing and not getting paid.
“Initially the success fee was payable by the client out of their damages but this was capped at 25% so the client was always guaranteed 75% of their compensation, which was highly acceptable to everyone.
“Then, for some bizarre reason, the government decided that the success fee would be paid by the defendant’s insurer. So when the defendant lost, the insurer would pay compensation, legal costs and then the other side’s success fee as well. This didn't go down at all well with the insurers and so they lobbied to get the government to cap success fees in certain types of cases.
“For instance in road traffic accidents - which make up the vast majority of all personal injury cases - the success fee is capped at 12.5%. In work-related accidents the success fee is capped at 25%. The exception is where the claim concludes at trial ( very few do) in which case, if successful, the solicitor can receive a 100% success fee i.e. double their costs.
“Over the past 10 years or so, at comercrawley we have operated all our claims on no win no fee and do not charge clients a penny, win or lose. We fund (to the tune of several hundred thousand pounds) all the ongoing expenses of running clients’ claims including the cost of medical reports, other experts’ fees, police reports, the cost of accessing medical records etc. On one case alone we have over £50,000 outstanding on disbursements we have funded for the client.
“Firms like comercrawley have lifted the burden of funding personal injury litigation off the State and now insurers are saying they don't like it. They say there is a litigation culture but in fact the number of claims made is not increasing.
“David Cameron talks about personal injury lawyers jumping to take on a claim on the slightest pretext – but the whole point about no win no fee is that you don't get paid if you don't win the claim. If you took on any old rubbish you would soon be out of business. Who wants to work on a ‘no win no fee’ basis on something where there is only a slim prospect of success?
“If the current proposal was just that the success fee should once again be paid by the client out of damages - subject to the same safeguards as before - then I don't see too much of a problem.
“In fact, as I am sure that the government is well aware, some personal injury solicitors will cut their own throats by offering to do cases for lower and lower success fees until we get back to where we are – clients not paying anything towards the litigation.
"However, this is just the thin end of the wedge. Over the last seven years personal injury lawyers have seen insurers and the government force through costs changes which have meant that the vast majority of claims are now dealt with on fixed costs - and we have seen a significant reduction on these costs during this period. For example, seven years ago a straightforward road accident claim valued at £5,000 would attract fixed costs of £1,800 - now such a claim would attract costs of just £1,200.
“I am sure that the government and insurers’ game plan is to drive solicitors out of the market for modest value claims. There is already a new electronic portal system which covers road traffic accident claims up to £10k, which has been designed for use by the public - and I am sure this is the forerunner of excluding costs altogether so the public have to pursue their own claims, and we all know what will happen then.
“The insurers will bank on members of the public getting worn down by the process of delay and prevarication and I am sure the vast majority just won't bother if they have to take on the insurers on their own.”
http://www.comercrawley.co.uk/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)