Hello and welcome to today's webinar from data law in relation to the new claims process, which I'm sure you're all legs excited about as I am as really nobody still knows whether or not is going to happen are indeed what will happen when he does come in. But what I'm hopeful for is that by the end of today session you'll have a good idea where everything is up in relation to the build. But far more importantly for me, what the opportunities on what the worries are when this system actually gets introduced. So that's it for the session. So let me take you through this. So I was asked, really by days of our whether or not you can predict the future on what's happening with the claims process. So I said, Right, hang on a minute, Let me get me crystal ball. Oh, because the worry here on this new claims process is that it still hasn't been built, still don't know the rules and ultimately were being driven in a way that seems to be one sided Andan tell you a little bit more on that from a story that I got from a conference this week. As we get through the slides put as a business. Of course, we've got to try and plan for all eventualities. So this well, we will hopefully give you that little bit of understanding to kind of go. All right. They sees what's knocking on our door, and this is hopefully we're gonna make money out of it. So what do we know? Well, what we do know is that there's going to be multiple portals on for me. This is one of the most interesting point because everybody at the moment keeps referring to the litigant in person portal this ally P as being the new portal. But actually, this new portal is going to be for all personal injury claims. Up to £5000 on include damages of up to £10,000. Now for experience behind Practitioner, you're probably Sinai going. Mm. This small claims limit What? That rising to £5000 come to the majority of these claims and I suspect it likely will. Although there are worries from the defendant's side that that £5000 damages mark is in question and that will be one of the opportunities that we talk about later. The other King Point that people are talking about is this alternative dispute resolution because it seemed dead straight forward to those building the system that if you're a litigant in person, you're gonna want access to some kind of mediation. And they were creating a scenario. Was a litigant in person you would have access to mediation on then, at one of the M I B sessions where they were talking about the build So far, somebody quite rightly said to them, They say they are. It's gonna be available to those who have got legal representation as well, isn't it? And all of a sudden it was like a line bull moment going on to say, Ah, we're not fallen, Andi. If that's the case, then somebody who is being represented, whether it be illegal representation or not, is now going to have a different route to justice than somebody that has no representation. How does that work? How is that fair? And so very much so when we talk about the new civil procedure rules, that's one of the things that landed at the committee's door, and they just pushed it straight back and said, You can't do this. Somebody's gonna have to come up with an explanation or a change of policy that currently exists That says that if you're unrepresented, you have a different accessory to just this than anybody. That's represented, which is perhaps no surprise when we talk about the civil procedure rules that that's still not written and they're not written, and hopefully they will be written by January. However, I heard from somebody on the Civil Procedure Rules Committee at this conference this week, and the most astounding thing was said from a claimant lawyer perspective. And I appreciate that when you listen to my webinars three dates of all you, you're fully understand the I own claim of biased. But it was said that the new rules are being written based on the build off the M I B screens. Now, to me, that tells me that there is a new insurance body that is funded by the insurance company that is creating with screens that the Rules Committee is going too much, I said, Surely not needs to be the other way around. So it is a massive worry if that really is exactly how it is being built. I mean, I've complete respect for the M I B. They're building something. And if you remember, cast your mind back to 2010 or 2000 and nine before the implementation of the current claims portal on the organization that was building the portal due to go live roughly the same time. Is this almost at the ST sixth of April? On at this point, CRIF, the builders of the original portal had not even been retained. So when everybody says I don't think it could be introduced, have not got enough time to build it. Just cast your mind back. They hadn't even Bean retained in the October of 2000 and nine for a portal that went live, albeit was pushed back three weeks. If remember, four weeks from the start of April to the end of April, they will once that ahead. So what else do we know? Well, we definitely know that the portal is going to have an integrated motor insurance database check, which is handy is there might be running the most insurance database on. Don't you love acronyms? E now will, because I'll be talking about the M I d In the end, m i b and ask you and etcetera as partners presentation and just always strikes me how we are full of acronyms. I will try to avoid them. Um, so if you're building in UK or in putting a new claim into the new portal, it will run the voter insurance database. Check on their fault will apparently send the new claim notification form to the motor ensure that comes up on the M I. T check now is a regular user of the In my day, I I know full well that we get multiple insurers back on numerous occasions. Yes, it's no and the vast majority. But I would say to you that probably four or 5% of cases get multiple insurers, Buck. So be interesting to see how that develops. One of the other key points sort of incident in person or certainly for anybody bringing a claim is that the medical prognosis period can be awaited before submission of the medical report. And to me, that just stacks up with exactly on things out at the moment. Certainly our practice is to remind clients that here's the medical report they are more than welcome to wait until the outcome of the prognosis to ensure that they recover. Because if they submitted early and they settle the claim and it's tough and there's nothing going to change on that spot on parts of this new process on the other that this is now I think the another key point. Provide a free, integrated claims on the writing exchange check for individuals. Now I say this because I asked that Want to be on my deeper on my beat presentations? How is that gonna work? Because if you're a litigant in person, you're going to get a free ask U P I check on. If you are represented by a lawyer, you're going to get an ask. U P I checked the m I b are saying that the portal will be accessible by anybody. Anybody that wants to represent a claimant. I e claims management company on obviously is legal director for credit. However, accident exchange we fall into that. And so we're in this position where if we want to present to present these claims on behalf of these clients, could I have access to ask u P I because at the moment. Q b I's limited to lawyers. So when we talk about worries and opportunities at the end of this, simply warn of the issues that would happen. If you want to see I'm seeing listening to this weapon, huh? Is you have no guarantee that you're gonna have access to being able to import for multiple clients. And representative, bit of a worried out one. So again, But to the m I b on their release, I think it was this week in relation to the current development stages have now highlighted this very issue are saying they're court that currently waiting notification from the government as to whether or not this convey be open to those other represents IFC. We're not lawyers. What else do we know? Well, this professional use of it will probably include CM seats because he how are you going to explain them? These are small claims being represented by anybody and Sam sees are the biggest worry for the government to come into this area. But actually, there's no way of stopping them unless you limit that. Ask you PR point. It's really gonna be on this. So if you think in that your CMC we're gonna rule the world actually might have an issue on that because you might not even be allowed access to this portal. Apparently, is gonna be user friendly for lips. Now, if you think of the current portal on the number of different screens that you have to import some of them at that straightforward army, you know, enter your name and address, enter the third party's name and address. L enter registration numbers. There's gonna be drop down boxes for the areas of impact. See your vehicle. There's going to be drop down boxes for the type of accident scenario they're all going to generate this claims notification for But there's still part like there was notification form that I can't believe for one minute it's gonna be user friendly to lips. And that's one of the things that I'm gonna took Jonah's part about worries. So what are people saying? Well, James Heath is that president of Foil. He's saying leave the dogma at the door and focus on delivering a solution that works for claimants and compensates is alike. Now I don't think he was meaning this type of document, the door and obviously, for those of you that know me, you know, I am made marking cyclist on. I would much rather that dog movers at my door they missed corn imports of So what else do we hear? Barnicle's from us. He's worried about a minimum viable product that does not say car accident victims fully support letting him in person on, discriminates against legally represented claimants and provides on Third Pantages for CME sees should not be acceptable. So again, you were in this scenario here, where we've got this potential ultimate dream product that nobody's talking about Billy ever achieve it again? If you cast your mind back to the Koran portal, you're in a position where that has developed over time. If you remember right back at the start, there was no integration possible between the likes of Proclaim and other computer systems in the portal, and it was only months later when that was introduced, so that this minimum viable product is what everybody's saying. Yeah, that's that's exactly what we're after, but really, is that really what's going to be achievable here? Because there's all sorts of things that are going to cause problems? Lattin saying he wants a single, simple to understand pre action protocol. It could be drafted to cover the operation of the new portal on all claims that start there so straightaway. He's saying that every claim is gonna be starting that in, not portal, unless you think it's more than £5000. And if it does, then be calm more than £5000 then there's got to be some integration between the new portal on the current portal. Because, of course, that comes claims just significantly more has not been thought through. Is there a box that's going to be able to be ticked? To say it now falls out of this current portal because the claim exceeds the £5000 something that's no on the bill? But I've seen so far from me and might be, but they do have all the sprint sessions, and maybe that's not part and parcel of the release so far. So there buck in my world on with C H O on Kirsten. But no, if the jobs Tho is saying it's commonly held both fallacious view that credit higher repair, not proclaim itself moss, but they seize legally incorrect because the claimant incurs the loss in their own name on is legally responsible to repay these in accordance with the contract of the agreement that they have signed. This is a proper face plant moment for me because you're in a position were already explained to you that the lip filling in that claims notification form is gonna be facing some really, really tough questions on those questions. Have implications, Andi, because the view of the people who seem to be right in this product, both from the screen part of you in the rules point of view seem to be of the opinion that credit Ivan credit repair is going to be outside of this. And if he's going to be outside of this, and how is that going to work on the morning is significant? I'll explain why in a minute. Firstly, on the credit higher point, this is the corn claims notification form. No doubt you're all familiar with it. I've seen it in some of the way. This is Section eight. If the claimant has been provided a vehicle by the insurer, please go to section now. I don't know if most of you aware But if, in ensure it is providing a vehicle half the side, it's through a credit hire company. It used to be that the used to push gal urges for Kirsty cars not still exists. But a lot of the time being sure is actually recommending their client the access to companies like ourselves who provide a blooming good service for that customer. But how does that letting any person potentially understand this? Does the claimant require the use of an alternative vehicle? Yes, I know as to claim have been provided with the use of an alternative vehicle, Yes or no? If yes, is he still ongoing? So if this happens is part of this new portal. Can you understand that there potentially we've got a problem? And certainly on the build that I've seen so far, the M I B have instructed us in a completely different question on it's about. Do you need a higher vehicle? And that's a simple question. Of course, a lot of customers don't realize that. Do they need a honey vehicle? Well, don't need a high vehicle by insurance provided me with the vehicle on. The biggest issue has already been highlighted when claimant lawyers gets, he wrote. This was in the Philips Mikel in global logistic case in 2016 On on this claims notification form on this particular section, eight point on those two questions does declaim It required the use of an alternative vehicle. No. Has the payment been provided with the use of an alternative vehicle? No. You could argue that in that particular point in time that actually that those questions could be either all on those and still mean exactly the same well, in this Mikel cakes, the core highlighted that the signature on a statement of truth holding out what the evidence is that's is what the case is all about. The judge went on to confirm that the defendant is entitled to rely upon that. So when the solicitor has said no, the claimant doesn't need an alternative vehicle. Andi know they and don't they don't have one already that Did you say that bit I can take And I can take that bit and say I can rely on not if I'm the defendant. But the claim of Cornwall misunderstood this. This is a claimant lawyer who's completing this, who may well have just said in accordance with part of six, the production protocal vehicle related damages are perceived to be outside of the portal. So you've got Higher company who's been presenting the replacement vehicle charges in the high in the repaired charges separately to the CNF. But now you're in a position where you go is saying that the lawyers still has to ask those questions still has to make sure those questions were completed on there because this statement of truth that the end is going to hold them accountable if they put the wrong answers to those questions he respect different. The fight that the High Company way well have already presented have been in concert with the third party Insurance to say there is an ongoing claim and then the new process. This is a release from the M I. B. You're in this position where the they are highlighting that if it gets to the stage to park, then these things, these extra things, that going to be included on what they're specifically saying here is that a settlement style park to show offers how are rejected. I'm going to be problem possibilities. So where were on the stage to pack it moment Unassuming. The stage to part looks similar. Going forward, there is a part in that. It says car hire, claim ICTs and being pursued yes or no. So if you're listening and in person on you've used the company like s and you're in this position where, you know, acts have been in communication on your behalf with the insurer to sort out the repairs in the higher. Then what happens if I leave that blank? What happens that if I leave that car hi, a bit completely blind? Because what sneakers saying is essentially doesn't matter if you don't put in there your hire car charges and on it then settles. When you said in your claims notification form that there was no claim for these and the defendant can say I'm not paying anything that comes after the personal injury is settled because you told me there was nothing else to claim. Imagine explaining that to re litigate in person face with same question as part of the new portal. This is massive. This is a big worry that the people just will not understand this. Okay, so my next line is really a change of topic now because well, wanted to think about is whether or not we're gonna make any money. Because, of course, the current way that we're making money is by receiving costs. I say we, I mean in relation to a personal injury. Claimant solicitor, you are receiving costs from the defendant emulation to claim on your in this position where you will then charging client a percentage of their damages. So if we look at the current proposed tariff, highlight the current proposed tariff because there is an argument to say that this time will change muscle making a really big play for this, they've queried how the time has been calculated under a freedom of information, that it's been reported back to them, that it's been from multiple different areas at multiple different personal injury tools that we're all defended based then where must have sought clarification. It's then combined that actually does also been some M. O. J. Analyst looking at it now with the graces to respect to an M. O. J analyst, how can they possibly consider what that years of knowledge of judicial close board guidelines except you and this is so different than where we are at the moment. Okay? So rather than go through those numbers, we're gonna bring you back to that slide and put some figures around it shortly, because what's The other thing I wanted to consider is how we're gonna fund it because of the moment. Of course, everybody's in the CF A's, and I'll come back to those in the moment. But there are, of course, DBS affectionately known as Don't bother agreements, which is an agreement between the person providing advocacy, litigation or claims management services on the recipient of those services. Where, if the recipient obtains, especially, find financial benefit in connection with the muscle in relation to which the services are provided, they will pay the person providing the services defined, amount off the financial benefit obtained about it. That all seems dead straight forward. Okay, you can challenge the client a percentage on your endless position with the DB A that that percentage, when actually in relation to personal injury, is limited to 25%. In other areas of law, that could be as much as 50% sports. There are problems on the problems with adult bother agreement is the indemnity principle because the claim and cannot recover more in costs than it is liable to pay its own lawyer. So you're now in a position of going okay, Don't bother agreement for claims. It's a £5000 is actually a downside simpler than the currency I face scenario. But if the claim, then Joe's over £5000 which is, I think, likely on a certain percentage of cases, at the very least, under the current way of measuring damages. If that happens, you're then in a position where the additional cost of getting from the defendant we're gonna be a problem because of the d. B. A. But if you're looking at a CF A, it's an agreement with the person providing advocacy. All association services actually remember, but from the d. B. A. Is advocacy, litigation or claims management services. But now we're talking about CF A that can't exist with the claims management company because it claims measuring completed, not perverted person provide advocacy or litigation services. So it's a really bizarre scenario now because realistically I want everybody on the c f A. Just in case the claim goes over £5000 I can still get cost from the defendant on Still charge my client up to 25% of their damages, as I do at the moment until bother agreements. There's the bit where I'm highlighting tear that in a claim for personal injuries, the only sums recovered by the client from which payments shall be Matt our general damages for pain, suffering, loss, immunity on for pecuniary loss other than future Penick peculiarly OSP on the subject to this, including v A. T no more than 25%. If you just like that, sink in for a moment, okay? So challenging. What's a 25% on? Actually, that d be a is a much simpler agreement to draft in a cf A. I'm only going out 25% of P I and damages does not leave me. So I'm deceptively saying that Bernie Mind currently would be 1750. It will then be potentially £235 that it means that 25% of keeping £56.25 or that's what I'm charging my client that's not grows. You've got 100 and £12.50 191 25 £297. 50 455 665. Her best. A big old £931.25 the last massively different, massively different from the charges that currently running from into claiming lawyers. So if you're saying there's a claimant lawyer, I was he's going to impart my business going forward. It seems to me that the majority of prognosis are somewhere between the for nine months. So realistically, you building your the fact that your income is going to be somewhere between 112 £191 you have got to drive some massive efficiencies. So if you just on that d be a point, okay, you know, these claims that then fallout off the current proposed Tommy scheme you're not gonna make a lot of money on, and why would actually say to you is you want to consider hybrid agreement the hybrid off If it settles Western £5000 he's dealt with on this DB a basis on if he exceeds £5000 then you into this cf a. But this is gonna be. You're going to spend a lot of money on draft in this. If you were CMC, you can't do a c f A boot. Jack Williams against of your claims management company. You can't sign a client or conditional fee agreement. You can Onley signed him up to Adult Barbara agreement. The damage is based. Agreement is this is gonna be a bit of a minefield on Realistically. When were saying when the government sent that CME Cesaire gonna rule the world on these types of claims? You can see there's a lot of problem mutation here. That's a whether or not that actually have access to the system be if they sign clients up to a DB a. Then how are they going to make money from a lawyer when it comes to £5000? And they need to try over to the lawyer to carry on that bit and see how does the lawyer than charge and therefore there be no income if you like for a management company on any recommendations complicated. And I'm not sure that there's gonna be a lot of people happy to do this with the amount of money that we're talking about. There are more worries, and the more is is highlighted in the bottom. Cubs listers against Ryan Air Claim Bottom coz it's a business model that depends on processing the high volume of such claims, all of which are of low value. So I don't if you come across David Box Company What it really nice guy knows what he's doing has driven some fantastic efficiencies into his firm to process flight claims. Very little income, if you want from each individual claim in this case, is one that he's company were acting on. And it's where Ryan Eri decides to make a direct payment to a customer who was instructed. But what claims to be entitled to an equitable lien over the payment, which would require Ryanair to hold back part of the compensation in order to cover bots, entitlement fees, books in the Ryanair terms and conditions of booking a flight? The passengers required to deal directly with Ryanair and to allow Ryanair 28 days to respond before instructing 1/3 party to act on their behalf. The Equitable right may well arise in the case of costing coordinate er, but as the acronym makes clear 80 hours appropriate when there is a dispute to resolve on a lesson until Ryan they're refuses a claim. There is no dispute. So imagine judgment. Therefore were bought. Simply writes a lesser of claim or assists a client to complete the form online on the claim is paid in response to the letter off the form. It is not entitled to an interest in the compensation. That equity will protect some fancy words there. But can you see how this looks? Very, very similar to potentially the nuclei portal. You're right in light to reclaim or assisting in the completion of an online fall. So far you're gonna do is assist in the completion of an online farm. And there's a terrorist that tells you how much the compensation is. And you guys just got a tip about a medical, which is probably the extra bit here. Potentially a client could argue I'm not paying you because the insurer could pay the client die reds based on the tariff system. That should be straightforward. That may well be a point here. Where is a lawyer on day one? You have to highlight to your client that they could do this themselves on the system is set up to assist them to do them that do this themselves. Andi. It would therefore, they would not have to pay your things. It's crazy, but probably one of the few industries in the world that says Don't come to me because you can give it for free. And you really gonna have to think about how you structure in your advice to your client on completing the claims notification. For now, more Lorries eyes this bit the opportunity, because what part on this slide is what you're probably already aware old. And that is the definition of what Bush, which is a sprain, strain tear rupture or less the damage of the muscle tendon. All ligaments in the net, back or shoulder are on issue of soft tissue associated with the muscle tendon, a ligament in the neck, back or shoulder. An injury is accepted by this subsection. If is an injury of soft tissue, which is a part of or connected to another injury, the other injuries no, an injury of soft tissue in the neck, back or shoulder or description forming in subsection two. In other words, it's about neck, back and shoulders. No, again. I was at another conference. I do. You do some work. I don't just get into conferences. On this other conference. There was a guy there. I won't name names, but he's defendants Lister, and he's worried because of this. And this is the minor injury section in the 14th edition of the Judicial College guidelines on its minor injuries, which are the shot duration Where is a complete recovery within three months? I'm not wasting any of the chapters cases where the significant pain of multiple injuries, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. So his worry is that you're gonna have you with Washington, that bucking shoulder injury and you're also gonna have a minor injury. Now that minor injury could be an ankle strain from pressing the brake. It could be a trivial from injury from where you bent your thumb back on the steering wheel. He could be a restrained from the way the stay in real is moved. It could be a seat belt breezy, and he's worried that actually this injury might wrap my lasting with minor three months, he's now going to be reported on a lot more than it's currently being reported on. But if you take that particular minor injury on the other two the current proposed tariff, I'm compare it to the current whiplash. You'll see that the savings to ensure a very limited and actually insurance could be playing it upside more. In which case, you know, is this gonna be an opportunity that you are making sure when you are presenting are dealing with a client From day one you are saying to your client, Make sure you tell the doctor about all your minor injuries, irrespective of whether or not they're just met by called shoulder. Or if your client speaks to you before we go to the GP Bear GP or hospital. Make sure you get this registered because potentially, you know, this is all bunkers. These reforms were to reduce the number of costs of whitewash claims. It wasn't to increase the number of different injuries, so defendants are worried. We're worried it's all rubbish will be introduced. There is a positive out of this Obama play medical office move. That's really about all the rays. That's a positive on this because it is, um, booking photo. There is significant problems for seen in this particular proposal. There's worries because it can't be introduced. One thing that no even saw its about is before the event insurance. How is that going to be dealt with? How many clients will need before the event insurance? Will we be advised differently now? Now they need before the event insurance because the policy of the 12 month policy that they're buying now will have an impact on what they can do and what support they're going to get post reforms in April. Yet they don't know about that when they're buying that. Before we even insurance policies. Now it's It's a looking for little. It really is. But hopefully it's part of this Webinar today I've been able to highlight were up to what the potential is. We also not talk about Brexit and potential general elections. It could all go out with the bathwater, I doubt I do think that this is gonna come in on. I wouldn't necessarily say t and that there was any reason why it shouldn't commend by people. I would be parting your business for it to do so, you can see from the slides. They're exactly what the potential financial income will be. What the funding is really all consenting at the moment is best to look. It's hard. It's gonna be hard to plan on when it comes in. It's probably gonna be harder, but you know, people will still need representation on. There is potentially still a way to ensure that you can earn money to be able to provide that representation mutual fund. Hopefully, you found that enlightening not to say is Thank you very much for joining us on the webinar. We'll see you all soon.
Webinar
Slides
238 Users
4 Courses
1 Reviews
