Practical Impact Of The Jackson Report On Uk Claim Management Companies

Copyright (c) 2010 Evolution Legalunless he was telling lies all along.
IntroductionHowever this regime has been extremely unpopular
In November 2009 Lord Jackson published hiswith Insurance companies as they are left to foot
recommendations for the future of small value RTAthe entire bill for what are in the main low value
claims and the referral system that has beencompensation claims. They have been lobbying to
developed around the market over the last 25 years.have the regime changed almost since 2001 and now
The implications of the report are far reaching and inwith the Jackson report they have succeeded to
affect the operations of all claims managementsome greater or lesser degree.
companies.The recommendations of the Jackson Report (as
Historypertinent to this market)
Upto 2001 the market in small value RTA claims wasLord Justice Jackson has made the following
diverse and unregulated. Ultimate referral sourcesrecommendations for the market:
could refer claims to accident managementEnding the "indemnity principle" - Leading to the
companies or Solicitors (or both) and there was noscrapping of ATE Insurance - Which in itself leads to
hard or fast rules as to legal protection for thethe scrapping of CFA's - Bringing about the use of
claimant.Contingency Fee Agreements (COFA's) - The
Some Solicitors used the then little known system ofimplementation of "1 party cost shifting" - The
After the Event (ATE) Insurance, some relied uponbanning of referral fees - An uplift on damages by
Before the Event (BTE) insurance and some relied10%
upon their own risk assessment procedures withoutBy scrapping the indemnity principle, Lord Jackson is
putting claimants on any kind of legal protectionsmaking the relationship between the claimant and the
cheme.Solicitor private, meaning that legal costs no longer
It should be noted that at this time the paying ofform part of the compensation claim but are a
referral fees by Solicitors to any referral source wasseparate item recoverable between the Solicitor and
banned by the Law Society, although the rule wasthe Insurance Company.
flagrantly ignored by all and sundry.By scrapping the Indemnity principle and bringing in
The Woolf Reforms 2001the "1 party cost shifting" regime, Lord Justice
In 2001 Lord Woolf dissected the entire process andJackson is releasing the claimant from the risk of
created the Access to Justice Act which effectivelylosing the claim and facing a cost bill from the
brought about the process known as "No Win NoInsurance Company.
Fee" (NWNF) a much maligned, misunderstood andEven if the Insurance Company successfully fights
abused process.the claimant's case, they will not be able to recover
Within the NWNF regime it was decreed that on thecosts, thus freeing the claimant from the risk of
basis that a claimant was an innocent victim, accesscosts and ending the need for an ATE Insurance
to justice should be free. The claimant should notpolicy.
have to pay anything to obtain compensation forIt also has the effect of bringing in American style
injuries he sustained at the hands of another personContingency Fee Agreements, whereby the Solicitor
or company.will still act for the claimant for free until the end of
All of this was subject to the indemnity principlethe case, but at that point will be entitled to a
whereby a claimant can only recover losses that hepercentage of recovered damages, the percentage
has sustained as the result of the accident, i.echarged being based upon the risk of success.
damaged car, replacement car, injuries and legalThis effectively ends the NWNF regime.
costs. If the claimant is not responsible for legal costsSo now in the new regime, if a claimant makes a
then the negligent driver is not responsible for themclaim for compensation:
either.The claimant enters into a COFA with the Solicitor
Solicitors could enter into Conditional Fee Agreementsand agrees a success percentage. - There is no need
(CFA) with a claimant, supported by ATE Insurancefor any Insurance policy - The Solicitor works for
that ensured that if a client made a claim forfree until the successful conclusion of the claim.
compensation:If the claim succeeds:
The Solicitor would carry out all work for the clientThe claimant will relinquish an agreed percentage of
without charging, irrespective of how long the claimhis recovered damages to the Solicitor - The Solicitor
took to settle - The Solicitor would put in place anwill separately recover costs on a sliding scale from
ATE policy for the client - So long as the claimantthe Insurance company (much reduced from previous
gave all required assistance he could never becosts regime).
responsible for costs irrespective of whether he wonIf the claim fails:
or lost the claim.The client receives £zero compensation - The
If the claim succeeded:Solicitor does not recover any percentage from the
The claimant would receive 100% of theclient nor recovers the costs from the Insurance
compensation award. - The Solicitor could recover aCompany. - The Insurance Company will not seek to
fixed fee for costs of £1200 plus claim a successrecover costs from the client.
fee of upto 20% of the £1200 costs award. -Ultimately, this regime releases a significant costs
Recover the premium for the ATE fee. - All of theseburden from the Insurance Company.
costs were payable by the negligent driver'sIf LJ Jackson's proposals regarding the banning of
insurance company.referral fees is implemented, Solicitors can not legally
If the claim failedpay referral fees to any sources, be it Claims
The claimant received nothing in compensation. - TheManagement Companies and / or Insurance Brokers.
Solicitor recovered his costs from the ATE policyThis will have a significant effect on the market
(but no success fee), along with the premium for thegenerally.
policy itself. - The policy would pay for the othersidesIf the banning idea does not come into effect,
costs.referral fees generally will be reduced for the entire
Hence the term NWNF. If the client wins there aremarketplace, simply because recovered costs, which
no fees to pay, but the regime should have beenpresently are the basis for all referral payments, will
called No Win No Fee, Loss No Fee because thebe much reduced and this will have a ripple effect
claimant was never going to pay anything, ever,across the entire market.