MoJ claims process

Hundreds of users suspended by MedCo for failing to sign financial links agreement

handshake

Some 560 authorised users of MedCo – law firms, claims management companies and compensators – were suspended from the system earlier in the spring for failing to accept the new user agreement that requires them to declare financial links with any medical reporting organisation. Meanwhile, four tier 1 MROs have been reclassified as tier 2.

June 15th, 2017

MedCo kicks out more shell companies

stethoscope

MedCo has identified and suspended a further 21 ‘shell’ companies from the MedCo system, taking the total purged since the revised qualifying criteria were put in place last October to 155. The definition of a medical reporting organisation was changed last year to stop the use of shells to gather instructions and forward them on.

June 6th, 2017

MedCo suspends 37 users for failing to upload medical case data

stethoscope on keyboard - medical report

MedCo has continued its enforcement activity by suspending 23 medical reporting organisations and 14 direct medical experts for failing to upload medical case data to its system. Both are required to upload medical case data as part of their user agreements.

June 1st, 2017

Court of Appeal backs claimant solicitors in “£400 club” case

Lord Justice Briggs

Solicitors who received the £400 stage 1 fixed-costs payment due under the original version of the RTA protocol do not have to repay the money even though no action was then taken on their cases, the Court of Appeal has ruled.

May 16th, 2017

MedCo issued hundreds of warnings to users over poor behaviour in past year

stethoscope on keyboard - medical report

MedCo issued 337 warning letters to users – and went on to suspend two-thirds of them – over the past year for behaviours such as circumventing the random search selection process and influencing medical experts’ opinions on diagnosis/prognosis, it has emerged.

May 3rd, 2017

APIL pushes for “predictable claim process” for fixed cost clinical negligence cases

NHS Building

The Association of Personal Injury has called for a “predictable claim process” for clinical negligence actions if the government goes ahead with its plan to impose fixed costs for cases worth up to £25,000. However, a survey has shown strong public support for fixed fees and for lawyers not receiving more in fees that patients did in compensation.

May 2nd, 2017

Defection of claimant RTA lawyers to other areas of PI not happening, report finds

Bavita Rai Weightmans

The widespread expectation that claimant firms would diversify away from road traffic accident work into other, potentially more lucrative areas of personal injury has not proved to be the case, according to new research. It also said the plan to introduce a tariff for low-value RTA damages would remove the “inflationary involvement of the judiciary”.

March 28th, 2017

Accident victims “forced into rehab by greedy lawyers”

injury2

There are suggestions that some accident victims are being “forced into rehab” by lawyers and claims management companies determined to “boost their own incomes”, an independent report has found.

February 22nd, 2017

Law Society intervenes in high-stakes appeal over the ‘£400 club’

Law Society - Front2

The Court of Appeal has invited the Law Society to intervene in a highly significant hearing this month in which insurers are trying to recover millions of pounds in RTA claims portal fees from claimant solicitors in the so-called ‘£400 club’.

February 9th, 2017

Post-portal PAD applications subject to fixed fees, Court of Appeal rules

Lord Justice Briggs

Applications for pre-action disclosure in cases that leave the personal injury portals are still subject to fixed costs, the Court of Appeal has ruled. However, it suggested that the rule committee might have to increase the level of fixed costs so as to incentivise defendant to comply with their disclosure obligations.

February 1st, 2017

Blog

Formal regulation – a price worth paying for third-party funders

Christopher Deadman 2

The comments by Lord Faulks QC last week that third-party litigation funding is “in danger of undermining the integrity of our much-admired legal system”, has been met with predictable howls of derision by those involved in the industry. The issue of statutory regulation or licensing has been on the agenda for a while but the creation of the Association of Litigation Funders, with its voluntary code of conduct has gone some way to persuading the Ministry of Justice (before the election, at least) that this is not necessary for the time being.

June 13th, 2017

Featured Associate

Temple Legal Protection

Visit website

Featured Associate

Eclipse

Visit website