Jul 29

Why are you reading this?

Posted in General

My last day as a blogger for a while so I thought I’d complete my service with some further thoughts on Social Media. I recently read an article relating to social media and the most common sins. Whilst much of the article taken literally is true, I was disappointed with the authors stance and his literal take on the benefits of social media.  I will outline my point.

The author believes that there is a common misconception that social media is low budget. I would be interested in hearing why anyone has spent a huge amount of money on developing a social media strategy. It is free to sign up to twitter, Linkedin, facebook and the cost of a blog is minimal in comparison to a printed mail merge, or, sponsorship of an event.

 He also discusses how Tesco’s digital marketing officer has said they will use their digital marketing to “enrich and add value to the customer journey…” and how they should have discussed how they would use it to sell various items within their stores. Who in the current recession would be keen to hear how Tesco are planning on making us buy more. Firms are being pushed towards CSR policies, green policies and ensuring customers always receive the best possible service in the most holistic way. I do not believe for one minute that the Tesco supermarket giant has not thought this through. Of course they will use their strategy to sell more and their profits are evidence enough that this is the case, but they’re not daft enough to shout about it.

Apparently most big brands use social media because other brands are doing it. So why do we do it?

At Box Legal, we have significantly raised our profile through the use of social media (you’re reading this right?).

We are able to provide both our panel firms and possibly new firms with an insight into how we run our business. We are also able to offer advice and provide information on the various aspects of law and relevant newsworthy stories.  I believe, with the help of social media, we are able to add value to the current service we provide – all done in an eco- friendly happy way. And with that, I leave you until next time…

Nb. The article chosen for discussion is featured in Marketing Week, 28th July 2011 and is written by Mark Ritson.  

comments: 0 »
Jul 27

Rupert and his link with Box Legal

Posted in After The Event Insurance

Daniel will be back to his blog on Monday with words of wisdom. Until then I will continue with my tenuous linkage… Some would say the silly season is upon us in the world of journalism, but with resignations from Rebekah Brooks and the Murdochs appearing in front of the Commons Culture committee, how could anyone not find the recent media compelling. In his interview with the Wall Street Journal, Murdoch commented that he thought News Corp had handled the situation extremely well but changed this statement in front of MPs telling them this was the humblest day of his career.  With investigations still on going into the hacking of phones, the integrity that I’m sure  these journalists once held true, has now disappeared. I heard someone say that you only own one thing in life and that’s your integrity. Once you lose this you can never get it back.

So let me apply integrity to ATE Companies. On my weekly visit to our various panel members, I hear many stores about other After the Event Insurance Companies. How they have approached our clients and tried to poach them using various manipulative ways. I also hear about ATE companies that firms have worked with over a number of years, never claiming anything until that one case falls. Rather than thanking them for the good business by paying out immediately, they ask for a copy of the file to try to avoid paying that claim. At Box Legal we are very open about our scheme, we work closely with our panel members to ensure we give them the best possible service. We pay out claims in full within 7 days. Box Legal is run with integrity and with the interests of our firms at the forefront of our business. Can your After the Event Insurance Company say the same?

comments: 0 »
Jul 25

La Belle et la Bête et Box Legal

Posted in After The Event Insurance

A Monday morning without rain and a hint of a blue sky and sun. Kind of makes it a little easier to take – especially in Manchester when a Monday morning with rain is standard. I had a quiet weekend, my niece and nephew – 5 and 3 respectfully, are over from France for two weeks. They are extremely conscious of the fact that we don’t speak French and whilst they will happily chatter in French to each other, they are always keen to explain in English their discussion. Whilst this is very open and honest, it can get a little embarrassing in company, when a 5 year old has to patiently explain the importance of something that has been said on Beauty and the Beast…

So what has this to do with ATE you ask? Well a possible tenuous link could be the openness of such a situation and the honesty of a Box Legal After The Event Insurance policy. At Box Legal, we never ask for a file if you lose a case. We are conscious of the fact that as a Solicitor, you are the ones qualified to make the decision whether to run the case or not and with a legal background, we are also aware that things can go wrong. Any claim you make is always paid out within 7 days. Our whole scheme is similar and very open. With minimal administration, we place you, the Solicitor back in control of your own case – as it should be. For more information about our ATE policies, give us a call or visit our website www.boxlegal.co.uk .  So a little bit of blatant publicity this morning. Why not! I also gave you the added bonus of a weather report, and you can’t have everything for free.

comments: 0 »
Jul 22

A little Box Legal and Social Media

Posted in General

So it’s down to me to come up with something interesting and exciting that could rival Daniels discussions.  Whilst I am not an ATE expert (although I am getting there…), having worked in professional services for a numbers of years and  worked closely with personal injury departments as a marketing manager, I would hope I am experienced enough to talk about that.

It’s been a busy week at Box Legal HQ with Daniel away. We are a very small team here which makes us quite unique. You will always get to speak to someone with a good knowledge of the legal process (Jon, Daniel and Simon are all legally qualified).This week, I have been busy visiting various panel firms in the North West. It’s a part of my role that I really enjoy, it gets me out and about and I  learn about how the different firms operate.

My role covers all marketing within the company and of course I am involved with social media . We have a blog (as you will know), a Facebook page, a Twitter feed and we all have a presence on LinkedIn. All are linked to one another so you may be reading this blog from a variety of places.

 I believe that social media has become one of the most important marketing tools we now have. With this in mind, I recently read a hilarious article about social media and how the normal protocol for how we act on a day to day basis seems to go out of the window when it comes to networking on sites such as these. Would you really walk up to someone in the street and poke them if you hadn’t seen them for ten years! Would you offer your friendship to various people and have a look at photos of their life without knowing them very well. While social media is vital to businesses, maybe sometimes we need to think a little bit more out of the box in the way we use it.  Below is a link to a YouTube video that will make you laugh. A good start to the weekend I think.      

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDycZH0CA4I

comments: 0 »
Jul 16

Tick Tock

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

It’s that time again. I am off on holiday for the next two weeks so you will have to do without me for while. I think Kirsten might try her hand in my absence.

Before I go, let’s examine some issues regarding time shall we?

Starting with referral fees – me thinks their days may be numbered. Justice Minister Lord McNally is keen to ban them. Problem is of course - what is a referral fee? You may have read my blog concerning AXA – is your solicitor panel handling  work for you for free the same thing as paying for a case? The answer is yes in my mind. So how do you ban them? After all, Personal Injury Claims may be in the headlines but referral fees or ‘introductions’ are paid for all manner of legal work including conveyancing.  Before they were permitted, our friends Claims Direct managed to circumvent the rules with case assessment fees, client statement fees etc. You name it and there was a fee for it.

And if referrals are banned, is that going to be the end of claims management companies? The simple answer is no. They will join with solicitors – who rather conveniently will be able to offer them part of their practice in return thanks to the upcoming Alternative Business rules.

People don’t like insurance companies selling their cases so the political will is to ban them but the reality is likely to mean referrals simple morph into another form.

So what about Jackson? Well the timescale still indicates October 2012 for implementation. Which in legislation terms (excluding taking the country to war) is pretty quick. This is of course notwithstanding the fact that the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill (LASPO)  is a very lengthy document. To keep the pedal to the metal, the Government has adopted the unique (and many say foolhardy) approach of fast tracking the consultation process. This has resulted in the scarcely believable time slot allocation of just 15 minutes per organisation. Now, LASPO is 187 pages long and contains no fewer than 119 sections. I calculate that they have therefore allowed each organisation to speak for just under 5 seconds per page. Now this is supposed to be the Government listening to esteemed organisations such as the Bar Council and the Law Society but clearly there is an agenda here. This procedure has judicial review written all over it. A more contemptuous attitude I could not imagine.

So the final subject on this topic is my flight time – 10 hours. It’s a long way to Mauritius you see. Longer than the Government will consult in total with all interested parties in the LASPO Bill.

You couldn’t make it up.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Jul 12

Things are hotting up

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, The Jackson Report

Just back from southern Turkey. Now I was expecting it to be warm – the forecast was around 32 degrees. This level of sun I can cope with – after all we had 2 days of these temperatures here (otherwise known as our summer).

Anyway, dead on the money – it was 32 degrees – on Friday. It then jumped 10 degrees in a day to 42 degrees on Saturday. This was a shock. If you ventured outside, it was like having a sauna in your clothes. Lovely.

So what has all this to do with After the Event Insurance or PI claims? Not a great deal but just a tenuous link to the state of things with (a) Jackson and (b) referral fees and a general round up.

It looks like the newspapers (what’s left of them) have the bit between their teeth about referral fees and insurance companies. We also had Panorama last night telling us that a lot of the PI industry is made up of scams and fake crashes and the Law Society coordinating a backlash against the Jackson Reforms. Amongst all of this, is the Government really going to force through a set of rules that only the defendants say will work? You bet.

Now you remember my questions to Jaggard and Axa?  Jaggards: ‘How can costs be rising if RTA claim costs are fixed’ and Axa ‘What do your panel of solicitors taking PI claims from you [now without a fee] do for free in return’). Well,  I have had very few replies from either of them. Now when I say ‘very few’ I mean zero. Come on – they are straight forward questions and we should be told. Anyone else have the answers?

I think I preferred Turkish heat. Unpredictable maybe but up front and in your face.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Jul 6

Admiral Insurance Worried About Referral Fee Ban

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

The chickens are coming home to roost. The pot and kettle are at it again. Something smelly is hitting the fan.

I am running out of idioms here.

Admiral Insurance made £142.4m profit last year from it’s motor arm (remember they are part of an industry pleading poverty to the Government). Now, 52% of this profit related to ‘ancillary sales’.

What is this? Well, I doubt Admiral sell many replica parrots or sailor’s hats so where could this £74.05m profit be coming from? Could it be from referral fees? Many leading experts think so and so does the stock market.

More evidence I feel that it is not the ‘claims culture’ nor adverts on TV causing a rise in motor claims. It is the insurance industry themselves.

Now what do you think they will be claiming next? I know, they will be saying that, by being allowed to charge referral fees, they can keep the cost of premiums down. If they weren’t allowed them then they would have to put the premiums up to keep as profitable. It’s an interesting argument but clearly flawed. If all insurers ceased flogging cases, the number of claims would drop and so the amount of money being paid out would fall as well.

But hey, I’m just a lawyer who runs an insurance broker. What do I know?

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 1 »
Jun 30

Referral Fees: AXA Jump Off the Band Wagon

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Road Accidents, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

It is great to see these masters of spin at work isn’t it?

First the ABI denied it – then they had to come clean and admit that insurance companies were selling car accident insurance leads. The  justification: If we didn’t do it then Claims Management Companies would do it so we may as well make the money.

Well rubbish. AXA have been found out and have tried to head off a PR disaster for themselves by suddenly becoming the good guys – ‘We will no longer charge lawyers referral fees’.

Now what does this mean? Will they no longer encourage their insured to claim personal injury? Will they still encourage them but pass the leads through for free? Will they ask for something in return from the firms receiving the cases – I don’t know but maybe they will have to do some uninsured loss recovery for free? You see there is more than one way to skin a cat so AXA may suddenly have seen the error of their ways but I am sceptical that there won’t be some sort of balancing of the books going on.

I know – why don’t AXA (and all other insurers come to that) publish their referral arrangements for us all to scrutinise?

They won’t of course. Is it all a conspiracy? Have the insurers deliberately driven up claim numbers so they can cry fowl to the Government who, let’s face it, have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

I think an investigation is called for.

Less of the Shane Warne and more Bob Willis please AXA.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 1 »
Jun 27

The Pot Calling the Kettle Black

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Road Accidents, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

Did you hear Jack Straw and a chap from the Association of British Insurers (ABI) on the Today programme this morning? No? Well, it went something like this:

Jack Straw’s friend had an accident about 6 months ago – no injuries and everything paid for by the other driver. He then started to get calls from Claims Management Companies asking him it he wanted to claim for Personal Injury. This went on for some time. The friend asked Jack Straw to find out how the Claims Companies got hold of the information about his accident. Well, after some digging, what do you know? The friend’s own insurance company admitted that they had sold the information to the claims management companies.

So there you have it – proof that the so called compensation culture is the fault of the defendant insurance industry and not due to adverts on TV. This is what we and many other companies in the know have been saying for some time – backed up by the data of course which shows all types of accident numbers reducing save for motor claims.

On the Today programme, the ABI representative got a real grilling from John Humphries (for it is he). The ABI’s justification for the practice is - wait for it – ‘if the insurers didn’t do it then everyone else would so the insurers at least make money out of it’. Well this isn’t bourne out by the figures – as stated above. Clearly this practice is driving motor claims higher. It should be banned.

When is the Government going to wake up and realise that they are being bamboozled by some very clever lobbying by the defendant insurance industry.

Unbelievable.

4.50pm Update: I have found the discussion on the BBC Website. Click here to listen: http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9523000/9523272.stm

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 2 »
Jun 22

Justice Bill is Published

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, The Jackson Report

It is all over the papers this morning. The tabloids all concentrate on the rights of home owners to beat up burglars and seem to brush over the other reforms.

To be honest, it is a complete mishmash of proposals from probation and sentencing to civil procedures and legal aid. There is so much there in the 96 pages that it is easy to overlook items.

Here’s a good one. As expected, the changes to success fees and after event insurance appear from part 43. Some bright spark has proposed that the cut off date for after the event insurance is going to be the date of the insurance and not the accident date. This means that solicitors are going to have to check very carefully that everything is insured prior to the reforms otherwise I can see some clients complaining (and no doubt crying fowl) when they have to pick up the tab for a policy required later in the case.  I am assuming the cut off date for qualified one way costs shifting is going to be the accident date though (can’t see how it can be anything else) and so there is a big hole here for solicitors to fall in to.

My view is that this legislation, although popular with the Daily Mail readers, won’t go down so well in the House of Lords. Of particular concern will be the reforms proposed to Legal Aid and we therefore expect some batting back and forth (still in Wimbledon mode you see) before it gets through. This would obviously be good news for the civil procedural changes although it would only delay the inevitable.

You can find the full Bill here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2010-2012/0205/12205.i-v.html

Watch this space.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Jun 21

Anyone for Tennis (or ATE Insurance)?

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors

I have just realised that it has been a week since my last posting. It has been really busy here with new sign ups and policies. Contrary to popular belief, I do have other things to do at work – not just ranting away on-line.

Looks like Jaggards have been very busy as well – no explanation from them yet as to how costs can be increasing….

So what’s the subject for today? Well, as the tennis is on, I thought it could be something to do with that. I used to live in Wimbledon and was there for nearly 3 years (if truth be told it was in a flat about 20 mins walk outside the main town – more like Merton, but you know how it is). Each time the tennis came along I thought – I know, I will queue up and watch a match or two. You know what? I never got around to it. I always thought there would be next year and the queueing put me off a bit. So now here I am in North London and even more put off attending. I really can’t face the district line (they seem only to have about 3 trains) and what would we do with the kids? More hurdles so less incentive to go. And it is so much easier watching it erm at my desk on iPlayer (don’t tell the boss I said that).

Here’s a thought. If only we could make our After the Event Insurance like the iPlayer. No queuing, no long forms, no er, district line (you get the idea). What we need is a click and insure product available from the desktop so that people aren’t put off by the admin and hassle.

Well that’s exactly what we have got. Our insurance takes 30 seconds to apply for and the only reporting we need solicitors to do is tell when they issue proceedings. Very easy. What’s more, if the solicitor uses a case management system (for example Proclaim), it can link with our website which means firms don’t even need to fill in the form. Insuring a case is just two button clicks. And guess what? We are only a few weeks from launching our new website which will make things even easier.

No sleeping overnight in tents with our products.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Jun 14

Justice Bill is nearly ready & Jaggards at it again

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

A couple of topics today.

First let’s talk about Jackson. That well known supporter of the PI industry, Jonathan Djanogly has confirmed that the Justice Bill will be published later this month. It has been delayed due to the Impact Assessment not being ‘fit for purpose’ as judged by the Cabinet Office (no doubt something to do with being prepared before the MoJ could have read all of the submissions to the consultation, being based on Jaggards i.e. skewed data blah blah blah). A new impact assessment will be produced alongside the Bill and will no doubt look very similar to the old one but with just some tweaks to keep the Cabinet Office lawyers happy.

The Justice Bill is going to contain a whole raft of changes and not just to Personal Injury claims. It is going to deal with Legal Aid and sentencing reform so I don’t think it is going to go through parliament (not to mention the House of Lords) without some challenges. No one knows how long the Bill will take to become law but the best guess we have is 6 months. The devil is of course in the detail and we won’t be seeing the draft procedural rules for some time. Even if the Bill can be enacted in 6 months, we still don’t expect the full reforms to be ready until at least October 2012. We shall see…

Now I have already mentioned our dear friends Jaggards and their willing to help the Government with their unbiased data set. Well they are at it again – helping the Ministry of Justice to decide on fixed costs. To be fair, they aren’t actually helping officially but having already had a foot in the door, I wouldn’t bet on them pushing it open a little more. Ready for this – it’s a good one………. they are now saying that fixed costs are too high and so the Jackson reforms, when they come in, will actually mean PI solicitors will be making more money and those poor defendant insurers will be losing even more.

Now I would like to know which abacus they are using and see their methodology. Which planet are they on exactly? Fixed costs are er, fixed and Jackson isn’t going to increase these. The success fee is not going to be recoverable under Jackson so how exactly are PI solicitors going to make more money? If you work for Jaggards and read this blog then please leave a comment explaining this one – I will publish it verbatim.

So there you have it – more smoke wafting over the battlefield. Unbelievable. 

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 1 »
Jun 9

How After the Event Insurance Works & the Importance of Insuring Early

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Solicitors

Actually, let’s start with insurance generally.

All insurance companies need to make money (this comes as a surprise to some!). This means that they have to pay out less in claims than they get in in premiums and have enough left over to pay overheads, wages etc. In order to set annual premiums, insurers analyse risk very carefully and set premiums high enough to cover their calculated risk (and a bit on top just in case). If they get it wrong, there is always next year’s premiums which will have to go up to cover any losses from the year before and to cover the increased risk calculation this year.

After the Event Insurers operate in a similar way but with a few differences. First, they need to make money so they calculate premiums based on risk just as a domestic insurer. The problem is, premiums are normally only paid at the end and aren’t paid annually – the end means the end of the case and this can be 3, 4, 5 or more years away. This is a long time for the cash to come in and also a long time before the insurer knows whether or not it is getting it right or not. It is therefore only now, after many years of operating, that ATE Insurers are bedding down their risk profiles. Just when they get it right, things are about to change of course (see Jackson).

The other problem for After the Event Insurers is that the market (in insurance terms) is very small. Domestic insurers may have millions of policy holders whereas ATE insurers are lucky to have 10,000. This means the spread of risk is much lower. Lower risk spread means lower premium income, higher premiums and higher risk.

So you see, ATE Insurers get upset with solicitors who don’t play ball and insure all of their cases from day one. The problem with firms insuring later on is that, by doing this, the ‘easy’ cases which are settling early aren’t being insured. With no premiums coming in from these straight forward claims, the insurer’s spread of risk is further reduced. It is like a tightening net and a bit of a downward spiral. This is because, if a solicitor insures later, the premiums the insurer has to charge to maintain income for virtually the same risk means all premiums have to rise. The solicitor is then faced with higher premiums so is put off insuring early and in fact waits even later – perhaps until proceedings are issued. This means there is even less spread of risk so premiums rise again etc etc. You get the idea.

There is another problem though. Insuring late means that a lot of the claim isn’t going to be covered. Let’s do a comparison with health insurance. If you take this out when you are young, premiums are cheap – perhaps just a few pounds per month. Why? Well, the risk of you being ill when young is very low. If you wait to take it out until you are say 50, premiums are very high because people who are in their 50s tend to have more ailments. Let’s say though that you wait until you are 50 years old to take out a policy. Once on cover you then contact the insurer and say that you incurred some physio charges two years ago due to a bad back. Do you think the insurer will pay up? Of course not. The treatment occurred prior to the inception of the policy. This is exactly the same as an After the Event Insurance policy. If a solicitor takes it out late in a claim, any disbursements incurred prior to the policy start date won’t be covered AND MOST POLICIES WON’T COVER THE DEFENDANT’S ADVERSE COSTS UP UNTIL THIS POINT EITHER. This means, by insuring late, a solicitor has exposed their client to the risk of having to pay pre-policy disbursements, adverse costs and a very high ATE Premium to boot.

So the moral of this tale is, insure everything and insure early.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Jun 6

Referral Fees

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Solicitors

Bit like Marmite these – you either love them or hate them. Some say that permitting companies and organisation to sell cases to the highest bidder has resulted in the devaluation of a profession. Others believe referral fees have allowed markets to be opened up for consumers.

Refferals have been talked about for some time now and finally, the Legal Services Board (LSB) has come to a decision. They have decided not to ban them but have then left everything else to the Solicitors Regulation Authority with a steer to ensure there is transparency  i.e. the SRA needs to create some rules so that clients know how much is being paid, when and by whom to whom (er which already exists in Personal Injury).

Why did the Legal Services Board decide not to ban them? Well, bizarrely Alternative Business Structures seem to have put a kibosh on the ban. The rules for Alternative Business Structures come into force in October this year. They will allow non-solicitor ownership of solicitors firms – which means that external investors can get a piece of the pie.

How can this be related to referral fees? Well, large referrers are pretty powerful. A company that controls the supply of work is very valuable. The LSB  realised that if referral fees were banned, come October, there was a lovely mechanism being put into place which would allow referrers to be rewarded. They would simply be given a slice of a law firm – and they didn’t want that. A ban would encourage this and this was a step too far for the legal profession.

Referral fees may be a dirty word to some but they are here to stay and remain the caller of many tunes.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Jun 2

Not about After the Event Insurance but a Word of Warning Part 2

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General

Did you read all about the incident with my car? [http://www.aftertheeventinsuranceblog.co.uk/road_accidents/not-about-after-the-event-insurance-but-a-word-of-warning/]

Well, you know I said the Police couldn’t be less interested? Well I was wrong in a way. I got a call this morning from Hampshire Police to say that they had just found my car! The car was in good condition except for all of the identity marks (chassis numbers etc) which have been changed. It was in a holding yard at the dock ready to be shipped to Cyprus. So you see, they do it back to front – catch the car first then (with luck) the thieves.

The Police are now doing some forensics to try and find the culprits and the chap who bought the car (no doubt in a pub somewhere) is going to be somewhat out of pocket, or in prison. One of the two.

My insurers get the car back and so everyone is ok.

Well no. You see, although Esure are going to get virtually all of their money back, they still count it as a full claim so have cancelled my policy. As I had just put the car on cover, that means I have lost a years worth of insurance. Add to that the fact that I can no longer protect my no claims bonus (two claims in last 3 years – the Mrs rearranging a parked car being claim no. 2), various personal items lost in the car which aren’t recoverable, and the fact that our premiums have now risen, we are considerably out of pocket.

So I am crossing my fingers that PC Plod catches the little bar stewards. I would dearly love to look them in the eye in an identity parade.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
May 31

Costs Judges Slate Jackson Reforms

Posted in After The Event Insurance, The Jackson Report

I’m not sure why they didn’t come out with this before the Ministry of Justice announced the planned reforms but anyway, at last people are agreeing with what we have been saying all along. The Jackson reforms are a sledgehammer to crack a nut and will result in tonnes of satellite litigation for the courts just at a time when all of the challenges have been dealt with.

Master Campbell, Master Haworth and Master Leonard – all Senior High Court costs Masters – have written a long report analysing the proposed changes. Whilst they agree with some of them, they disagree with most and, it has to be said, they are at the coal face so know the issues more than anyone else. If they don’t like them, the Government has to take notice. If the Ministry of Justice tries to push them through and ride roughshod over these opinions then I can see trouble ahead.

I won’t go into detail here as their comments have been set out nicely here [ http://claimscouncil.org/news/publications ] but as far as After the Event Insurance is concerned, they think it should stay, it should be recoverable from the Defendant but it should be capped to avoid huge premiums being bought last minute by solicitors. Which is is exactly what we said should happen….

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
May 26

That’s a wrap

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors

Is that the correct spelling? Hopefully, people won’t think I am talking about sandwiches here.

Yes it is reference to our Animation competition which we have now launched to the world. We have set up a dedicated website (www.boxlegalfilm.co.uk)  where you can see the rules, ask questions and (best of all) submit your entries. Don’t forget the closing date is the end of July.

We want to redefine the corporate video with a fresh approach and a good dose of humour. Looks like we have trodden on a few toes though – we have already upset an animation company who say we are simply trying to get some animation done on the cheap. Well that’s not entirely true – the prize fund is £2250 and we had to invest in a new website – but the point is we want to get the bedroom animator (not sure that sounds quite right) to show us what he/she can do rather than a company who (we suspect) won’t be half as creative.

Anyway, we hope that the challenge will produce some clever/funny/wacky/bizarre entries about, er, After the Event Insurance. Should be interesting….

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
May 23

Fraudulant Claims

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, Road Accidents

We know they are out there. We have all heard about the fake accidents and extra passengers.

If a claimant is found to be fraudulent then he/she is in big trouble. First of course, there are the legal costs. If you make up a claim and are found out, any After the Event Insurance policy you have won’t be valid so you will be facing many thousands of pounds in defendant’s costs and disbursements. In addition, most Conditional Fee Agreements state that, in the event of a finding of fraud, you will also have to pay your own solicitor’s charges.

Ok – so what? Are fraudulent claimants likely to pay up? Well no. They often disappear – after all it is common for them to use a fake address.

Worse for the fraudster however is the fact that they have committed a criminal offence. If they are caught, the police (if they can be bothered that is) could arrest them for fraud and deception.

So how are the defendant insurers reacting? Well they are being their usual crafty selves. First, they are (quite rightly) setting up fraud teams to investigate these criminals. Often the fraudsters aren’t just doing this once but are serial offenders and so, if the defendants can stop them, they are going to save many thousands of pounds.

The problem is, the defendant insurers are now going too far. We have evidence which suggests that it is now common place for fraud to alleged in defences pleaded by defendant insurer solicitors. Virtually standard phrases are being used and defendant solicitors are telling claimant solicitors that they must (a) tell their clients of the consequences of being found to be fraudulent and (b) tell the client’s After the Event Insurer.

What is the effect of this? Well, some claimants get scared. They don’t want to be left facing a massive bill and so, even if they are innocent, they cease claiming. The problem is, we understand some After the Event Insurers are then taking this action to be evidence of a fraud and so won’t pay out for any costs. We also believe that ATE Insurers are checking defences very carefully and, if a claimant loses, they point to any allegation of fraud and tell the claimant that, in view of the allegation and the fact that they lost their claim, they won’t pay out. Now this is not where there has been a finding of fraud, just where a case has been lost on the facts.

So you see, the defendant insurer tactics are backfiring somewhat. By alleging fraud across most defences, they are giving ATE insurers ammunition to refuse claims. If a claim is refused of course, the defendant insurer doesn’t get paid costs. So they are shooting themselves in the foot here.

What do our underwriters do? Well they ignore these shenanigans. Any allegation of fraud is seen as bravado. The underwriters we use wait to see what the Judge decides. If the Judge makes a finding of fraud on the facts then they don’t pay out. If there is no finding of fraud then they do pay. Life is so much simpler when you don’t play games.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 1 »
May 17

Is the ABI Starting to Unravel?

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, The Jackson Report

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) may be starting to unravel…. and all because of the Jackson reforms.

The problem they have is the nature of insurance has changed. It used to be that people paid a premium and then the insurer sat back and hoped that no one made a claim.

Now, with referral fees, claims can be valuable – to some.

DAS has already left the ABI and now Elite (an After the Event Insurer) looks set to follow. Clearly, ATE Insurers are going to suffer when the Jackson reforms come in and so their interests are diametrically opposed to the mainstream insurers who are very keen for the rules to be introduced.

The problem is, referral fees are also going to be looked at – and this will cause further friction within the membership. Some of the mainstream insurers now sell personal injury claims to the highest bidder and so actively go after people who have had accidents. This doesn’t make them popular with insurers who haven’t adopted this approach.

The cracks are appearing which I suspect is good news for the man in the street. The ABI has proved to be a powerful lobby-er whose persuasive powers have swayed the Government to dance to their tune.

Let’s hope the Pied piper is silenced sometime soon.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
May 13

We are going into the film business

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

Of course you knew that already. Obviously, a company full of lawyers selling After the Event Insurance is bound to start making movies – it’s a logical step after all.

Well, the thing is, we are developing a completely new website and will be using short films to get the message across. The problem of course is that we know nothing about making ‘webinars’ etc so instead we are going to hold a competition and get the YouTube generation to come up with some new takes on the corporate video.

The first competition will be starting next week and will run until the end of July. We are offering a total prize fund of £2250 and are looking for a 2 minute stop/go animation explaining what After the Event Insurance is and the effect of the Jackson Report.  So we hope some students out there will be entering with the hope of paying for some of those tuition fees.

I shall publish the rules and rough script next week so watch this er, space. 

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 2 »
May 10

Referral Fees and Before the Event Insurance

Posted in After The Event Insurance, Personal Injury Claims, Road Accidents, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

Old Ken Clarke was all for Before the Event (BTE) Insurance. No wonder the Government has decided to leave referral fees alone.

Let me explain.

BTE Insurance, as you no doubt are aware, is an annual policy attached to motor or household insurance policies which covers the policy holder (and often their family) in the event of a legal dispute. If for example someone has a policy with their motor insurance, it would have cost them about £25 to £40. For the next 12 months they then have legal assistance and all of their legal fees paid for if they need to make or defend a legal claim.

So, let’s say they have an accident which wasn’t their fault. They contact their BTE insurance provider who places them with a solicitor. The policy holder will be protected against legal costs if they lose and if they win, the solicitor recovers their charges from the defendant. Sound familiar? Well it is exactly what happens with After the Event Insurance save for one significant fact: The BTE insurer will charge the solicitor a referral fee for getting the case.

In other words, the BTE provider sells the case to the solicitor, for up to £750! So instead of the BTE policy actually being a liabilty for the BTE Insurer, it is in fact an asset – they want clients to claim on them as it makes them money. What is more, the BTE provider insists (often with a nod and a wink) that the solicitor doesn’t claim on the policy. You know the sort of thing – if they did claim, it would be the last case they received or similar strong arm tactics.

So the BTE provider is receiving up to £40 for each policy they sell plus £750 for each personal injury claim. Nice.

Let’s compare this to After the Event Insurance bought er, after an accident has happened. Motor ATE Policies typically cost around £350 although the cost to clients post Jackson is likely to be much less, around £150. How many car accidents have you had in the last 10 years? Me – none. The average person – one. So, in 10 years, if you were buying a BTE policy just in case, you would have shelled out around £400.  Instead, if you simply bought an ATE Insurance policy when the accident happened, it would most likely cost just £150 for you to have exactly the same cover.

So BTE isn’t the answer. Not only are BTE Insurers flogging cases to the highest bidder, they are charging clients far too much. After the Event Insurance is much more efficient and cost effective. You only buy it when you need it, not each and every year just in case.

Ken Clarke is wrong. BTE Insurance is not the holy grail but a licence to print money. Tick the ‘No’ to legal insurance box on your motor quote and save a packet.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
May 6

Part 36 offers and ATE Insurance

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

I have been asked to explain how After the Event Insurance works with Part 36 offers, so here goes.

As you will no doubt be aware, a Part 36 offer is an offer to settle made by either party in an attempt to conclude a claim early. They are most often made by defendants and can be in relation to liability or quantum or indeed both.

The rules state that, if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer and the claimant decides not to accept it, if they go to trial and less is awarded by a judge or if later the claimant is forced to accept less than was offered, the claimant has to pay the defendant’s legal costs (and disbursements) incurred from the date the offer was made until the end of the case. What is more, the claimant also has to pay his/her own legal costs (so basically any disbursements if acting under a CFA) from the offer date as well, as these cannot be recovered from the defendant.

So this is where After the Event insurance comes in. You see the problem solicitors have is that they are dammed if they do and dammed if they don’t. If they tell a client to accept an offer, they get hassle from the client who thinks the solicitor isn’t getting them the right settlement and just wants to get their costs. If they tell the client to carry on and then fail to beat the offer, the client says they should have advised them to accept. So you see, ATE Insurance is as much to protect the solicitor here as the client. With our After the Event insurance in place, if a solicitor advises the client to continue, but then the offer isn’t beaten, the insurance will kick in to cover the adverse costs and disbursements. Without it, the client has to pay these out of their damages OR (as is often the case we hear) they create such a stink that the solicitor ends up paying them.

Well at least this is all changing post-Jackson I hear you cry? Not a bit of it. Exactly the same rules will apply. So which is it? Protect your client from costs and yourself from accusations of bad advice or take a punt on each and every case. Bit like driving without a seat belt. Daft.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
May 3

Not about After the Event Insurance but a Word of Warning

Posted in General, Road Accidents, Solicitors

Another good short week? Enjoy the wedding?

I didn’t. Had a bit of an incident which soured things a little.

Now if you read my blog regularly, you might begin to think that I am a used car salesman on the side but it’s just coincidence. We bought a 7 seater to accommodate all of the children plus their assorted friends recently so last week, I put our Mercedes M class up for sale in Autotrader.

I got a couple of calls, and one person wanted to come and see it on Tuesday night. Problem was, I was out playing football but we finally managed to shift the times and ‘Akesh’ and his friend were there when I got home. I proceeded to show them around the car but refused to let them drive it as they obviously weren’t insured. They checked all of the paperwork  – chassis number against the V5 etc, even that the chassis wasn’t bent at all.

They said they had seen one other car that night but the owner only had one key so they were suspicious. Did I have two keys? Of course – so I locked the car and got the other one. They then wanted to check that the central locking was working with the metal part of the fob (there is a small emergency key which is hidden in the Mercedes electrical fob) but it didn’t seem to work.

They then wanted to check the spare tyre was in the boot so I opened it and lent in. Next thing I know, the boot lid has come down on my head and I am somewhat stunned. ‘Akesh’ said he was looking for the lock in the boot and hadn’t realised I was going to lean in. I wasn’t feeling all that great – but ‘Akesh’ said he was interested in the car and just wanted to do an HPI credit check on it and would call me in the morning. With that, he locked the car, handed me back the key and I went back in side to look at my head in the mirror (cut and massive raised bruise).

So that was that. Except, in the morning I woke up and the car had gone. I then looked at the keys and realised they had swapped one of them after cracking me on the head. It was pretty much identical to our keys and not obvious in the dark.

So there you have it. I am now dealing with my insurers and the police who incidentally, despite an assault and theft of an expensive car, couldn’t be less interested.

I have since been told that this same theft modus operandi was featured on the BBC’s ‘The Real Hustle’.

Shame I hadn’t seen it. I suspect ’Akesh’ and his mate have.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Apr 26

After the Event Insurance & Holding Harmless Policies

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

Good break? Very hectic bank holiday for the Morris family so I have come back to work for a rest.

There didn’t seem to be many people going to work this morning though. I read somewhere that over 25% of people would be taking these middle 3 days off in order to end up with an 11 day holiday. Now here at Box Legal, I am in obviously, and so is Jon Gouldsmith and Kirsten Arnold. Which means it must be my colleague Alan Whicker who is off. I wondered why I hadn’t seen him (with apologies to Tommy Cooper).

Enough of the flim flam, let’s talk about something you may not have heard of: ‘Hold Harmless’ ATE Insurance policies.

Strange name, strange concept. Basically, there are unscrupulous After the Event Insurers out there and some greedy (some would also say foolish) solicitors. The solicitors have agreed to take out After the Event Insurance from the insurer but have also agreed never to claim on the policies (they ‘hold’ the insurer ‘harmless’ to claims). How can that be I hear you say? Well, the whole point is that the policy is recoverable at the moment from the defendant. The solicitor agrees to buy the policy for a low sum, say £100 but can then recover £350 or more from the defendant. This gives them a tidy ‘profit’ of £250 per policy and the insurer makes £100. Everyone’s a winner? Well, no. What happens if someone loses? Well the solicitor has agreed to pay out all of the costs from the profit they have made on the policies. Which basically means they are acting as insurers themselves - which is illegal by the way and the SRA aren’t happy either.

Solicitors acting in this way are putting profit before their client’s best interests as they will always be having one eye on the risk of losing. The insurer is basically defrauding the defendant insurance industry as they are issuing a piece of paper and saying it is an insurance policy when in reality it isn’t.

We are aware of a number of insurers and firms who act in this way. The problem is, they are clever and there isn’t anything in writing. It is all done with nods and winks.

So how do you stop them? Well, there’s no need actually. When Jackson comes in, Hold Harmless policies will disappear. Why? Well, the client is going to be paying and will vote with his or her feet if a solicitor tries to sell them an inflated policy. The SRA is looking to come down very hard on firms attempting to make a profit out of ATE insurance at the expense of client’s damages. We believe some may try to continue the con but they will be a dying breed.

Bit like people who actually turn up for work I suppose.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Apr 19

Disbursement Claims on After the Event Insurance Policies

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

Hello there. I am back.

We had a lovely week in the French Alps. Fantastic weather but only snow quite high up so the children had to go in the cable car every day to ski school whilst the poor old parents sat outside drinking espressos at 3 (where’s my Euros symbol?) a pop. We shall go earlier next year.

I thought I would talk today about disbursements as I think these are not really seen as a risk for clients (everyone focuses on adverse costs) but they are very important.

We have carried out an analysis on claims paid since we set up our scheme some 7 years ago. It may surprise you to know that the average disbursement claim paid out is nearly £1,900! Don’t forget that is the average – if you look at the top 25%, it is over £5,000 per claim and the worst ever was for just over £16,000!

I think it was good old Lord Jackson who suggested that solicitors would be happy to shoulder these expenses and absorb them into the overheads of their business models. This was generous of him – particularly as he has effectively taken away the success fee (clients will shop around for the cheapest one). I don’t think many firms are going to be happy to pay £1,900 per failed case let alone £5,000 or even £16,000!

And it gets worse….

The number of claims are likely to reduce (less money for solicitors = lower ability to pay referrers = less referrer profit = less claims) and we all know what happens with supply and demand on services. If a company is supplying engineer’s assessments and is doing 5,000 of them a year, they can keep their prices low due to high volumes. If instead they are only doing 3,000 a year, they still have to cover their overheads and so, to keep profitable, their prices will have to rise. It’s the old ‘pile it high, sell it cheap’ Woolworths analogy in reverse (and look what happened to them).

So we think disbursements are going to rise – and that’s not all….

Our legal expert, Jon Gouldsmith, pointed out something interesting to me. A lot of our claims involve barristers who have acted on a CFA and so when they lose, they have waived their fee. Well, success fees for barristers won’t be recoverable from the defendant post-Jackson, just like the solicitor’s success fee. It will be a client expense and so we think clients won’t like them and nor will barristers. They will go back to standard fee paying arrangements which means their fees are going to be added to the disbursements which the solicitor has to, er write off (this means pay of course!) in the event of a loss. Our calculations show this will add about 15% to the disbursements liability.

So the bad news is, clients are going to have to be told that they face an average disbursements liability of £2,000 odd and a worse case scenario of, say £18,000 based on our figures. Some solicitors may want to ask for money on account for this.

OR, clients could buy a useful thing called After the Event insurance!

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Apr 18

‘Win an Amazon Kindle Competition’ Closes!

Posted in General

Box Legal would like to thank all of those who entered our competition to win an Amazon Kindle.

The answer to the question we asked, “How many cancellation reasons do we allow? “, was 7.

A winner was selected at random from all the entrants who emailed or direct messaged us with the correct answer.

Congratulations to the winner of the competition, Rebecca Jenkinson. We will contact you directly by email for details of where to send the Kindle to.

Please continue to follow us and keep reading our blog. There will be more competitions coming soon!

comments: 2 »
Apr 13

Guest blogger: A journalistic approach to running the country?

Posted in Personal Injury Claims

This is the second in our series of guest blogs. It comes from Malcolm Roberts, owner of Beechwood Services - A document signing and investigation service for claimant solicitors.

A wise friend once observed that whenever you read a newspaper article on a subject you know well, it’s clear that the journalist has only gained at best a superficial grasp of the topic. This then makes you question the validity of everything else that you read in the papers. Now apply that logic to the government’s approach to Civil Litigation Funding and you have to wonder about their capacity to run the country. If they are applying the same insight and thoroughness to foreign policy, defence, home affairs, the Health Service and education the prospects are alarming.

At first it seemed that they had been successfully lobbied by the insurers, but they, it would seem, are very unhappy with Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (along with the Plain English Campaign) and expect premiums to rise due to the MOJ/Jackson reforms. So if access to justice will be reduced and insurance will cost more, who gains from this? Ken Clarke expects to save £50m from the NHS no longer paying for ATE, but how much tax revenue will the Exchequer lose as claimant and defendant solicitors are laid off, ATE providers close their doors, costs draughtsman vanish, CMCs disappear, CFA field agents become a thing of the past and all of their accountants, suppliers, advertising agencies, landlords, etc suffer with them?

Reading Lord Young’s report, commissioned by David Cameron whilst in opposition, it’s clear that there was antipathy to the brash advertising that encourages the great unwashed to take on big business with confidence. Young concluded that the compensation culture existed only in perception, but did not allow this unwelcome truth to deflect him from his purpose, which it seems was to contribute to the case made by Ken Clarke recently in the Commons. Clarke’s case, as Daniel Morris has shown, was built on deeply flawed figures, which may present a glimmer of hope if he can accept his mistakes. More likely he won’t, as reducing the number and cost of claims assists the government enormously. I can’t get away from the feeling that the best way to reduce the med neg bill would be to sort out whatever’s wrong with the NHS and reduce the number of victims, rather than diluting the principle of compensation, a fundamental tenet of English law. What next; the presumption of innocence?

Assuming the proposed changes take place, will the personal injury market really grind to a halt? Accidents will still happen and people will still be entitled to be compensated. What will need to be adapted will be the “deal” offered by claimant solicitors. Clients will have to be protected from incurring costs if they lose, and if that means they have to hand over a percentage of their award then so be it. By adopting the worst feature of the American model, i.e. a damages based system, I believe the government has unwittingly paved the way for a transparent marketing proposition which claimants will have more faith in than the “too good to be true” one we have at present.

Malcolm Roberts
Beechwood Services

comments: 0 »
Apr 11

Win an Amazon Kindle! Competition closes Friday 15 April.

Posted in Amazon Kindle Competition, General

To enter the competition you must do the following:

  1. Answer the following question: Q. How many cancellation reasons do we allow?
    …and send your answer by email to Kirsten@boxlegal.co.uk
  2. Follow Box Legal on Twitter…just click here: http://twitter.com/BoxLegal
  3. Tweet the following message at least once: ‘Box Legal Competition: Answer just one question to win an Amazon Kindle! Click http://tinyurl.com/5rujuq9 to enter

The winner will be chosen on Monday18th April 2011, and announced on this blog and via Twitter.

Best of luck!

comments: 0 »
Apr 9

The Future for Personal Injury Solicitors

Posted in After The Event Insurance, General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

OK. I have done After the Event Insurance and the fact that it is going to be needed post-Jackson, so let’s look at solicitors shall we? Are they going to be needed, I mean after all, they are going to increase the litigant in person rates so no need for them anymore?

Well that’s rubbish of course. Most people when faced with dealing with legal proceedings would run a mile and would rather do nothing. It is pretty daunting, no matter how many leaflets the small claims court issues. 

The problem here is not whether there are going to be sufficient punters for solicitors to act for but rather the other way round – are there going to be sufficient Personal Injury Lawyers around after the Jackson reforms? You may recall the hit the profession took recently with the fixed costs allowed by the RTA portal not to mention predictable costs rates which haven’t been increased since being brought in – not even for the galloping rate of inflation. After the Government brings in their Jackson reforms, will there be any profit in Personal Injury anymore?

Well I think it depends. Before I give you my opinion, I should say I have quite a bit of experience at the coal face (otherwise I suspect you may stop reading and do something more interesting instead (‘Why Don’t You’ reference there for the older readers)). A few years back, Simon Pinner and I set up a very large PI department at our firm – Kingsford Stacey Blackwell. You wouldn’t believe it now but we leased a very large office in Fetter Lane, Central London – just inside the ‘City’ to take advantage of the City of London recoverable Court rates. We had over 80 staff at our peak. Unfortunately, predictable costs then loomed on the horizon so it was no longer viable to operate where we were.

Which is, I suppose, my point. Post Jackson, those practices doing it the old fashioned way (solicitor, secretary, expensive centrally located office etc) are going to be a thing of the past. It simply won’t be viable for firms to operate in this way. We are talking factory hens here I am afraid and a lot of decent IT. We are going to see more of the out of town industrial estate operations with lots of paralegals using case management software to churn out settlements.

Jackson is going to change the face of litigation and in particular PI like no one before. The odd high street PI solicitor may survive but it won’t be the mainstay of their practice anymore - they will have to subsidise their work with something else. Clients are used to telephone banking and call centres so it won’t come as much of a shock to them but be under no illusion, Solicitors are going to suffer. Money can be made but PI solicitors are going to be heading the way of the bank manager – no longer top of the tree but  about two thirds of the way down. Just above Quantity Surveyors.

So it is on this cheery note that I bid you farewell. Rats and sinking ships I hear you cry? Not a bit of it. Just off for a week, er skiing. Trouble is there’s no snow. My crumb of comfort is thinking of the money I am saving not having to hire skis. Always look on the bright side is what I say. They could have upped the PI small claims court limit after all.

See you in a week.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 0 »
Apr 6

The Future for After the Event Insurance

Posted in General, Personal Injury Claims, Solicitors, The Jackson Report

Now that the dust has settled on Ken Clarke’s announcement, let’s do some crystal ball gazing to see what is going to happen to After the Event Insurance post Jackson implementation.

First, let’s look at the (likely) rules:

  • After the Event Insurance won’t we recoverable from the defendant
  • Adverse costs won’t generally be payable except:
    • Where the claimant has acted unreasonably (we shall ignore fraud as ATE Insurance wouldn’t cover this anyway)
    • Where the claimant is wealthy
    • Where the Defendant has made a Part 36 offer and the client fails to beat it.
  • The client will get an uplift of 10% on their general damages to pay for their success fee and any ATE insurance policy.
  • There may be a fixed sum payable if a case is lost to put off ‘silly’ claims – the amount being banded around here is £1,000.

So, why would anyone need an After the Event Insurance policy (I am being facetious)?

Well, here goes:

  1. To cover the claimant’s own disbursements which can run into 5 figures
  2. To cover the risk of the claimant being found to have been ‘unreasonable’ which will be decided at the end of the case by the Judge.
  3. To cover the risk of the claimant being found to be sufficiently wealthy (no definition yet) to pay costs
  4. To cover adverse costs should the claimant fail to beat a Part 36 offer which can be made at any time (we think defendants will make it very early)
  5. To cover fixed adverse costs should the claimant lose (£1,000?)

So, basically, pretty much the same as the current regime save for some part of adverse costs which may be restricted but may not be - and the claimant won’t know which it is until the end of the case anyway.

It appears that the defendant insurance industry has managed to pull the rabbit out of the hat. They have left the claimant facing almost the same risks as before but have made them pay for the premium. Brilliant.

Now the good news is that premiums will have to fall as adverse costs are definitely going to be less. Also, those ‘hold harmless’ cowboy insurers won’t be able to operate any more and inefficient insurers will disappear so only proper insurers will remain operating on a level playing field.

I know this sounds strange but I am actually looking forward to it.

Box Legal Limited: After the Event Insurance Providers
www.boxlegal.co.uk  | daniel@boxlegal.co.uk | 0870 766 9997

comments: 2 »
« Previous Next »