# Referral fees to be banned



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Woo hoo! The slimy parasites won't be able to scam the public and push costs up any more. Doubt premiums will drop much but it should slow down the massive rises a lot.


----------



## bigmc (Mar 22, 2010)

They should also ban the ambulance chaser adverts on tv too, the sooner people realise that the litigious culture of the US doesn't make for a good economy the better. I do believe though if you are genuinely injured you deserve some sort of compensation.


----------



## mattsbmw (Jul 20, 2008)

I never realised this happened till i watched the news and it seriously annoys me that my details were SOLD to a company without my consent.

This is why i get a text a week since two years following my accident.

I would have thought this was breaking the data protection act??


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

I get texts all the time and I've never had an accident!!


----------



## Andy from Sandy (May 6, 2011)

> The slimy parasites won't be able to scam the public and push costs up any more.


But as far as I can see it is the insurance companies themselves that started the ball rolling. So they boost their earnings by selling the information and then put up the premiums to pay for the increased claims.

As you say the premiums probably won't come down but it will hopefully reduce the leeches.


----------



## 335dAND110XS (Dec 17, 2010)

Andy - IMO the insurance companies AND the claims companies are both slimy parasites!


----------



## Andy from Sandy (May 6, 2011)

335dAND110XS said:


> Andy - IMO the insurance companies AND the claims companies are both slimy parasites!


:thumb:


----------



## centenary (Sep 5, 2010)

Some good news. But what is to stop the accident solicitors just whacking another grand on their overall costs?


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

dont take this the wrong way but end of the day you might find some solicitors that dont agree with no win no fee schemes they have allowed alot of people defamation cases and in some ways have been a very good thing, unfortunately these same rules allow for ease in personal injury claims and tbh i dont like them but put my solicitors (okay still in education side) but i would not allow my personal judgement into being a solicitor. 

No win no fee unfortunately was originally designed for access to fair honest justice without fear of monies in civil cases, but like (and has been in certain ways) anything it can be abused


----------



## OvlovMike (Jul 19, 2011)

No win, no fee should be banned, permanently. When entering into a court case, you should be certain that you're going to win. If not, why aren't you certain? Maybe because you're taking the ****?

IMO your doctor should be the only one that can refer you to a personal injury solicitor. Adverts should be banned, direct access should be banned. If you're that injured that you need to claim, then you can f*ck off if you think I'm going to buy that you don't have opportunity to go to your doctor.


----------



## Stumper (Apr 5, 2009)

bigmc said:


> They should also ban the ambulance chaser adverts on tv too, the sooner people realise that the litigious culture of the US doesn't make for a good economy the better. I do believe though if you are genuinely injured you deserve some sort of compensation.


Nevermind the TV adverts, most of the hospitals in London have adverts for the ambulance chasing lawyers on the back of their appointment cards! 
It's no wonder people use them and think it's ok to try and claim for the slightest little thing when people who you'd expect to be responsible are advertising these firms.


----------



## Johnboy82 (Nov 12, 2010)

centenary said:


> Some good news. But what is to stop the accident solicitors just whacking another grand on their overall costs?


The Solicitors get fixed costs from the insurers when the case is settled either before litigation or after it. In England and Wales its under the MOJ Low Value Personal Injury Claims Process and is readily available of The minisrty of justice website. I pay on average £1620.00 per claim at work to solicitors. Sometimes double that.


----------



## justina3 (Jan 11, 2008)

centenary said:


> Some good news. But what is to stop the accident solicitors just whacking another grand on their overall costs?


Costs have to be seen to be fair and reasonable to the case in hand, I had a case last year where I refused to pay some ground rent on an apartment due to the maintenance company doing nothing they where meant to be doing, they sued and there solicitor tried to charge £1200 legal costs I lost the case sadly due to a lack of evidence on my part however the costs of £1200 where not allowed only £625.00


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

No money from referrals means it's going to come from somewhere. Can you guess where? Go on, have a try.


----------



## justina3 (Jan 11, 2008)

Gruffs said:


> No money from referrals means it's going to come from somewhere. Can you guess where? Go on, have a try.


shot in the dark here driver ?


----------



## justina3 (Jan 11, 2008)

Gruffs said:


> No money from referrals means it's going to come from somewhere. Can you guess where? Go on, have a try.


looking at the world through my rose sunglasses wouldnt the insurance compaines be better of from not having to pay out so many medical claims


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

Yes they would.

But, would you drop premiums if it were you?


----------



## justina3 (Jan 11, 2008)

Gruffs said:


> Yes they would.
> 
> But, would you drop premiums if it were you?


Argh but didn't I read somewhere the whole premium system is under investigation buy the oft? Maybe this action will coincide with there findings and change there findings if any,

God I live in a lovely very unreal world sometimes but you have to have faith.


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

Bless you.

Can i come to your world. I warn you though, I may bring Clotted Cream fudge and Mountain Dew to bliss out on.

I have faith that there will be a cost incurred in the re-administration of the systems that must, unfortunately, be passed on.

A bit like water companies charging thier customers for fixing their leaky pipes which is their system and therefore part of their overheads in running their business. 

If they can, they will.


----------



## Shiny (Apr 23, 2007)

justina3 said:


> looking at the world through my rose sunglasses wouldnt the insurance compaines be better of from not having to pay out so many medical claims


This is one of those weird catch 22s i don't quite understand. If Insurer A is taking a referral fee, then Insurer B is paying it as part of their claims costs. By the law of averages, if there are 100 accidents between Insurer A and Insurer B, 50 of them will be A's policyholder's fault and 50 of them will be Insurer B's policyholder's fault. So ultimately, each Insurer will be paying out as much in referral fees in claims costs as they are in making money from referrals, so i'd have thought one would offset the other when weighing up the loss and profit ratios at the end of the year.

I guess the main problem is that by taking a referral fee, claiming for injury etc is "encouraged" by the Insurers, which ultimately means the overall costs of claim may have jumped up considerably by getting solicitors involved that may have been avoided if a solicitor wasn't involved.


----------



## Ninja59 (Feb 17, 2009)

OvlovMike said:


> No win, no fee should be banned, permanently. When entering into a court case, you should be certain that you're going to win. If not, why aren't you certain? Maybe because you're taking the ****?
> 
> IMO your doctor should be the only one that can refer you to a personal injury solicitor. Adverts should be banned, direct access should be banned. If you're that injured that you need to claim, then you can f*ck off if you think I'm going to buy that you don't have opportunity to go to your doctor.


i strangely say it should not be because it does allow access to fair justice without the worry of cost implications (not everyone can afford a solicitor straight off and in someways it makes the solicitor work harder to ensure they do win as otherwise they have lost that time and effort for nothing), however i do believe there should be limits on its use though to stop abuses of the system. In someways though people only see the negative impact if you want to put it that way...and not the good ways it has (depending on your pov, for example people that could never afford defamation cases (one of the most expensive forms of litigation).

no one is ever 100% certain of winning a case despite however good your brief etc. is, every case is different the situations and very rarely are the same cases repeated in the same style in the same environment.

unfortunately legal aid is mostly unavailable for many people these days as it is alot tighter and the budget is far less than it ever used to be, without no win no fee in place *deserving* people could go without saying/doing anything against the person that caused the problem and on the balance of probabilities were more than likely to win in the solicitors *eyes*.

However, putting my moral aspect aside, there is another viewpoint which i do not really think people will be happy about but end of the day the solicitor makes decent money in fees from easy cases that are clear cut yes i know it maybe from "ambulance chasers" but nothing in the world is 100% morally correct IMHO and with my solicitors head on i do not see a problem end of the day a person has come to you with a claim if the opportunity to provide relief, assistance, put them back in the same situation as before the incident (however that maybe done) then so be it,morally it might not sit well with me or others on here but then as a solicitor i am not there to *judge the people before me but the incident that has occurred*


----------

