EWJ June 2024 web - Journal - Page 21
parties to the case should bear in mind that Article IX
of the Bill of Rights 1689 applies to the Committee’s
proceedings and so not make reference to this
evidence in the ongoing case. (Paragraph 7)
ttempting to compare current premiums with those
pre-reform. They told us that “it is still too early to
properly evaluate the reforms, even without past and
prevailing complicating factors such as COVID-19
and inflation”.53 The MoJ also acknowledged that
there has been an increase in the average price for comprehensive motor insurance since 2021, which they
stated has been driven by global supply chain issues and
inflation. The Civil Liability Act 2018 requires HM
Treasury to lay a report in Parliament during the 2024–
25 financial year, assessing the effects of the Act on policyholders. This will be based on information which
insurers must have provided to the Financial Conduct
Authority by 1 October 2023. The MoJ told us this
meant “It would be premature to try to draw any conclusions about the impact of the reforms on premiums
before this statutory exercise is completed”.
Use of the OIC portal by litigants in person
The OIC portal has been designed to support people
who have suffered injuries from road traffic accidents
to make a claim for compensation without the need
for legal help. Initial estimates had suggested 30% of
users would not have legal representation, yet this is
currently the case for less than 10% of users, and even
this figure is disputed by some who suggest it is likely
to be lower still. This is largely because of a lack both
of awareness around the existence of the OIC and of
confidence in navigating a potentially complex system.
(Paragraph 22)
Whilst we accept that the majority of OIC users will
continue to use legal representation, it is not clear to
what extent a lack of awareness of the portal is
responsible for the low number of unrepresented
claims. Accordingly, we recommend that the MoJ and
Motor Insurers’ Bureau conduct research to better
understand this, and whether steps to improve awareness of the OIC portal and user-confidence in the system would encourage more litigants in person.
(Paragraph 23)
The Government estimated that the whiplash reform
programme would remove more than £1.2 billion
from the cost of providing motor insurance, and that
these savings would be passed on to policyholders
through lower premiums. However, whilst the total
number of minor personal injury claims has reduced
in the last two years, the cost of motor insurance has
continued to rise, with insurers citing cost of living
pressures, the effects of the pandemic, the war in
Ukraine and the increasing cost of care in relation to
high value and catastrophic claims. It is, therefore, difficult to determine the extent to which these upward
pressures have been offset by any savings arising from
the whiplash reform programme.
Technical issues for professional users
The OIC portal was designed with unrepresented
claimants and users in mind, whereas as we have already noted the vast majority of the portal’s actual
users are legal professionals. We are concerned to hear
that a number of professional users of the OIC service
continue to experience problems with the portal
We note the requirement in the Civil Liability Act 2018
for HM Treasury to report to Parliament in the 2024–
25 financial year on the extent to which savings have
been passed on to policyholders. Whilst we acknowledge that many factors may impact on the cost of
motor insurance premiums, it is vital that the direct
effect of the whiplash reforms is properly assessed. We
recommend that the Government ensures this process is as transparent as possible, including publication
of the submissions made by insurers. Given the
whiplash reforms are still bedding in, and the large
number of cases still awaiting settlement, we further
recommend that the Government conduct a followup assessment one year after the publication of its
planned review.
Ms Ruth Mason
Consultant Obstetrician
MD MRCOG
Ruth Mason started preparing medico-legal
reports for claimants and defendants in 2016 and
has prepared over 200 reports.
Conclusions and recommendations
Current Supreme Court case
Given that some of the witnesses the Committee
would have intended to call to give oral evidence are
parties to the case of Hassam v Rabot to be heard by the
Supreme Court in early 2024, and the centrality of the
treatment of mixed injury claims in assessing the overall implementation of the whiplash reform programme, the Committee has decided to pause its
inquiry until the Supreme Court has ruled on the
case. In the interim, we nevertheless wish to raise some
concerns in relation to the operation of the OIC service to date, which were highlighted in the written evidence we received, and which we have set out in the
remainder of this Report. We have also published the
written evidence to the inquiry. We note that these are
Parliamentary Proceedings, and that just as we are
pausing our inquiry in respect to the Supreme Court,
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
Consultant Obstetrician at University Hospitals, Sussex
since 2010, becoming Labour Ward Lead.
Special expertise in Obstetrics and Feto-Maternal medicine,
including ultrasound scanning of the fetus.
Expert witness for HM Coroner in Surrey on a series of
Neonatal deaths, giving evidence in court.
Reviewed all the maternity protocols to obtain CNST Level 3
in 2013. The maternity unit was designated "outstanding"
by the CQC in 2016.
Her main interests are in complex pregnancies, including
twins, and the management of labour. Antenatal clinic for
mums with mental health illnesses.
Contact Details:
Medico-legal secretary: Alayne Fawkes
Tel: 01903 741154
Email: pms@pypermedical.co.uk
Hareswith Cottage, West Chiltington Road, Storrington, West Sussex RH20 4BP
19
JUNE 2024