Injuries board compensation - More or less than court typically?

kennM

Hey guys,

Done plenty of reading and there seems to be varied views on this but no specific thread discussing it. Just asking....

Do the Injuries Board tend to offer (a) more (b) the same or (c) less than courts? I've read stats that only 22% of cases are actually settled for the injuries board amount.... naturally there are plenty of other variables.... going onto court, pre trial settlement, court ordered settlement etc.

Interested to get your views & thoughts..... when giving your view can you also give an indication regarding how you have came to that opinion, e.g. first hand experience, read something somewhere, anecdotal evidence... etc.

Cheers all!

Delancey

Not sure you'll get a clear cut answer to your questions - opinions on the Injuries Board vs. Courts seem to differ :rolleyes:

kennM

Delancey wrote: »

Not sure you'll get a clear cut answer to your questions - opinions on the Injuries Board vs. Courts seem to differ :rolleyes:

I'd tend to agree with you but none-the-less I'd be interested to see what people think one way or another and why they think that way.

kennM

Anyone got any views/thoughts on this?

Cheers all.... btw: Merry Christmas to one and all, wishing each and very one a peaceful and prosperous new year.

puzzle factory

way less,just an organisation set up to save the poor insurance companies money.

Flincher

We seem to be accepting a lot more Assessments over the last year or so than previously. In a lot of cases, it seems to be just on the low side of what a Court would award. Clients seem willing enough to take their money, and are willing to lose 10% or so instead of waiting for a couple of years and going through the Courts.

That's just my own view based on the cases I deal with.

The Jaw

Despite their similiar duties, it is a small bit like comparing apples with organges.
The Injuries Board, for example, will not assess a case where the injuries parts has on-going or unspecified injuries. They will send these types of cases forward to the Courts ( or more specifically authorise the cases to by pass the board).
These on-going injuries are usually symptomatic of a relatively serious injury.As a result the Courts usually hear the more serious ones and thus give higher awards.

kennM

The Jaw wrote: »

Despite their similiar duties, it is a small bit like comparing apples with organges.
The Injuries Board, for example, will not assess a case where the injuries parts has on-going or unspecified injuries. They will send these types of cases forward to the Courts ( or more specifically authorise the cases to by pass the board).
These on-going injuries are usually symptomatic of a relatively serious injury.As a result the Courts usually hear the more serious ones and thus give higher awards.

I understand your point... there are cases though where PIAB settlement figure has been declined and gone to court. Would be interested to get any sort of indication around these. Actually its difficult to tell where the division/spread of these cases are. Apparently (as per stats i read somewhere, open to correction and they may be out of date) only 22% of cases are settled for the figure proposed by PIAB. So that 78% could include a lot of different variables that we don't know the size of....

i.e. % that PIAB could not assess and sent direct to court, % that declined PIAB settlement and negotiated settlement pre court, % that declined PIAB and went to court.....

I believe the point you mention fall into the first category I mention above... just interested to get peoples views and thoughts and perspectives on it.

Cheers all