Can the Oireachtas legislate to cap personal injury awards?

Geuze

Personal injury awards are very high in Ireland.

At the moment, the Judicial Council is considering the level of these awards.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0205/1195164-judicial-council/


My question is: can the Oireachtas pass a law to set and/or cap these awards?

I don't see how it's plausible to set caps. Surely, by it's very nature, each injury is different. I reckon, a refreshed 'book of quantum' with lower awards would be a reasonable approach.

To be honest, I can't really see any issue with Mary who claims to have whiplash from an accident getting 15k to move on with her life. Is she conning the system? Probably. But let her at it. She got unlucky and that's life.

However, I do think that if Mary pops into her solicitor for another unfortunate accident, then a Garda investigation should take place before the insurance companies can progress with things. That way you'd possibly overpay the odd exaggerated case, but you'd put the boot into those who are serial claimants, or who think of doing it just because it's handy money, which is where the real issue lies, anyway.

Geuze

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see how it's plausible to set caps. Surely, by it's very nature, each injury is different. I reckon, a refreshed 'book of quantum' with lower awards would be a reasonable approach.

Who gets to revise the "book of quantum"?

Can the relevant Minister revise it?

Geuze

Geuze wrote: »

Who gets to revise the "book of quantum"?

Can the relevant Minister revise it?

I don't know the actual answer, but I'd assume some committee somewhere has the responsibility.


I do know it was talked about before, though. I remember listening to Newstalk and they were discussing this. They were talking about the book of quantum values should be brought down, but there wasn't a specific mention of who does that.


It is very easy, if you have the neck, to make a few euro off 'accidents'. It's almost impossible to lose, unless you get greedy. I know of one particular woman that has had three claims in the last three years. Two of which overlapped (one was a fall in the street, which was sorted, then she fell in a shop, and before that got wrapped up, she went for a beautician who used a product on her that gave a mild rash - apparently the beautician should have done a spot test first, but i mean the rash was there and gone within 2-3 days). She is clever enough to accept the first offer by an insurance company and never risk going to court.


I think there should be (if there isn't already) a database that says Woman X has had Y amount of claims, and Z are still open/ongoing).

Victor

Might there be constitutional right to work and / or property rights issues in such a cap?

Eggs For Dinner

Deleted User wrote: »

To be honest, I can't really see any issue with Mary who claims to have whiplash from an accident getting 15k to move on with her life. Is she conning the system? Probably. But let her at it. She got unlucky and that's life.
y.

So we should all get a €15k 'free hit' at compo? That equates to 25-30 years worth of the average premium which each of us pay?

Dempo1

Not at all sure Government can legislate these proposals, we've been here many times before, the Personal Injuries Assessment Board was intended in one regard to reduce costs and seems to be an abject failure.

The Courts System (and I think it's pretty good) in essence would make capping injury awards near impossible, government can't legislate against a person entitlement to appeal.

I'm all for a review but Government trying to in essence pre determine the outcome of a legal claim / court case seems wholely inappropriate to me.

Green Peter

Geuze wrote: »

Personal injury awards are very high in Ireland.

At the moment, the Judicial Council is considering the level of these awards.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0205/1195164-judicial-council/


My question is: can the Oireachtas pass a law to set and/or cap these awards?

Hopefully, it's a disgrace as it is.

angel eyes 2012

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't know the actual answer, but I'd assume some committee somewhere has the responsibility.


I do know it was talked about before, though. I remember listening to Newstalk and they were discussing this. They were talking about the book of quantum values should be brought down, but there wasn't a specific mention of who does that.

.

There is a committee already.

https://judicialcouncil.ie/personal-injuries-guidelines-committee/

Irishphotodesk

Has anyone considered why the awards are high....and maybe ask questions...

is it because more people are claiming for injuries they received here than in Europe?
Is it because claims were not investigated properly because insurance companies thought it was cheaper to pay out than investigate 30+ years ago. And now they have already set precedents.

Is it possible that our health care system prices are higher than in Europe?
Is it possible that our legal fees are higher than Europe ?
Is it possible that insurance fees are higher than in Europe ?

Is it possible that every step involved in making a claim from an insurance company involves a different person who (might be higher than Europe) needs to add their fee.

The entire system needs to be fixed - without a doubt, but the best way to start is exactly what the insurance companies have been doing, analysis of claims and challenging those that they believe are fake/set up, over time attitudes will change and the likelihood of headline payouts will diminish.

So, one solution as far as I’m concerned would be to punish the legals/person if they take on a claim which is found to be fake/false, Properly punish those who commit perjury with jail time and have a Garda in court to arrest those suspected of fake claims.

Eggs For Dinner

It's a combination of all of the above. There are no clean hands from any party involved in this and the machine has been allowed spiral out of control. The system, from start to finish, is unsustainable

ohnonotgmail

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

So we should all get a €15k 'free hit' at compo? That equates to 25-30 years worth of the average premium which each of us pay?

How much do you think somebody should get for 12 months of pain and ongoing movement issues?

Eggs For Dinner

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

How much do you think somebody should get for 12 months of pain and ongoing movement issues?

What level of pain?
What level of movement issues?
What age are they?
What job do they do?
What's the prognosis on full recovery?
What social and sporting activities are they involved in?

Your question can't be answered in isolation

happyoutscan

Irishphotodesk wrote: »

Has anyone considered why the awards are high....and maybe ask questions...

is it because more people are claiming for injuries they received here than in Europe?
Is it because claims were not investigated properly because insurance companies thought it was cheaper to pay out than investigate 30+ years ago. And now they have already set precedents.

Is it possible that our health care system prices are higher than in Europe?
Is it possible that our legal fees are higher than Europe ?
Is it possible that insurance fees are higher than in Europe ?

Is it possible that every step involved in making a claim from an insurance company involves a different person who (might be higher than Europe) needs to add their fee.

The entire system needs to be fixed - without a doubt, but the best way to start is exactly what the insurance companies have been doing, analysis of claims and challenging those that they believe are fake/set up, over time attitudes will change and the likelihood of headline payouts will diminish.

So, one solution as far as I’m concerned would be to punish the legals/person if they take on a claim which is found to be fake/false, Properly punish those who commit perjury with jail time and have a Garda in court to arrest those suspected of fake claims.

Have they though?

Also, I'd be giving sweet **** all for soft tissue damage (ie whiplash). No more of the soft money for the MAJORITY of the con-artists seeking it.

ohnonotgmail

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

What level of pain?
What level of movement issues?
What age are they?
What job do they do?
What's the prognosis on full recovery?
What social and sporting activities are they involved in?

Your question can't be answered in isolation

exactly. Yet some think that 15K for whiplash injuries is too much when they have no idea of the details of those injuries.

Eggs For Dinner

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

exactly. Yet some think that 15K for whiplash injuries is too much when they have no idea of the details of those injuries.

But when those details are available, the limits are too high at the lower end of the scale. The very fact that the majority of soft tissue claimants end all treatment when the cheque comes through is testament to that

happyoutscan

Unless you have CT/MRI scans which can back up your claims of actual injury then these acute whiplash 'injuries' should not be humoured.

ohnonotgmail

happyoutscan wrote: »

Unless you have CT/MRI scans which can back up your claims of actual injury then these acute whiplash 'injuries' should not be humoured.

and who pays for them?

is_that_so

The Book of Quantum is a list of guidelines that judges use and it's managed and revised by the PIAB.

Eggs For Dinner

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and who pays for them?

The claimant pays for them. If the claim is successful, the costs are recouped from person who caused the accident and so they should

Irishphotodesk

happyoutscan wrote: »

Have they though?

Also, I'd be giving sweet **** all for soft tissue damage (ie whiplash). No more of the soft money for the MAJORITY of the con-artists seeking it.

yes - they have been actively monitoring trends in claims as well as recurring names and relationships - which is why we can see multiple stories about claimants withdrawing claims.

They are selectively picking and choosing which claims to target (based on algorithms i would guess) but the stories "should" deter people from trying their luck.

Geuze

is_that_so wrote: »

The Book of Quantum is a list of guidelines that judges use and it's managed and revised by the PIAB.

Are you sure?

I read that if a Judge makes an award at the higher end of the scale, that becomes the new norm in this Book.

Eggs For Dinner

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

So we should all get a €15k 'free hit' at compo? That equates to 25-30 years worth of the average premium which each of us pay?

Yeah. I don't see what's wrong with that. That's the way it is at the moment, anyway. Very few people are legitimately involved in car accidents where they are left with 'soft tissue' issues in the first place. It seems to me, that giving an informal process of 'first claim goes unlooked' you get the genuine people out of the system quicker. And if the same person appears twice or three times, you know you've a serial claimant on your hands.


People can have injuries that don't show up on x-rays or such. I've experienced it myself. It'd be unfair to label everyone a liar from the word go, and as there is no obvious, easy way to differentiate who's being legitimate, and who's pulling a fast one.


The problem, as I see it, are serial claimants. People who have incredibly bad luck and have a claim in every year or two for practically their entire adult life. That's where attention needs to be focused (in my opinion).

Geuze

Victor wrote: »

Might there be constitutional right to work and / or property rights issues in such a cap?

This is my question, really.

Are there constitutional reasons stopping the Govt / parliament from legislating in this area?

We know awards are double UK levels.

We know the UK are reducing their awards.

We know UK awards are above German levels.


Could we legislate to cap awards at, say, 75% below current levels?

Irishphotodesk

Geuze wrote: »

.....

We know awards are double UK levels.

....

any source for this ?

my recollection is that the statistic that was thrown out a few years ago making a similar claim - included legal fees (so the difference is not as big without the legal fees and expenses incurred... but that part was cut when reported in the media)

I may be incorrect, but that's my recollection - and then it was misinterpreted and shaped into the "fact" that you have outlined too.

BattleCorp

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

What level of pain?
What level of movement issues?
What age are they?
What job do they do?
What's the prognosis on full recovery?
What social and sporting activities are they involved in?

Your question can't be answered in isolation

Easy to coach a person into giving the correct answers to the questions above.

So many aspiring pianists, basketball players etc. getting injured just when they were on the cusp of getting to the Olympics.

BattleCorp

Geuze wrote: »

Could we legislate to cap awards at, say, 75% below current levels?

There is already a cap on General Damages. I think it's set at €450,000. That's the maximum and you'd want a pretty catastrophic injury to get that. I'm thinking paralysis, brain damage etc.

I don't see how you can put a cap on Special Damages. These are damages for out of pocket expenses such as medical costs, lost earnings, future earnings etc. Putting a cap on it is difficult as each case is different. Someone could get a mild brain injury and maybe need very little care, costing €500k, and someone else could get a severe brain injury and their future care could cost €10m+.

I could lose a foot but still be able to do my job so the payout to me would be less than it would be to a steeplejack, who needs his foot for his job more than I do.

Say someone hurts their back lifting something. How do you put a value on that? I've strained my back and missed 5 days out of work and I was grand after that. I've a mate who had his 26th back operation two weeks ago after injuring his back lifting something similar.

It's cases like that make it difficult to cap awards.

hullaballoo

Geuze wrote: »

This is my question, really.

Are there constitutional reasons stopping the Govt / parliament from legislating in this area?

We know awards are double UK levels.

We know the UK are reducing their awards.

We know UK awards are above German levels.


Could we legislate to cap awards at, say, 75% below current levels?

Yes, there are constitutional reasons why the government cannot interfere in a judicial process, such as the evaluation of damages in litigation. It's solely the preserve of the courts. An attempt by government to interfere in this is unconstitutional.

I don't know where you are getting the "we know" bits of your post from. It would be helpful if you could cite your sources there because it seems that we don't know, actually. I've never heard that our awards are double UK levels. Seems an incredible statement to make to me.

Awards are too high here for certain low level kinds of injuries, I don't think there's any doubt or question about that. Even just from first principles, without looking abroad. On the other hand, I am very unsure about the merit in having a race to the bottom for damages for injuries.

The recalibration of damages for minor injuries is underway. Insurance companies have successfully lobbied not just the government but the judiciary on this, something of a coup on their part, and they're still complaining it's not enough.

Maybe the government should make it mandatory for everyone in the State to take out every available policy of insurance that could conceivably apply to them, then make it an indictable crime to attempt to claim against any of these policies with a mandatory minimum 15 year sentence. Or maybe even then the insurance companies would lobby for summary disposal with life imprisonment. Who knows.

Eggs For Dinner

When the legal profession display such disdain for the insurance industry, I'm heartened that real change must be on the horizon. Claims, and cost of claims in Ireland are unsustainable and multiples of what they are in the UK and Europe




Can someone give me a 'cabal'???

Geuze

hullaballoo wrote: »

Yes, there are constitutional reasons why the government cannot interfere in a judicial process, such as the evaluation of damages in litigation. It's solely the preserve of the courts. An attempt by government to interfere in this is unconstitutional.

I don't know where you are getting the "we know" bits of your post from. It would be helpful if you could cite your sources there because it seems that we don't know, actually. I've never heard that our awards are double UK levels. Seems an incredible statement to make to me.

My apologies, here is one example:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/soft-tissue-damage-awards-four-times-greater-in-republic-than-uk-1.3633206


Over and over again, the media report huge claims and awards in Ireland.


We know that many claims are fraudulent, as the claimant stop going for treatment when the payout arrived:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/most-whiplash-patients-end-treatment-when-legal-action-finished-1.4041918

It is like a miracle, the cash is a wonderful cure!!

The newspapers are full of examples of fraudulent and exaggerated claims. So we do know that, there isn't any debate there.

The size of the awards encourages false claims, so if we want to reduce the number of false claims (which we all do) my question is can we reduce the value of the awards?

It seems the answer is no?


For example, whiplash here is 10k-20k.

Could we legislate to cap that figure at 5k?

Also, a friend suggested a good idea - could we legislate to say all payouts are non-cash, they are vouchers to be used at physios?

the_pen_turner

The 2 problems are that there is no personal responsibility anymore. It's always someone else's fault. If they held people responsible for their actions then pay days would be a lot less
And the way that medical costs are awarded you have an injury ,here is money do what you like with it. It should only cover expenses that are vouched. If someone needs 10k work of physio then pay for each session not just hand them money. Only genuine people will get the treatment

Ubbquittious

Geuze wrote: »

Who gets to revise the "book of quantum"?

Can the relevant Minister revise it?

The book of quantum is penned by a single monk deep in the bowels of Trinity college in Latin. It takes him several days to scribe and decorate a single page. The odd evening he'll have a sup of buckfast from the Ardagh chalice. He never leaves his underground lair. He is nearly 80 and has no successor lined up

Victor

the_pen_turner wrote: »

The 2 problems are that there is no personal responsibility anymore. It's always someone else's fault. If they held people responsible for their actions then pay days would be a lot less

I think this is rather confused. Culpable parties need to be held responsible. Victims generally do not.

And the way that medical costs are awarded you have an injury ,here is money do what you like with it. It should only cover expenses that are vouched. If someone needs 10k work of physio then pay for each session not just hand them money. Only genuine people will get the treatment

So, I once made a claim. I had spent about €20,000 before I received anything. What good would vouchers have been?

Geuze

Geuze wrote: »

Also, a friend suggested a good idea - could we legislate to say all payouts are non-cash, they are vouchers to be used at physios?

How is that compensating someone for pain and having to deal with an injury? They'll be long sorted by the time a payout is made to them.