Judges called to review/lower insurance claim pay outs

sexmag · 28-07-2018 09:00AM #1

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/compensation-claims-crisis-judges-told-to-slash-payouts-37162760.html

Now I think we can all agree that insurance pay outs in this country have spiralled out of control but in saying that a review by judges to do a blanket lowering of pay outs is not the way forward.

The option of a garda fraud detection team to fine people who make fake claims, along with insurers doing their due diligence is the way forward for cutting out scrupulous claims,not only that each pay out for claims should be on a case by case basis with medical reports provided along with impact reports on future earnings as they stand. There will be people who genuinelyneed compensation after an incident who might be severely affected by this.

This crap I costantly see in the news of "So and so claiming 60k damages(and it is almost always that figure,I can find 5 articles at the moment based on that) for car crash claims" needs to stop.

Thoughts on this,your opinion,what you believe the result and impact will be plus what you think is the best way forward?

The Bishop Basher · 28-07-2018 09:03AM

The legal profession should be entirely excluded from any governance of the claims process.

They have had enough time to fix it and all they’ve done is keep feeding from the trough.

Great to see them recognise the problem though.

Robbo · 28-07-2018 12:47PM

sexmag wrote: »

[This crap I costantly see in the news of "So and so claiming 60k damages(and it is almost always that figure,I can find 5 articles at the moment based on that) for car crash claims" needs to stop.

€60k is always in the headline because it's the maximum amount which may be awarded for a Circuit Court personal injuries action. No set of personal injuries papers ever claim such a specific figure, it's purely to sex the story up. Circuit Court actions are usually settled or ruled for sums far less than €60k.

If it was a High Court action, the same logic would dictate "Man fails in personal injuries action for an unlimited amount". This of course would sound silly and implausible but hanging the €60k figure out there is solely in the interests of clickbait and advertising revenue.

Useful sources of information for this type of discussion include the annual reports of the Courts Service and the Injuries Board (or PIAB). Published judgments, established legal principles and doctrines would also contribute to a good discussion. The Kearns report when published should also be worth a read, less so at the moment when its being reported through the prism of PR.

If this descends into an After Hours style maelstrom, this thread won't have much of a lifespan.

4ensic15 · 28-07-2018 06:17PM

Judges are supposedly independent in the exercise of their functions. The only law-making powers in the state are vested in the Oireachtas. This is an absolute load of cobblers.

Under His Eye · 28-07-2018 06:19PM

It would seem a thread from AH has got lost on it's way to AHland.

plodder · 29-07-2018 07:57AM

4ensic15 wrote: »

Judges are supposedly independent in the exercise of their functions.

But, they're also supposed to be consistent. And it looks like we're finally getting acceptance that awards are ridiculously out of line with the rest of the world and more important that something has to be done about it.

What should happen? Take the book of quantum and divide every figure in it by 5 - would be a good start.

4ensic15 · 29-07-2018 08:01AM

plodder wrote: »

But, they're also supposed to be consistent. And it looks like we're finally getting acceptance that awards are ridiculously out of line with the rest of the world and more important that something has to be done about it.

What should happen? Take the book of quantum and divide every figure in it by 5 - would be a good start.

They are supposed to follow precedent, not get together in a huddle and decide the law. That is legislating, which is not allowed under the constitution. This is propaganda put out by insurance companies and politicians.

machiavellianme · 29-07-2018 08:05AM

How about modifying how payouts work?
If judges want to award X, then so be it. The only catch is that the victim gets 2k up front. On production of genuine medical expense based receipts showing how they used that 2k in their recovery, they get another 2k and so forth until the awarded sum is gone or they no longer require the remainder due to being cured.
60k payments to buy a new car and go on holiday makes little improvement for sore necks.

4ensic15 · 29-07-2018 08:09AM

machiavellianme wrote: »

How about modifying how payouts work?
If judges want to award X, then so be it. The only catch is that the victim gets 2k up front. On production of genuine medical expense based receipts showing how they used that 2k in their recovery, they get another 2k and so forth until the awarded sum is gone or they no longer require the remainder due to being cured.
60k payments to buy a new car and go on holiday makes little improvement for sore necks.

There are no 60K payments. That is a myth. At the moment there are no conditional payments and it would only suit larger payments. The judges have been calling for such a scheme for years. It needs politicians to do something, like legislate, which they are in fact paid to do, but rarely bother.
The insurance companies don't want it either. They want one-off payments and don't want their balance sheets carrying committed payments into the future.

plodder · 29-07-2018 08:20AM

4ensic15 wrote: »

They are supposed to follow precedent, not get together in a huddle and decide the law. That is legislating, which is not allowed under the constitution. This is propaganda put out by insurance companies and politicians.

This isn't the law though; it's the level of awards. Though I can imagine judges might be reluctant to do this.

Maybe the answer is to put the book of quantum on a statutory footing, after slashing the numbers in it of course. One way or another, someone has to do it.

boombang · 29-07-2018 08:22AM

If the lawyers aren't part of the problem then they have got terrible PR skills and aren't managing to convey all of the good work through the media. I believe they're all at the trough.

plodder · 29-07-2018 08:25AM

4ensic15 wrote: »

There are no 60K payments. That is a myth. At the moment there are no conditional payments and it would only suit larger payments. The judges have been calling for such a scheme for years. It needs politicians to do something, like legislate, which they are in fact paid to do, but rarely bother.
The insurance companies don't want it either. They want one-off payments and don't want their balance sheets carrying committed payments into the future.

We shouldn't be letting insurance companies dictate the agenda either. They would adjust to such a system if they had to. Committed payments into the future is much the same in principle as pension annuities, which they already deal with.

4ensic15 · 29-07-2018 08:31AM

plodder wrote: »

This isn't the law though; it's the level of awards. Though I can imagine judges might be reluctant to do this.

Maybe the answer is to put the book of quantum on a statutory footing, after slashing the numbers in it of course. One way or another, someone has to do it.

The level of awards are a matter of law. Whoever does it, it can't be judges at a meeting.

plodder · 29-07-2018 08:45AM

4ensic15 wrote: »

Whoever does it, it can't be judges at a meeting.

I suppose the big question is a public policy one. Should we continue with the most generous compensation system on the planet, and if not what do we do? Do, we benchmark against some average, and if so which one? I guess those questions really need to be answered by the legislature.

dr.fuzzenstein · 29-07-2018 08:55AM

Well, the book of quantum has a figure of €15k to €19k for minor whiplash injury with full recovery.
This is way out of line with, for example, Germany, where for the above grade of injury you might receive between €500 and €2000.

https://www.bussgeldkatalog.org/schleudertrauma/#schmerzensgeld_bei_einem_schleudertrauma

In order to receive €2000, the claimant would be unable to work for several weeks and have real, quantifiable injuries.
Trying to obtain monetary compensation by exaggerating or faking injuries is straight into fraud, which will result in criminal prosecution and prison is mentioned even before fines.
In comparison there is a perception of a "better luck next time" attitude to fraudulent insurance claims in Ireland.

plodder · 29-07-2018 09:04AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Well, the book of quantum has a figure of €15k to €19k for minor whiplash injury with full recovery.
This is way out of line with, for example, Germany, where for the above grade of injury you might receive between €500 and €2000.

https://www.bussgeldkatalog.org/schleudertrauma/#schmerzensgeld_bei_einem_schleudertrauma

In order to receive €2000, the claimant would be unable to work for several weeks and have real, quantifiable injuries.
Trying to obtain monetary compensation by exaggerating or faking injuries is straight into fraud, which will result in criminal prosecution and prison is mentioned even before fines.
In comparison there is a perception of a "better luck next time" attitude to fraudulent insurance claims in Ireland.

and Germany is out of kilter with the rest of Europe according to the article above.

I'd be wary about conflating the general issue with fraudulent claims though. The general issue is not about fraud. As of today, you are legally entitled to claim that sort of money for soft tissue injuries that you fully recover from.

dr.fuzzenstein · 29-07-2018 09:19AM

plodder wrote: »

and Germany is out of kilter with the rest of Europe according to the article above.

I'd be wary about conflating the general issue with fraudulent claims though. The general issue is not about fraud. As of today, you are entitled to claim that sort of money for soft tissue injuries that you fully recover from.

Yes, Germany is out of kilter in that it offers higher rewards as outlined in the article in the OP.
And simply bolding the word "entitled" does not make a solid point.

In the end you can have awards that are massively out of line with the rest of Europe, or you can have reasonable car insurance.

TheChizler · 29-07-2018 09:26AM

4ensic15 wrote: »

At the moment there are no conditional payments and it would only suit larger payments.

Unless you're made a ward of court or something.

dr.fuzzenstein · 29-07-2018 09:26AM

This really outlines the problem very neatly.
There is no getting away from the figures.

The issue is payouts that bear no relation to the level of injury.

plodder · 29-07-2018 09:29AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

In the end you can have awards that are massively out of line with the rest of Europe, or you can have reasonable car insurance.

I agree. I just meant we should be careful not to allow the issues to be conflated in case we end up with more delay because the fraud problem could be harder to solve than the the general problem with the size of awards.

TheChizler · 29-07-2018 09:33AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

This really outlines the problem very neatly.
There is no getting away from the figures.

The issue is payouts that bear no relation to the level of injury.

Are we comparing an average Irish award figure for an unspecified level of injury to the range allowable for minor injuries in other countries? If so I'm not sure if that's a very relevant comparison.

4ensic15 · 29-07-2018 09:49AM

TheChizler wrote: »

Unless you're made a ward of court or something.

Even as a ward of court, all that happens is that the commitee dispense the Ward's own money.

dr.fuzzenstein · 29-07-2018 10:04AM

TheChizler wrote: »

Are we comparing an average Irish award figure for an unspecified level of injury to the range allowable for minor injuries in other countries? If so I'm not sure if that's a very relevant comparison.

It's extremely relevant.
As I've posted earlier, mild whiplash with no long lasting effects €15000 in Ireland, €500 in Germany.
That is for the same injury. We're not talking about serious injuries here. To be blunt, we're talking about 5 figure payouts for scratches and owies here.
Of course on a legal forum we're talking about impacting the livelihood of the legal profession.
And they will fight this tooth and nail with every means at their disposal.
And since they're heavily represented in the political sphere I don't see things changing in the near future.

plodder · 29-07-2018 10:21AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

And since they're heavily represented in the political sphere I don't see things changing in the near future.

This report might be the catalyst for change, not least because the author is the former president of the High Court.

TheChizler · 29-07-2018 05:03PM

4ensic15 wrote: »

Even as a ward of court, all that happens is that the commitee dispense the Ward's own money.

Subject to approval that it's in the wards best interest though.

4ensic15 · 29-07-2018 06:29PM

TheChizler wrote: »

Subject to approval that it's in the wards best interest though.

Any award of compensation the ward might get is paid into the fund. There is no going back as in the staggered payment model. All the committee is doing is managing the money.

Carawaystick · 31-07-2018 10:30PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

It's extremely relevant.
As I've posted earlier, mild whiplash with no long lasting effects €15000 in Ireland, €500 in Germany.
That is for the same injury. We're not talking about serious injuries here. To be blunt, we're talking about 5 figure payouts for scratches and owies here.
Of course on a legal forum we're talking about impacting the livelihood of the legal profession.
And they will fight this tooth and nail with every means at their disposal.
And since they're heavily represented in the political sphere I don't see things changing in the near future.

Who pays for the medical costs of treatment in Germany? In Ireland the injured person pays for the medical costs if theres a RTC. So if a person is hospitalised, the insurance payment has to cover the cost of that treatment, which will be at the private patient scale, not public bed costs.

mdebets · 01-08-2018 02:55PM

Carawaystick wrote: »

Who pays for the medical costs of treatment in Germany? In Ireland the injured person pays for the medical costs if theres a RTC. So if a person is hospitalised, the insurance payment has to cover the cost of that treatment, which will be at the private patient scale, not public bed costs.

That's the important point. The sums mentioned in the article above don't contain payments for the actual medical costs, they are looked after seperately by the insurance company. So the figures for Ireland are not really that high, as they include the medical costs already.

boombang · 01-08-2018 09:21PM

I thought this was a telling story regarding how some in the legal system clearly want to keep the gravey train rolling (despite the best efforts of other in the profession). I know you can't always make that informed a judgement about what you read from possibly selectively reported stories, bit this one was really crazy. I think Prof Kevin Barry must be taking it in as an expert witness. Disgusting.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/high-court-judge-overturns-racket-injury-claim-ruling-1.3582255?mode=amp

Eric Cartman · 01-08-2018 09:29PM

unprovable back and neck injuries should be capped at 5k and only one per area per lifetime. these chancers getting 30k in a car crash is whats caused this.

johnnyskeleton · 03-08-2018 06:46PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

This really outlines the problem very neatly.
There is no getting away from the figures.

The issue is payouts that bear no relation to the level of injury.

That seems to compare the average of all motor claims for Ireland up to 100k vs the minor injuries in other countries. Why not compare like with like?

More generally, if there is to be political interference with claims with a view to reducing insurance, I advocate that we prohibit all forms of compensation and then no one will have to pay insurance companies any money at all! The only people who will complain about this will be too sick or too dead to complain*, so let's do it.

*and of course the insurance companies themselves, but of course as we all know they are a silent vested interest group in this whole debate, and it's really the lawyers who are the ones interfering with things.

Judges called to review/lower insurance claim pay outs

Comments