Taking A Cut In NHS Cases - Could Victims Start Having To Pay Costs?
Justice Secretary Ken Clarke has indicated that the future of no win no fee claims could be in jeopardy, if the government carries out its intentions to move towards a more US-style of payments in NHS cases and other personal injury claims.
Currently, solicitors dealing with NHS cases, medical negligence claims and personal injury compensation awards are paid on a no win no fee basis, but can double their fees in successful cases. This practice has led to a huge increase in costs that has drained the dwindling NHS budget further than ever before. Under the new system some of the costs would be recovered from the compensation award made to the victim.
A Chorus Of Disapproval
Mr Clarke has always been critical of the system, but his promotion of a more US-based system has raised a chorus of disapproval from many quarters. The most obvious argument against the proposed system is why should those who have been injured through the negligence or lack of care of others have to pay towards the costs of bringing a medical negligence or personal injury accident claim?
Mr Clarke's argument for the proposed changes has, no doubt, received some credence in light of the most recent high profile case where a man's legal team were negotiating a compensation award of 100,000 pounds for a cut finger (the man eventually received 3,000 pounds). These sorts of cases pander to the media's love of a good scandal in the legal profession - a vision of 'ambulance chasers' milking the system for every penny. But in fact this sort of frivolous claim highlights the true cause for concern. Rather than penalising genuine victims by forcing them to hand over part of their compensation settlement in fees, it is perhaps the proliferation of drawn out claims for trifling injuries that have strained the system to breaking point.
Particularly in NHS cases where the victim may need every penny of the compensation settlement to pay for medical treatment and living costs, deducting a proportion of that settlement could in fact make the legal profession even less popular in the eyes of the public than it already is.
Another 'Stealth Tax' On The Poor?
In the current economic climate, with a government looking for any way possible to cut the deficit and claw back some funds into the country's coffers, this proposal could be construed as another 'stealth tax' on those who can least afford it. Those victims bringing medical negligence claims against large organisations such as the NHS are not doing it for fun. They are doing it to ensure not only that they get the compensation that they deserve, but also to highlight inefficiencies in a system that seems inherently flawed. NHS cases don't just pay out compensation to victims. They also lead to investigations, reviews and changes within the system to ensure that others do not suffer the same kind of poor level of care that the victim had to endure.
It's not always about the money. Perhaps it's time that the government realised that and started looking at the real root cause of today's so-called compensation culture - a medical system that, due to budgetary cuts and low staff morale, keeps making mistakes. Penalising the victims to satisfy the headline writers and in an attempt to reduce legal costs is an approach that could lead to those who genuinely have a case deciding not to pursue it. Victims of medical negligence should not have to suffer in silence just because the government needs to carry out a cost cutting exercise.
About the Author:
We deal in a range of claims, including medical negligence and compensation.
Article Marketing
13 people like this article
