Issue 22 November 2016 ISSN 2051-6495
Linking the industry together
CLARE LUNN
“We need to send a strong message to anyone considering making a false claim, that we will pursue these claims, and we will push for the toughest sentences and fines”
Supported by
Sponsored by
A CENTURY OF PROFESSIONALISM
The highest standards in post-accident services under one umbrella. NPS score of 79% CSI rating of 9/10 EDAM Group provides real-time CSI reporting, pro-actively asking customers for feedback at point of service. Customer feedback allows EDAM Group to continuously improve and exceed the highest customer expectations. We understand the importance of your customer’s journey – we are people made, service driven. EDAM partners: MEDI-TRUST Medical reports and assessments
Get in touch to find out more about working with us today. 0330 134 0110 | hello@edamgroup.co.uk | www.edamgroup.co.uk
MODERN CLAIMS
Editorial Contributors Abigail Taylor Claims Handler Triton Global Limited
Lesley Graves Managing Director Citadel Law
Adrian Coupland Managing Director of Data Services SSP
Mark Hewitt Managing Director Rebmark Legal Solutions
Amanda Stevens Group Head of Legal Practice Hudgell Solicitors
Mark Ledger Principal Prosthetist Blatchford Clinic
Andrew Price Practice Leader Zurich
Oliver Smith Marketing Manager Slicebread
Andy Watson CEO Ageas UK
Robin Selley In-House Lawyer Box Legal
David Simon Chairman Triton Global Limited
Sarah Roberts Marketing Executive Eclipse Legal Systems
David Williams Managing Director AXA Insurance
Scott Whyte Managing Director Watermans
Donna Scully Partner Carpenters
Stephen Ward Managing Director Clerksoom & Clerksroom Direct
Dr Hugh Koch Clinical Psychologist and Director Hugh Koch Associates
Zoe Holland Managing Director ZebraLC
James Roberts Business Development Director Insurance, Europcar UK Group Jason Mosely Executive Director Retail Motor Industry Federation
WELCOME
Welcome to the latest issue of Modern Claims Magazine! In this issue, I speak to cover star and Head of Claims Crime Prevention at LV=, Clare Lunn about why she believes there is a compensation culture in the UK, cross-industry collaboration in regards to stamping out fraud, and keeping the genuine claimant in mind. The full interview with Clare appears on pages 13-15. I also spoke to Steven McEwan, a Partner at heavyweight law firm, Hogan Lovells, about his thoughts on the Insurance Act 2015, specifically the fundamental dishonestly clause and whether this will be an effective combatant against fraud. He also considers the implications of Solvency II for consumers, insurers and defendants in his interview on pages 17-18.
W
This issue is accompanied by a Sustainability Supplement, proudly sponsored by Carpenters Solicitors, which examines the future state of the claims sector given the monumental changes it is undergoing. Parties from across the industry have contributed to the supplement to give their perspectives on the current and future market, something Martin Coyne, Ralli and Access To Justice, also analyses in his feature on pages 42-43. Furthering this issue’s fraud focus, is DCI Oliver Little, from the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) at the City of London Police, who spoke to us about the changing nature of motor fraud and the often overlooked dangers it poses to the public (page 44-45). Broadening the scope beyond fraud, other highlights include the news, authored by the Chairman of the Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers (SCIL), Stephen Webber. In his article, Stephen considers the proposed fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence and the effects of cost reform in clinical negligence litigation (see pages 7-8). As always, there are some exciting industry events being planned at Modern Claims Towers. The annual Doctors Chambers Modern Claims Awards will return for the third time on Thursday 27th April 2017, at New Dock Hall in Leeds. I’m delighted to announce that nominations are now open and more information can be found by visiting http://www.modernclaimsawards.co.uk/. The Doctors Chambers Modern Claims Conference also returns on Tuesday 23rd May at the Etihad Stadium, Manchester. For further information about booking to attend and also sponsoring, please visit http:// www.modernclaimsevents.co.uk/. This issue of Modern Claims is a special one for me as it will be my last as Group Editor. After 4 fabulous years at Charlton Grant helping to launch and produce all 22 editions of Modern Claims, I have decided to move on and will be passing the reins to Brendan Gurrie, our wonderful and extremely capable Editorial Assistant. Brendan will take up his post as Editor from the next issue and can be contacted via 01765 600909 or brendan@charltongrant.co.uk.
Issue 22 November 2016 ISSN 2051-6495 Group Editor Charlotte Parkinson
Production/Editorial Assistant Brendan Gurrie
Project Manager Rachael Pearson
Events Sales Kate McKittrick
Modern Claims Magazine is published by Charlton Grant Ltd ©2016.
All material is copyrighted both written and illustrated. Reproduction in part or whole is strictly forbidden without the written permission of the publisher. All images and information is collated from extensive research and along with advertisements is published in good faith. Although the author and publisher have made every effort to ensure that the information in this publication was correct at press time, the author and publisher do not assume and hereby disclaim any liability to any party for any loss, damage, or disruption caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident, or any other cause.
November 2016
I hope you enjoy this issue and for the last time from me, happy reading!
Charlotte Parkinson, Group Editor, Modern Claims Magazine. @modernchar charlotte.parkinson@charltongrant.co.uk 01765 600909
Modern Claims 03
MODERN CLAIMS
CONTENTS NEWS
INTERVIEWS
07
EdiTorial Board
13
7 The News With Stephen Webber
The head of clinical negligence at Hugh James Solicitors and Chairman of the Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers discusses the proposed fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence and the effects of cost reform in clinical negligence litigation.
13 Clare Lunn
Charlotte Parkinson, Modern Claims, spoke to the Head of Claims Crime Prevention at LV= about why she believes there is a compensation culture in the UK, cross-industry collaboration in regards to stamping out fraud, and keeping the genuine claimant in mind.
17 Steven McEwan & Helen Chapman
Charlotte Parkinson, Modern Claims, spoke with Steven McEwan and Helen Chapman at heavyweight law firm Hogan Lovells about their thoughts on the Insurance Act 2015, as well as the implications of Solvency II for consumers, insurers and defendants.
25
22 Vive la revolution!
22 What more can be done to empower the claimant?
James Roberts, Europcar UK Group
23 For the Good of the Fleet
Andrew Price, European Motor Fleet, Zurich.
23 How can firms measure where they stand on Total Quality?
Dr Hugh Koch, Hugh Koch Associates
25 On ‘Ethnic Penalties’
David Williams, AXA Insurance
25 ADAS, Automation, and the Future of Bodyshops
contributors
Amanda Stevens, Hudgell Solicitors
Jason Mosely, Retail Motor Industry Federation
27 Driving telematics adoption with cheaper technology
Adrian Coupland, SSP
27 Nowhere to hide
Scott Whyte, Watermans
29 Supporting Safe Driving into Old Age
Andy Watson, Ageas UK.
29 The Connected World
Oliver Smith, slicedbread/sharedo
31 The millennial advantage
Sarah Roberts, Eclipse Legal Systems
31 Trust and Collaboration
Donna Scully, Partner, Carpenters
33 The Insuretech Revolution David Simon, Triton Global
04 Modern Claims
November 2016
MODERN CLAIMS Issue 22 November 2016 ISSN 2051-6495
EdiTorial Board
FEATURES
40
33 Honesty Is the Best Policy
Robin Selley, Box Legal
35 Do Litigation Funders mark the dawn of a brighter future for PI?
Lesley Graves, Citadel Law
35 The Only Way is Ethics
Stephen Ward, Clerksoom & Clerksroom Direct
37 Making Progress with ‘Work in Progress’
51
42 The Personal Injury Reforms
The measures proposed in the Ministry of Justice’s whiplash consultation could have severe ramifications for genuine claimants. Martin Coyne analyses the reasons for the measures, and what consequences they might have.
44 A cohesive approach to fraud
Zoe Holland, ZebraLC.
37 Listen and Learn
Mark Hewitt, Rebmark Legal Solutions
39 The Machines are Coming: Technology and the Professions Keith Tracey, Aon Risk Solutions
40 Paralympic Success Sports Specific Prosthetics
Mark Ledger, Blatchford Clinic
FEATURES
Charlotte Parkinson, Modern Claims, spoke to the Detective Chief Inspector of the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) about the changing nature of motor fraud and the often overlooked dangers it poses to the public.
46 Sector Soapbox
Modern Claims’s panel of resident associations outline the burning issues.
48 Firm Focus: Hudgell Solicitor How Hudgell Solicitors secured national industry recognition and a growing profile as 2016 brings progress and success.
51 The Not-So-Great Escape
With winter approaching, you can expect an annual spike in ‘escape of water’ claims from homeowners. Claire Hird explains the real costs behind these claims, and how both insurers and claimants can prepare for the worst, and aim for the best.
53 Changing the Game
61
55 Getting Write-Offs Right
What can you do to solve the ageold problem in motor claims where customers disagree with engineers on the value of their vehicle in a write-off scenario? Having dealt with this scenario for years, S&G Response designed an innovative new programme to specifically address the problem – a vehicle replacement programme to source substitute transport in the event of a total loss.
57 The Autonomous Approach
The annual Association of British Insurers (ABI) Motor Conference took place on 18th October at the Grange Tower Bridge Hotel, London. Brendan Gurrie, Modern Claims, takes an in-depth look at the autonomous vehicles panel session.
61 Case Study: Eclipse
Eclipse’s Proclaim Practice Management System supports new start-up, Virtus Law Ltd.
61 Case Study: S & G
S&G Response revs up for further growth with a trio of senior appointments.
10 MINUTES WITH 62 10 minutes with…
Simon Stanfield, MASS
Aaron Pearson analyses the current challenges facing the claims industry, from cyber crime and data protection, to new disruptors and client care.
54 Destroy All Lawyers
Gary Gallen addresses negative perceptions of lawyers and legal professionals, and how the sector can fix these issues.
November 2016
Modern Claims 05
www.carpenters-law.co.uk | 0844 249 3844 | @CarpentersLawuk
Providing the best possible customer experience has been the cornerstone of our business for almost 60 years. Our partnership with Carpenters ensures that our customers are put at the centre of the process, and receive claims and legal services of the highest quality.
Steve Chelton Head of Claims and Insurer Fraud Protection, Swinton Group Limited
NEWS
Stephen Webber TALKS NEWS The head of clinical negligence at Hugh James Solicitors and Chairman of the Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers discusses the proposed fixed recoverable costs for clinical negligence and the effects of cost reform in clinical negligence litigation. he proposal for fixed recoverable costs (FRC) in clinical negligence was first raised by the Department of Health in August 2015. The first point to note is that the preconsultation is being proposed by the Department of Health rather than the Department of Justice. On the basis that the introduction of fixed costs is a change to the legal system then logic would dictate that the Department of Justice should be leading the consultation rather than the department that is, in fact, the defendant in the vast majority of clinical negligence litigation. Surely this is an enormous conflict of interest?
T
The pre-consultation was launched with what seemed to be one goal, to reduce costs, or, in reality, reduce the amount paid to claimant lawyers. The original document pulled no punches and stated that there was evidence that claimant solicitors were attempting to claim costs well in excess of the current guideline hourly rates and considerably higher than the NHS LA pays its defence solicitors. The claimant also claimed that this results in disproportionate costs claimed compared to damages paid. There was no reference to how the reforms might deal with the defendants’ behaviour, patient safety or the failure to learn lessons.
Entirely uneconomic
It was envisaged that the FRC reforms will apply to all cases where a letter of claim was sent on or after 1 October 2016. It was proposed that it would cover all cases up to £250,000. The Department of Health estimated savings of £80 million from the proposed reforms. This caused great concern in the claimant clinical negligence world as, if this sum of money were to be saved in addition to the savings from LASPO, then it followed that the fixed fee had to be set at a level so low that it would be entirely uneconomic. In my role as chairman of the Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers I have spent a great deal of time, along with my colleagues, explaining to the government the devastating and life changing effects of injuries in cases where damages are significantly less than £250,000, let alone close to that limit. Anyone practising in this field will have cases where devastating injuries have occurred within these damages limits. It is clear to any specialist lawyer that cases up to £250,000 cannot be described as low value. It is strange that the Department of Health, the defendant in these cases, issued a pre-consultation to deal with costs in cases up to £250,000 when low value claims in other areas of litigation were set up to £25,000. Even at this level, cases such as fatalities could be covered and it would be wrong to describe them as low value claims, bearing in mind the importance of these cases to the families involved.
It is obvious to anyone acting in this area of law that the LASPO reforms have not taken effect, and will not do so fully for probably another two years
The proposed £80 million saving led SCIL to wonder whether there was a misunderstanding within the government that the LASPO reforms had already taken effect. It is obvious to anyone
November 2016
Modern Claims 07
NEWS
If any FRC scheme is set too low there will be a dramatic and unjustifiable effect on access to justice acting in this area of law that the LASPO reforms have not taken effect, and will not do so fully for probably another two years. The majority of cases being settled at the present time are still preLASPO cases. Therefore any calculation made by the government could not incorporate the LASPO reforms and the £80 million saving that was proposed was simply unachievable. The government’s position does now seem to have altered, as it has been stated in parliament that the £80 million pound saving is now only to be considered indicative. If any FRC scheme is set too low there will be a dramatic and unjustifiable effect on access to justice. Specialist lawyers will not be able to accept instructions in cases covered by an uneconomic fixed cost regime and, subsequently, there is a risk that cases will be pursued by litigants in person and by non-specialists, who may feel that they can make a profit even at the lower fee. This will cause increased costs in the system due to delays and inappropriate cases being litigated. It is essential that any fixed fee, if introduced, is set at an appropriate level. As is the case with all fixed fees schemes this is not an exact science. In some cases a small amount of work will still achieve the fixed fee and in other cases more work will be needed. The fee should not be set at the lowest sum possible for carrying out the work, but at a reasonable figure to allow certainty for all parties and for the claimant to be properly represented. If an appropriate fixed fee is set then there are benefits for certainty. However, it should not be set by the defendant in the litigation but by an appropriate balanced working party.
So where are we now?
The 1 October 2016 has come and gone and yet we still do not have even a consultation let alone an implementation date. Has the government listened to the valid arguments put forward by claimant organisations that fixed recoverable costs cannot be looked at in isolation, but must be looked at in relation to how costs affect all aspects of clinical negligence litigation? We wait to see whether good sense prevails.
government is wrong to concentrate purely on fixed recoverable costs. They should focus on learning lessons, reducing negligence, patient safety, claimant costs, defendant behaviour and its effect on costs, as well as all other relevant issues. Any working party should be balanced and have members from the defendant and claimant side, as well as judges, insurers and economists to ensure that a reasonable level of fees is set for the benefit of both the patient and the tax payer. Master Cook, one of two masters responsible for managing clinical negligence cases issued in the Royal Courts of Justice (where 10% of cases are issued) provided the opening address to the recent APIL clinical negligence conference, in which he stated his views on reform in clinical negligence litigation. Master Cook, in his lecture, identified a number of reasons for the increase in clinical negligence costs, including a failure by the defendant to provide prompt and adequate disclosure, failure by the defendant to respond adequately to the pre-action protocol, a failure by the defendant to make early and prompt admissions and settling too many valid claims late in the litigation cycle. He also raised the needless opposition by defendants to interim payments on account of costs. Master Cook described these problems as having existed for many years and showing no signs of improvement. SCIL is firmly of the view that there has been unprecedented change and reform in the clinical negligence arena over the last few years, and the effect of the LASPO reforms have not yet been realised and assessed. Master Cook has made this point powerfully in his lecture on this subject. His view is that a period of calm reflection is now required and a proper study into the effect of the LASPO reforms to ensure our legal system gives effective access to justice. He stated unless fees are set at a level that makes it economically viable to take on such claims then people will inevitably be denied competent representation. I would applaud these comments and I believe this supports the need for an appropriate working party to consider all of these issues, rather than proceed to simply fixing claimant costs without detailed analysis of the whole system. Stephen Webber is Chairman of Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers (SCIL).
How can you fix the claimant costs when you are not looking at patient safety, defendant behaviour, court fees (that have been increased by over 600%), ATE insurance (and insurance premium tax that has increased by 100%) expert fees, delays in litigation, mediation, arbitration and all issues that affect costs on both the claimant and defendant sides? The Society of Clinical Injury Lawyers proposes that a working party is set up to consider all aspects of clinical negligence litigation, starting with learning lessons and avoiding negligence at the fore front. It should also consider how claimant costs are driven up by defendants’ behaviour and why the NHS LA settles 76% of cases post issue of proceedings as opposed to following a letter of claim. This causes a dramatic increase in costs. If two thirds of these cases were settled before proceedings then this would save approximately £130 million. This does put into context the £80 million (now indicative) saving proposed in the preconsultation on fixed recoverable costs
Undertaking detailed analysis
SCIL’s view is that clinical negligence litigation costs are multifactorial and need to be reviewed by a working party, and the
08 Modern Claims
November 2016
SUPERIOR DATA AND ADVANCED ANALYTICS
ISO Claims Outcome Advisor (COA)
PROVIDE FAIR, CONSISTENT, PERSONALISED OUTCOMES FOR
PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS
PROVIDE FAIR, CONSISTENT, PERSONALISED OUTCOMES FOR
PROPERTY CLAIMS Contact us for more information: ISO www.iso.com
Xactware www.xactware.com
27th April 2017 New Dock Hall, Leeds
N O M I N AT I O N S N O w O P E N Sponsorship Enquiries: Kate McKittrick | kate@charltongrant.co.uk | 01765 600909 Event Enquiries: Ellie Campbell | ellie.campbell@charltongrant.co.uk | 01765 600909
www.modernclaimsawards.co.uk kindly sponsored by
WHERE CLAIMS EXCELLENCE IS COMPULSORY Want to drive down claims costs? Where you press a button and get the support of specialists?
Contact the only dedicated Conversation Management and Intelligence-Led claims validation market provider and get instant access to the most effective Claims Cost Containment Solutions. Specialist Conversation Management Services to the Insurance Industry
01386 426 260 www.i-cogservices.com
INTERVIEW
Clare Lunn Charlotte Parkinson, Modern Claims, spoke to the Head of Claims Crime Prevention at LV= about why she believes there is a compensation culture in the UK, cross-industry collaboration in regards to stamping out fraud, and keeping the genuine claimant in mind.
Q A
What do you believe are the key contributing factors to rising insurance premiums?
There are a number of factors over recent years that have affected premiums, the major one being average claims costs increasing, in particular in relation to repair costs. Newer cars have more sophisticated technology and the materials, such as carbon fibre, are making vehicle repair costs more expensive, and we’re seeing this throughout the industry. Although claims frequency in motor seems to be falling, the actual personal injury frequency remains stubbornly high. Insurance fraud has pushed up the cost of premiums for a number of years now, but over recent years there’s been a growing compensation culture in the UK, which we believe is being fuelled by claims management companies and claimant law firms who encourage some people into making personal injury claims. In recent years, there has been an increase in the number of severe weather events, including flash flooding in some areas of the UK, which are increasing or maintaining claims costs in the property arena. In March, the Chancellor also announced an increase in insurance premium tax (IPT). All of these facts together have pushed up the cost of insurance premiums.
Q A
How is technology – such as telematics and black boxes, helping customers in terms of the cost of their insurance?
Telematics tends to be more popular with young or inexperienced drivers, and the technology can result in cheaper car insurance as insurers can monitor their driving behaviour. It is not as popular with more experienced drivers, so we don’t see huge amounts of fitted black boxes or telematics in the middle aged and older customer base. The industry has a part to play in promoting this kind of technology to those two other customer groups, as if they use telematics, their insurance premiums could reduce. There are some other significant developments in other areas of vehicle technology, such as assisted braking and parking assist, and the industry needs to make sure that we keep up with the advantages of this kind of technology, so we can price premiums accordingly and pass on any benefits to our customers. We’re also seeing an increase in the use of dash-cameras by some drivers and these can be really useful in the event of a claim. Our customers are willing to share their footage with us in order to prove what happened on the road and the position of the vehicle. We can then utilise this in a number of ways, including to prevent fraud, where we’ve been able to see evidence the vehicle has slammed the brakes on for no apparent reason, which has helped us in court.
Q A
Do you think there is a compensation culture in the UK?
Yes, definitely. There’s a growing compensation culture in the UK, which has been present over the last few years and unfortunately there have been no signs of this reducing. When you compare the number of claims that involve whiplash type injuries in the UK, which is over 70%, compared France at 3%, there is no wonder the UK is tarred with the name Whiplash Capital of
November 2016
Although claims frequency in motor seems to be falling, the actual personal injury frequency remains stubbornly high
Modern Claims 13
INTERVIEW
The vehicles being driven on UK roads are no less safe or less well built than our European neighbours, so there must be another reason why whiplash in the UK is significantly higher Europe. The vehicles being driven on UK roads are no less safe or less well built than our European neighbours, so there must be another reason why whiplash in the UK is significantly higher. Some people see road traffic accidents or a raised paving slab as a moneymaking opportunity; it’s a free holiday or a contribution to Christmas presents for the kids. Every day we hear of new ways the compensation culture is growing. It’s not just about whiplash now, it’s moved into other areas of claims, such as noise induced hearing loss (NIHL), and the most recent is the ‘have you suffered a food poisoning while on holiday? If so you can claim’. The compensation culture is still with us, and we as an industry need to educate our customers as to why they should only be making genuine claims of loss.
Q A
Whose responsibility is it to abolish this compensation culture?
There is a shared responsibility for insurers, regulators and industry bodies, such as the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB), and Government. Insurers need to take a lead role in this, but we do need the support of regulators such as the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) because we can’t do it on our own. Until we can address and take to task the firms that are flouting the rules and cold calling claimants, harassing people to claim, then the compensation culture will remain with us.
Q
Who should be responsible for ensuring the savings made by insurers are passed on to consumers in the form of lower premiums?
A
The UK General Insurance market is extremely competitive, which maintains the pressure on insurers to keep premiums to a minimum. It’s disappointing to hear that the proposed whiplash reforms are being deferred by the Government. The reforms were an ideal opportunity to tackle the issue of inflated and fictitious claims and a step in the right direction to begin reversing the compensation culture in this country. The real losers in this are genuine motorists who will continue to pay higher premiums due to the dishonest behaviour of others. It’s now even more important that regulators step up and take action against rogue firms and practices. It’s also vital that see improved regulation of Claims Management Companies and the industry works together to implement the proposals outlined in the Insurance Fraud Task Force.
The compensation culture is still with us, and we as an industry need to educate our customers as to why it’s not okay to claim and why they should only be making genuine claims of loss
Q A
What initiatives are LV= taking to tackle insurance fraud?
As an industry, we’re much better at identifying and preventing fraud, but there’s more we can do. Fraud never goes away, it just manifests in new forms. At LV= we continue to invest heavily in fraud protection and detection in various ways. It’s important to invest in our people, and we have some very skilled and experienced investigators who scrutinise potential fraudulent claims. We are also investing in new technology and data analytics, not only to identify fraud, but to help in the validation of genuine customer claims. It’s just as important we remember that the majority of our customers are genuine, and simply want us to help them and put them back in the position they were in before their loss or accident. It’s crucial to maintain a tough stance on fraud and be brave enough to run these cases to trial when necessary, and when fraud is proven, not to simply allow claimants and claimant law firms to walk away scot-free. We need to send a strong message to anyone considering making a false claim, that we will pursue these claims, and we will push for the toughest sentences and penalties.
Fraud never goes away, it just manifests in new forms
Q A
Do you think the industry is doing enough to stamp out cold calling?
Cold calling is still a huge problem. I personally received two cold calls in the last two weeks, trying to encourage me to claim for ‘the accident I’ve had’. On one of the calls, I played along and said I thought I might have been involved in an accident but I haven’t been injured, to which the caller replied, “You may not have thought you’d been injured, but you must have been.” They said that I must have been shaken up, that I’m probably still suffering from trauma, and that I should make a claim. We get regular calls from customers who have these nuisance callers fishing for information and encouraging people to claim. These people are interrupting customers’ evenings, and they are an absolute nightmare. Insurers are logging attempts of cold calling, where it is reported to us, and we pass that information on to the ICO. Insurers would welcome the ICO taking a hard line against any breaches in cold calling. LV= would support the recommendations made in the recent claims management company review, which suggested greater regulation and accountability in regards to the management and governance of CMCs, which has been highlighted as a main issue. The SRA recently suggested removing the cold calling ban from their guidelines, I don’t feel this would be welcomed by the majority of claimant law firms or insurers - that would be most unhelpful. Hopefully it won’t go ahead, it would be like turning the clock back for us.
Q
Do you think organisations such as the Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB) and Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) are doing enough to clamp down on organised fraud?
A
IFED are doing a good job with the resources they have to help insurers tackle fraud, but it does still feel like the tip of the iceberg. It would be good to understand how IFED
14 Modern Claims
November 2016
INTERVIEW
It’s just as important we remember that the majority of our customers are genuine, and simply want us to help them and put them back in the position they were in before their loss or accident could engage with other police forces in the UK to get fraud and financial crime further up their agenda. The IFB have some very ambitious plans to extend their focus to other product lines, such as home and liability fraud, which is very welcomed. They’re also working to develop their intelligence capability in the industry so they become the intelligence hub for insurance fraud. That means sharing and analysing data and making those connections across products, rather than being purely motor focussed. For this to be successful it’s critical that the IFB regularly updates and engages with insurers. Insurers really need to be in the position to assess the impact of the changes and be prepared to deal with those changes when they’re implemented. We also need to look at how we can support the IFB through the changes and in the future, because resources are limited.
Q A
What’s on the horizon for LV= in the next 12 months from an insurance fraud perspective?
We have a lot going on in our fraud prevention and detection plans. We will continue to review and develop the validation checks across the life of a policy, from point of quote, to sale, through to the claims stage. We need to ensure we’re providing our genuine customers with the right service and price, but also ensure that we prevent fraudsters from getting on our books in the first place. Like most insurers, we are looking at ways we can enhance existing fraud systems and rules to identify potential fraudsters, and we’re also heavily investing in new technology that can help us prevent fraud or validate claims. We’re exploring how we can use and understand new technology, from the pricing stage through to the claims stage. It is essential to understand how you can utilise new technology out there at the moment, combining it with what you already have to enhance fraud prevention techniques.
We need to send a strong message to anyone considering making a false claim, that we will pursue these claims, and we will push for the toughest sentences and fines
November 2016
Clare Lunn Clare has worked in General Insurance claims for over 20 years. During her time with RBS Insurance she specialised in Claims Validation and fraud prevention techniques, later she moved into a Change Management role as a Business Improvement Manager, which allowed her to gain experience of setting strategy and Organisational Design. Clare joined LV= in 2011 and was appointed Head of Claims Crime Prevention.
Modern Claims 15
REALISE YOUR DIGITAL STRATEGY The evolution of digital technologies is fundamentally transforming the way businesses operate. Using our experience and expertise, SSP enables you to put customers at the heart of your ever-evolving business, as the world around you continuously changes.
To discover more about the competitive advantage SSP’s digital solutions can give your business visit www.ssp-worldwide.com/digital or call us on 0800 590 705
INTERVIEW
Steven McEwan & Helen Chapman Charlotte Parkinson, Modern Claims, spoke with Steven McEwan and Helen Chapman at heavyweight law firm Hogan Lovells about their thoughts on the Insurance Act 2015, as well as the implications of Solvency II for consumers, insurers and defendants.
Q A
From your experience, which of the recent legislative updates has had the biggest effect on the insurance market?
Solvency II has had a very large impact. It has required insurers to make extensive changes to their approach to regulatory capital and investments. In many cases insurers have spent significant amounts of time and resources on regulatory approvals to allow them to use internal models and transitional measures. Many life insurers have also entered into complex restructuring transactions to allow certain assets to qualify for the matching adjustment. There have also been changes to the governance framework which have not made a great deal of difference in substance, but have required careful analysis of existing arrangements to ensure continuing compliance. Preparation and eventual implementation took many years, and already significant aspects of the new regime have been called into question, even by regulators themselves.
Q A
How must firms alter their approach to risk and due diligence in large-scale transactions?
Solvency II puts a significant focus on risk management, and capital requirements are set in a way that incentivises insurers to minimise the risks to which they are exposed. This includes in relation to investment management, outsourcing and the selection of reinsurers. Some insurers, including Lloyd’s, have been approved to use internal models to calculate their capital requirements. These models enable capital requirements to be set with a focus on the insurer’s specific assessment of different risks, rather than the one-size-fitsall approach of the standard formula that otherwise applies under Solvency II. This can make a significant difference; for example, the standard formula imposes a penal capital requirement on some types of securitisation investment, while the internal model can produce a much lower requirement because it allows the insurer to assess the actual risks posed by the investment. Qualifying to use an internal model is a very onerous process and requires the insurer to demonstrate the accuracy and risksensitivity of the model before it will be approved.
Q A
How does regulation change when completing large-scale transactions, and how should firms adapt to comply with this?
Solvency II does not generally distinguish between small and large transactions, though clearly if larger transactions give rise to larger risks then the overall impact on capital requirements will be greater. There are some references to materiality in the legislation; for example, a requirement to avoid material basis risk in reinsurance agreements. However, these references are often a source of uncertainty, and it is not safe to assume that something will be regarded as “immaterial” other than in extreme cases.
November 2016
What is Solvency II? Solvency II is a package of European legislation which became binding on EEA insurers on 1 January 2016. It consists of a directive which has been implemented into the laws of member states by national legislation and regulatory rules, and a directly effective regulation which applies automatically as the law of each EEA member state. Its most important feature is the introduction of a risk-sensitive regime under which regulatory capital requirements - in particular, the Solvency Capital Requirement (the SCR) - are determined on a basis that is far more risk sensitive than was required by previous insurance directives.
What is the Insurance Act 2015? The Insurance Act 2015 is a new law that applies throughout United Kingdom. It came into effect on 12 August 2016. It reforms and clarifies insurance law in numerous ways, with a focus on the remedies available to the insurer for misrepresentation, non-disclosure and fraud. Of particular note is the replacement of the duty of utmost good faith by a slightly more clearly defined duty to make a “fair presentation of the risk”. In addition, breaches of warranty by the policyholder will in future only permit the insurer to suspend payments of claims (albeit potentially indefinitely in some cases) rather than terminate the policy.
Modern Claims 17
INTERVIEW
It’s likely that more activity will be generated once the first year– end reports have been produced under Solvency II, and possibly we will see a December flurry in anticipation of that
Q A
Have you noticed any immediate effects following the implementation of Solvency II in January?
No. There was a lot of activity in preparation for implementation, but so far this year has been more of a settling in period. It’s likely that more activity will be generated once the first year-end reports have been produced under Solvency II, and possibly we will see a December flurry in anticipation of that.
Q A
What does the implementation of Solvency II mean for the consumer?
Not much in practice. The theory is that the consumer is better off because the new capital regime makes it less likely that an insurer will become insolvent. That is debatable though. If an insolvency occurs it would be likely to be because of an unforeseen risk, and the Solvency II regime will not necessarily be more adept at identifying such risks than the previous individual capital assessment (“ICA”) regime introduced by the FSA and continued by the PRA. That said, Solvency II will be an improvement on the basic regime created by the old EU insurance directives (on which the FSA superimposed the ICA regime), and it is helpful to have a common set of rules covering the whole EU.
Q
What are some of the new risks/challenges the insurance industry faces since the implementation of the Solvency I Directive in 1973?
A
Every major economic, political or technological development brings with it a new set of risks and uncertainty, and therefore a demand for more insurance, or for insurance to be delivered in a different way. As a result, the insurance industry has endured an array of changes since 1973, and has responded accordingly. The highlights include: • A much wider category of insurable risks – especially those arising from technological advances. • A more diffuse network of service providers and reinsurers spread far more internationally. • A complex international and individual sanctions regime. • Much more international business, meaning that conflicts of laws and different regulators adds to the complexity of large transactions. • Much more complex assets being marketed for investment, with risks (for example, commercial lending) that are not traditionally ones in which insurance invest.
Q A
Is the industry doing enough to provide the transparency called for by the Insurance Act 2015?
The picture here is very mixed, with some insurers making any contracting out provisions in policy wordings absolutely clear and unambiguous. Others are taking a less transparent approach. There is no cohesion in the market, which is proving confusing for insureds and difficult for brokers to manage.
Q A
addressed than previous law. The greater attention given to fraud is certainly welcome, as fraudulent claims are known to be an area of particular concern for the insurance industry. However, it is questionable whether the legislation will actually reduce fraud, since policyholders who make fraudulent claims are likely to do so in the hope that the fraud will be undetected, rather than in the belief that the insurer would have no remedy against them if the fraud is detected.
Q A
What’s on the horizon for you and Hogan Lovells in the next 12 months?
Following the first Solvency II year-end, we expect to see an increase in transactions designed to improve insurers’ Solvency II balance sheets. This will include disposal of capital intensive assets, including subsidiaries. It is also likely to bring further consolidation of the insurance industry as the weakness of some smaller insurers is revealed by publication of their first yearend results. For UK insurers, the implications of Brexit may result in some hesitation before action. We also expect to see insurers adopting a major focus on bedding in the Insurance Act. This will mean looking afresh at all wordings on new placements and renewals. There will also be the inevitable claims situations when insurers will be grappling with exercising the new proportionate remedies. Of particular interest will be how this plays out in scenarios where there is a significant stack of excess insurance.
If an insolvency occurs it would be likely to be because of an unforeseen risk, and the Solvency II regime will not necessarily be more adept at identifying such risks Steven McEwan & Helen Chapman Steven and Helen are partners specialising in insurance at Hogan Lovells. Steven focuses on insurance finance, regulatory capital, long-term insurance, reinsurance and the Lloyd’s insurance market. He recently gave a lunchtime lecture on the Solvency II balance sheet for the British Insurance Law Association (BILA). Helen focuses on all forms of insurance and reinsurance contracts and insurance mediation. Recently she has done a lot of work on the use of credit insurance by banks, and she has spoken and published extensively on the Insurance Act 2015.
Is the Insurance Act 2015 an effective fraud combative and what are the challenges around this? The Act does include two sections dealing with fraud that are more specific about how fraudulent claims will be
18 Modern Claims
November 2016
L
I N T E R N AT I O N A L
L
I N T E R N AT I O N A L
L
London - Dubai Hong Kong - Singapore I N T E R N AT I O N A L Specialist forensic investigation services to the global insurance, legal and risk management professions. Hawkins International’s offices are ideally positioned to field instructions throughout the Middle East, Africa, I N T E R N AT I O N A L Asia, Australasia and South America. Hawkins’ offices are supported by 80 forensic scientists and engineers based in the UK, Dubai, Hong Kong and Singapore,
Dubai
Hong Kong
Hawkins was established over thirty years ago and is now a leading and respected global forensic investigation firm.
Singapore
Dubai office
Hong Kong office
Singapore office
London office
Hawkins International 9th Floor, Office 909 The H Dubai, Office Tower One Sheikh Zayed Road PO Box 333690 Dubai United Arab Emirates
Hawkins HFS-Asia Room 502 Hoseinee House 69 Wyndham Street Central Hong Kong
Hawkins International 138 Market Street #24-01 CapitaGreen Singapore 048946
Hawkins International New London House 6 London Street London EC3R 7LP
Telephone
Telephone
+852 2548 0577 (24hr)
+65 (24hr) I N T6679 E R N A6150 TION AL
Telephone
Telephone
enquiries@hawkins.sg
london@hawkins.biz
+971 4 3721260 (UAE office hours)
+44 I N(0)20 T E R N7481 A T I O4897 N A L (24hr)
enquiries@hawkins.hk
+971 4 3721262 (24hr) enquiries@hawkins.ae
I N T E R N AT I O N A L www.hawkins.biz
I N T E R N AT I O N A L
EDITORIAL BOARD
Vive la revolution! What kinds of skills can millennials bring to the claims sector, and how can companies best harness these?
I
sometimes wonder if there has ever been a generation where the skills possessed by /being acquired by children are so markedly different from their parents.
Most business leaders in this country will have been raised through an individualistic academic learning environment where it’s all about me and my effort/achievement. This has fed through into traditional claims handling with a reluctance to delegate/ unbundle /deconstruct tasks until costs regimes have absolutely demanded it of us. Millennials, however, are schooled in project planning, team work and the virtue of “outsourcing” (internet Google search engines being the researcher, for example, rather than personal thumbing through dusty books on a library shelf) from an early age. Utilising these skills going forwards will not be about “harnessing” that approach – enthusiasm for it and a lack of comprehension about more traditional methods will, I think, create an unstoppable energy to transform – those clinging to older habits will become fringe relics of a former age. And what of personal interaction skills with clients/customers? Millennials do not readily understand the traditional restrictions of formality and social boundaries; they thrive in a fluid environment where relationships are far more easy going. At last the stuffiness of the professions and remoteness of insurers hiding behind policy schedules must surely come to an end, and what a good thing that will be. So let’s allow the millennials loose on our starchy documents filled with unintelligible language and make us all more approachable from the outset of our “retainers”- oops, what an old-fashioned word that is! Fluidity and instant availability brought about by various social media platforms will continue to transform the way we conduct business, making it a 24/7 operation for all, not just the big Corporates/top 20 law firms. Too often I still speak to lawyers who are trying to stem the tide of that particular revolution, but going forward, the young and the brave will set up their own business alternatives if we do not embrace their methodologies. The development of an online court as espoused by Sir Michael Briggs will accelerate moves in the market that favour the millennials and those prepared to harness them. As he recently said, the second revolution in civil litigation is about to unfold around us. Vive la revolution!
What more can be done to empower the claimant? he evolution of app-technology is playing a central role in enhancing brand experience and satisfaction – from doing the weekly grocery shop to buying train tickets - by giving customers the opportunity to serve themselves. So far in the insurance sector, apps have principally been employed for customer acquisition and on-going engagement. Using that same technology to empower the customer to control the claims process is the obvious next step.
T
In particular, self-service apps are being adopted for the arrangement of repairs and replacement vehicle hire, putting the customer in the driving seat rather than waiting for busy contact centres to do the organising for them. A number of brands are starting to look at the provision of pre-paid codes or vouchers that the customer can use to manage the process to suit their own family and lifestyle. They can book appointments using approved bodyshops and authorised car hire providers, and progression of repairs can be tracked via a portal or app. Replacement vehicles can be organised in the same way. For example, at Europcar we are working with a number of insurers to support the provision of a replacement vehicle while repairs are taking place, using tailor made portals to tap into our network of more than 200 locations across the UK, and the choice that comes from a peak fleet of 60,000 cars and vans. We are not simply offering standard daily rental options, but fully multi-modal solutions that give customers complete flexibility on the mode of transport that works for them, whilst their own vehicle is off the road. This includes car use by the hour, taxis and even public transport. This new evolution in self-service not only enhances the customer experience, but promises significant cost benefits for the insurer. If the onus is put on the bodyshop and rental company to talk to each other, customer downtime is minimised. The need for intervention from the insurance company is also reduced. Of course, what’s vital to make this self-service culture truly work to the benefit of the customer – and the insurer – is finding the right partners to provide the services that match the same quality and values of the insurer brand. Self-service will only work if the customer believes they are not being compromised. Picking the right partners who can empower that self-service is, therefore, crucial. James Roberts, Business Development Director, Insurance, Europcar UK Group.
Amanda Stevens, Group Head of Legal Practice, Hudgell Solicitors.
22 Modern Claims
November 2016
EDITORIAL BOARD
For the Good of the Fleet Telematics are generally considered to aid younger, newer drivers. How can they be used to benefit other drivers? he use of telematics to measure and influence driver behaviours is often thought of as a solution for young drivers, but some corporate fleets have been successfully using this technology for some time. If that is the case, why is its use not more widespread and well known in fleets?
T
The primary reason lies in the difference between a private motorist and a fleet driver. The private motorist knows that they are being monitored by telematics and that how (or when or where) they drive can influence how much premium they pay. The fleet driver does not have this financial motivation, so organisations must look to a different method to influence driver behaviour based on the data: line manager control. Where fleets have used driver behaviour telematics effectively they have seen year-on-year improvements in their collision and claim rates, as well as improved fuel economies. What all these companies have in common is that their line managers are looking at the telematics data on a regular basis and then sitting down with their drivers to understand the underlying causes of any trends or exceptions. In that way, they can ensure that the appropriate management and/or driver interventions are put in place. The importance of regular line manager engagement is one of the reasons why this technology has not been more widely adopted as an aid to reduce collision and claim rates. For many organisations, this falls into the ‘too difficult to manage’ category, and whilst they understand the benefits that could be achieved, they do not think it is currently right for their company. Traditionally, telematics use in fleets has been associated with Large Goods Vehicles, but is increasingly being used in van fleets and, with new developments such as driver behaviour apps for smartphones, it is now being adopted by some car fleets too, as the cost of the technology is no longer a barrier to implementation. These app based systems will, of course, still rely on line manager involvement to ensure continued success, but with the increase in use of ‘gamification’, our ‘smartphone culture’ may actually help some fleet drivers self-improve their driving and get to the top of the leader board amongst their peers! Andrew Price, Practice Leader, European Motor Fleet, Zurich.
How can firms measure where they stand on Total Quality? he language, culture and practice of civil justice is increasingly being influenced by concepts of Therapeutic Jurisprudence – the human, helpful and restorative side of litigation – and Total Quality Management – an organised approach to continuous service improvement.
T
‘Knowing our customers’ and bridging the gap between lawyers, barristers, judges, experts, defendants and claimants by understanding both ‘internal’ and ‘external’ customer relationships is crucial. Publications and research in the UK, Holland, Sweden and the USA indicate the importance of greater insights into the processes of civil claims and how to be more responsive and make the various ‘customer-supplier’ relationships more effective. We agree so far, I hope. But what’s next? A useful and practical next step would be for law firms, agencies and experts to attempt to decide on ‘top TJ/TQM’ dimensions of quality and service and to measure where they and their colleagues currently stand on these dimensions. Here are some preliminary dimensions for consideration: • Positive communication with clients • Understanding problem process areas in my firm • Effectiveness of dispute resolution procedures • Utilisation of Counsel’s skills • Ability to mediate • Positive communication between lawyer and experts • Resilience of colleagues’ well-being • Culture of TJ/TQM in my firm • Regularity of discussion of TJ/TQM in my firm. These are purely some ideas. What are yours? Each dimension could be placed on what psychologists call a Likert 5 or 7 point scale so that a lawyer’s perception of the firm’s current position could be assessed and tracked for improvement. This magazine has recently interviewed key players about innovation in both repetitive tasks and higher-level management and marketing tasks. Law firm partners aim for solid relationships with their varied clients, in an increasingly competitive market place. Whether a firm purports to be global, national or geographically focused, there is significant opportunity and advantage to applying the tried and tested concepts and practices of TJ and TQM to delivering consistent and uncompromising quality in legal and medico-legal services. Dr Hugh Koch, Clinical Psychologist and Director, Hugh Koch Associates and visiting Professor to School of Law, University of Stockholm. Recently published: ‘Legal Mind’ - Contemporary Issues in Psychological Injury and Law, Hugh C. H Koch (2016), Expert Witness Publications.
November 2016
Modern Claims 23
WE’RE GOING TO BREAK THE LAW. The law that says lawyers must speak legalese. The law that says lawyers don’t live in the real world. The law that says lawyers can’t share their knowledge for free. The law that says complexity is the route to profit. The law that says law is an enforcer not an enabler. The law that says charge by the minute instead of by the answer. The law that says you can’t, rather than you can. The law that says a few words will never do. The law that says there’s one for the rich and another for the rest. The law that says only lawyers can understand the law. The law that says no-one can break these laws and succeed. They can.
Welcome to rradar.
Gary Gallen, CEO rradar
0800 955 6111
rradar.com
EDITORIAL BOARD
On ‘Ethnic Penalties’ The former equality commissioner, Trevor Phillips, has claimed customers living in areas with a high density of minority ethnic households are paying an “ethnic penalty” in higher car insurance premiums. Is this an accurate statement, and how do you see this changing? s fear grows in the claimant lobby over the Government reforms promised in their Autumn Statement, we are seeing increasingly desperate attempts to discredit insurers, and this was one of the most ridiculous.
A
Whilst the question makes the challenge sound almost credible, those masters of spin Thompsons commissioned Phillips’s firm to produce a report based on flawed data and a clear (perhaps deliberate) lack of understanding about how Motor Insurance premiums are calculated. We look at age of drivers, type of car, but Insurers do not ask or look up the ethnicity of customers, or consider the ethnic composition of their locality. As a result, we do not know whether ethnic minority customers or areas with a higher proportion of ethnic minority citizens receive higher or lower prices from us; it’s simply not a rating factor. We price postcodes based simply on our historic experience of claims, and it is important to reflect this in prices in a highly competitive and often unprofitable market. Higher prices are a direct result of customers in those areas having more frequently claimed or having had more inflated claims than other areas, end of story.
ADAS, Automation, and the Future of Bodyshops How will Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Automated Driving Technology (ADT) change the future of bodyshops? MI Bodyshops (NAB & VBRA) have seen developments in advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) that offer consumers and other road users a significantly different driving experience to what we have traditionally known.
R
The technologies expected to reach the market in the next 2 years are all forms of ADAS that will still require the driver to be “in the loop” at all times. These ADAS provide the driver with “assistance”, but do not “control” the driving task. This is expected to contribute to a reduction of collisions, but an increase in the complexity of repairs. With increasing sensors and operating systems in normal driving, there will be improvements in the effectiveness of specific safety features. More and more vehicles have ADAS, therefore drivers’ expectations of a vehicle’s abilities are changing, which also changes driving behaviours. Use of, and reliance on, ADAS carries both benefits and potential risks. For RMI Body shop members the key issues revolve around reinstating these systems correctly following vehicle damage due to a collision. Sustained Investment in skills, technical information and equipment is paramount to ensuring safe repairs. We are fortunate in the UK to operate to very high standards of repair.
Obviously that truth doesn’t suit the claimant lobby agenda, and it is sad to see this continual insurer bashing, particularly following attempts to look for areas where we can collaborate to avoid unintended consequences of the reforms. Insurers have resisted rushing to comment on this story, partly as that just generates more interest, but also it doesn’t help those attempts at collaboration as we can only point out its fatal flaws. We also know how Thompsons operate, though following the Miners compensation scandal I’m surprised anyone gives it any credibility.
The operational challenge for body shops is to identify, correctly repair, or replace components. More important though, is the validation and verification that such systems are correctly functioning before the car leaves the body shop.
The ABI said “This report was compiled without any consultation with the insurance industry, by people with no understanding of how car insurers price their policies and was paid for by a firm of solicitors with a vested interest in fuelling the compensation culture”.
Volvo will commence ADT trials on the roads of Gothenburg in 2017. The UK government has announced an automated vehicle investment plan as part of the 2016 Highways England strategy.
I fully expect them to use this response to try and generate the headline “Major Insurers deny Ethnic Penalty” and get further nonsense coverage, but the reality is premiums are higher in certain parts of the country because claims costs are higher in certain parts of the country, it really is that simple. David Williams, Technical Director, AXA Insurance.
The move to fully Automated Driving Technology (ADT) is not expected on UK roads until 2020, which will create a further number of practical, legal and insurance issues. However, the repair challenges remain similar to those already encountered with ADAS.
RMI Body shops indentifies that the biggest opportunity presented by ADT is for Insurers, vehicle manufacturers and body shops to work together to protect consumers and implement the correct commercial models that can support continued and sustained levels of investment. Short term gain will not be the winning game here, and god forbid that anyone should be fatally injured in a vehicle that behaved incorrectly due to cost motivated corner cutting. Now is the time to invest in the sector to ensure the safety of all road users. Jason Mosely, Executive Director, Retail Motor Industry Federation.
November 2016
Modern Claims 25
Turn your Personal Injury files into cash today Our experience is unrivalled, based on the volume of transactions completed to date, and our ability to deliver on time, with cash on the table. Are you... Looking to retire from practice?
Concentrating on other practice areas?
Seeking to free up working capital?
Considering disposing of a limited number of files?
Looking to reduce overheads & liabilities?
An agent or advisor with a client looking to sell?
webuyanyfiles.com
Contact Neil Hudgell on 07739 325 274
Minimise losses
improve efficiency
the single platform for all legal built by
Today’s technology to solve today’s business problems. Claims lifecycle management software designed to help enterprise insurance firms minimise losses and improve efficiency. We are a leading innovator helping professional services firms thrive in the digital world. Talk to us about taking a look at sharedo and finding out how it can benefit your business...
0161 3272192 hello@sharedo.co.uk www.sharedo.co.uk @sharedo_IT
Our clients include:
EDITORIAL BOARD
Driving telematics adoption with cheaper technology Telematics products are generally considered to aid younger, newer drivers. How can they be used to benefit other drivers? n just three years, the proportion of the five cheapest quotes for drivers under 25 that came from telematics providers has leapt 16 percentage points to 55%. Yet the comparative figures from Consumer Intelligence for all age groups and motorists over 50 are languishing at 17% and 2% respectively.
I
It is clear older motorists are yet to fully benefit from telematics technology, potentially due to the lower premiums more experienced drivers usually attract. However, analysis of the private car data processed by SSP in the second quarter of this year showed the market is hardening, with a sharp rise in renewal rates year-on-year and increases for new business. Similarly, the latest Confused.com Car Insurance Price Index reported relatively higher rises in the average cost of comprehensive car policies for older drivers, with a large proportion of drivers over 40 experiencing price increases of more than 20% in the last year. It is not just the hardening market that is expected to drive telematics adoption amongst experienced drivers. Older drivers are more likely to drive higher specification cars, resulting in higher vehicle repair costs, so technology that minimises the risk of accidents occurring will bring down insurers’ overall outlay for vehicle repairs. Yet there remains the need to balance these savings against the expense of collecting telematics data. While the use of apps has gone some way towards addressing these cost barriers, some within the industry have been hesitant to adopt such solutions out of fear journeys are not being recorded correctly. That’s why we are seeing the introduction of game-changing data collection options, such as self-installed 12V devices that plug into cigarette lighters and pair with smartphone apps. The significantly reduced hardware costs of these devices makes telematics more accessible for the older driver market, combined with greater confidence in the levels of accuracy and quantity of data recorded.
Nowhere to hide The FCA’s transparency policy requiring insurers to inform customers of their previous insurance premiums on renewal will be implemented in 2017. What are the pros/cons of this for the claims industry and their customers? or so long insurers have been spouting the rhetoric that claimant lawyers, a so-called “compensation culture” and, well, pretty much anything else they can think of has been the reason behind insurance premiums only going in one direction.
F
We can go back to April 2013 when the insurance industry heralded the sweeping changes brought in by LASPO and the token drop in premiums that followed. This brought the headlines the insurers were looking for and, once the public had turned away to look elsewhere, they put the premiums straight back up. The great getaway with this was that they still had the ear of the government and mainstream media, so very little was reported about premiums rising, and instead the old “compensation culture” drum was banged in defence. The average car insurance customer now expects to be hit with an increase in their premium each year. They have just become so used to this trend. Now they will actually get to see just how big a rise it is, as opposed to having to rely upon digging out last year’s paperwork before phoning to ask why they are being penalised for potentially being a loyal customer. They will, quite rightly, want to ask questions of their insurer, particularly if they decide to search the internet about how much profit their insurer has made in the same 12 month period. No doubt they will be fed the same old tripe about it being all the big bad injured person’s fault though. The introduction of this policy is a welcome move as it further allows consumers to hold their insurer to account on premiums. It also represents another area where insurers have been forced by their regulatory body to disclose information they wanted to bury, in the hope their customers wouldn’t look for it to see the increase. Scott Whyte, Managing Director, Watermans.
These are uncertain times for the insurance industry. Until the activation of Article 50 begins the Brexit process by the end of March 2017, the terms of the UK’s exit from the EU remain unclear. As insurers plan to mitigate the impact on their businesses and find new ways to generate revenue, these revolutionary telematics solutions to many of the barriers to mass market adoption have come at just the right time. Adrian Coupland, Managing Director of Data Services, SSP.
November 2016
Modern Claims 27
For more details, contact Kirsten Roberts Call 0870 766 9997, Email kirsten@boxlegal.co.uk or visit www.boxlegal.co.uk
Supplied by Solicitors...for Solicitors
EDITORIAL BOARD
Supporting Safe Driving into Old Age What steps can be taken to ensure the continued safety of older drivers and their fellow road users? s a leading insurer of older drivers, we are keen to ensure the right measures are put in place for them to stay safe on our roads and we continue to support the Older Drivers Task Force. In July this year, the Supporting Safe Driving into Old Age report was published, which set out seven key recommendations to help older drivers stay safe on the roads.
A
We know only too well the devastating effect of crashes and it is right to show a greater interest in preventing accidents among the over 75s. This does more than merely protect the safety of the over 75s – it also helps vulnerable road users (such as pedestrians and cyclists of all ages) who we fear are more likely to be seriously injured by an older driver based on our own claims data. Encouragingly, there is a lot of interest in this topic – in fact 25 experts and organisations in transport, health, policing, licensing, car manufacturing and insurance all collaborated to produce the report and made seven key recommendations for government and other stakeholders. But now, the emphasis is for government and industry to work together to ensure older drivers can stay on the road and enjoy independent lives for as long as it is safe to do so. Recommendations include: 1. Requiring the DVLA to get evidence of an eyesight test at licence renewal 2. Raising the automatic requirement for drivers to notify the DVLA at age 70 of any medical condition affecting driving to 75 - if the requirement for an eye sight test is made compulsory 3. Asking a consumer body to prepare specific advice on modern car safety features that are of special significance for older drivers 4. Improving road design, signs and markings in order to meet the highest international standards 5. Evaluating existing driving appraisal courses and improving information provided to older drivers, their families, and medical professionals 6. Piloting new products which offer an alternative to driving for older people 7. Pooling insurer data and research into major claims involving older drivers to understand the detailed causes.
The Connected World he Internet of Things (IoT) is a network of interconnecting devices, such as intelligent vehicles and smart watches, that exchange data. The IoT is going to have a major impact upon insurers and this article looks at what could be laying ahead for them.
T
By 2025 there are predicted to be 30 billion connected devices globally, with a typical family of four having more than 100 on their person and around the house. An individual will have access to more information about themselves than ever. They will know about their wellbeing, how safely they drive, the status of their house and their shopping habits. More knowledge means increased consumer expectations. Changes are afoot already; telemetrics, advanced driver assistance systems and smart homes are just some of the connected devices that are providing insurance companies with more data and enabling them to provide usage based insurance. There are sizable opportunities in the insurance market. The greater access to data will enable businesses to understand their customers better. They have the opportunity to get involved in their clients’ connected eco system of data to combine health, driving and home insurance. Consumers will also become more aware and concerned about their privacy and data protection. The demand for cyber insurance, to allay consumer concerns, will increase and offer new market opportunities. Insurance firms could also find themselves becoming white label suppliers to corporations who embed insurance into their products. BMW and Allianz already offer usage-based insurance for the car manufacturer’s i3 and i8 electric vehicles. Samsung acquired SmartThings, an open platform for smart homes. Both organisations could extend their product offerings to include prevention and restitution. The wealth of data available to insurance companies will also enable them to diversify their services to include prevention. The data from many customers will enable firms to develop a greater understanding of the individual. This data can enable insurance companies to provide prevention services to educate customers so they make informed decisions to maintain the value of their assets.
The full report can be found here: https://ageas.co.uk/documents/ corporate/Road_Safety/AGE006-SSDIOA-Interactive-v1_(2).pdf
In order to thrive and take advantage of the IoT; insurance firms must act now. Finding success with the IoT will require changes in structure, culture and finding different ways of doing business. With emerging technology around every corner, firms that have agile business processes will be able to work with customers, their devices and their data. Insurance companies have the opportunity to partner with other IoT innovators to engrain their services into customers’ lives and make a beneficial difference.
Andy Watson, CEO, Ageas UK.
Oliver Smith, Marketing Manager, slicedbread.
We’re looking forward to seeing the progress made to ensure older drivers remain safe on our roads, and for future debates where the issue is discussed.
November 2016
Modern Claims 29
We keep your promises and deliver the claims service that your customers expect With 30 years experience in outsourced claims management and assistance services we know how to take care of your customers when it really matters.
Get in touch with us on: 0333 241 9580 sales@motorplus.co.uk motorplus.co.uk
Motor ▪ Health ▪ Property ▪ Financial Loss ▪ Legal Expenses Solutions ▪ Commercial
Buying or selling IN the personal injury sector? INVEST IN EXPERTISE, EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE THE WHY
M&A in the personal injury sector is a challenging and specialist area.
The Who
ZebraLCTM is the UKs leading technical due diligence expert in personal injury.
The USP
n Instructed in the highest profile ‘sector first’ M&A deals n ISO 9001 accredited for due diligence in the legal sector and SRA registered n UK legal sector M&A Awards; Acquisition International Award 2015 & Corporate LiveWire 2016
The Testimonial Tim Ritchie Head of M&A, Fairpoint Group PLC Unique blend of legal and financial expertise…discreet and confidential.
CONTACT
Projects Team: 0161 962 9324 Confidential Enquiries: zoeholland@zebralc.co.uk stevenastley@zebralc.co.uk www.zebralc.co.uk @zebralc
EDITORIAL BOARD
The millennial advantage
Trust and Collaboration
What kinds of skills can millennials bring to the claims sector, and how can companies best harness these?
It has been suggested that forcing claimant lawyers to cite their referral source on the Claims Notification Form (CNF) will help reduce the level of fraud. Do you agree with this?
T
he millennial generation is the largest age group to emerge since the baby boom generation, and will soon make up the majority of the workforce.
Many businesses use the same method of educating new recruits, whereby the ‘older’ generation are seen as the experts, whilst younger employees are commonly seen as novices with a lot to learn. Although this is often true, it can also be reversed. Despite a poor reputation for being lazy and egotistical, millennials are some of the most productive employees around – creating new ways to work smarter, rather than harder - and can introduce a renewed skillset to ultimately aid in firms’ longevity: • Use and knowledge of technology – millennials have grown up in a culture immersed in technological advancement and have embraced it incredibly quickly. Notably, this is the first time a younger generation is entering the workplace with a better grasp of a key business tool than most senior employees • A global perspective – most millennials have now either studied or travelled abroad, giving them a range of experience, as well as diverse opinions and a deeper understanding of different cultures • Adaptability – this generation of workers tends to thrive in environments of change, enabling them to provide innovative ideas for increasing productivity and development. Businesses can take advantage of these newfound skillsets and prepare for the future by implementing a few key concepts:
Embrace technology
Millennials are the most highly connected and tech-savvy generation, and, although obvious to most, it’s worth pointing out that technology is now playing a key role across all sectors and is set to continue its rapid development. Millennials can help to create a more efficient, engaging customer experience using social tools and apps, enabling them to instantly connect, engage and collaborate.
Embrace diversity
As the most ethnically diverse generation, millennials can bring a variety of experiences, viewpoints and backgrounds that will prove extremely advantageous in engaging customers.
Embrace innovation
In such a competitive market, it’s vital that claims companies are constantly adapting and delivering solutions to customers in line with their lifestyle, whether that’s an online portal or a smartphone app. Millennials are a fantastic source of innovation and can not only aid in business development, but also significantly increase productivity and development in creating solutions to customers’ ever-changing demands.
t may have been usurped in recent times by notions of ‘unnecessary claims’, but tackling the problem of fraud must remain top of the agenda for reforming the claims sector. The re-evaluation and pause of the George Osborne reform programme is potentially a boost for this view. MoJ officials were less enthusiastic on the proposals than the more politically-driven former occupants of No.10 and HM Treasury. Officials, at least privately, recognised that they would create a whole new set of problems. Whatever the reasons for this delay, and there are likely to be many, the sector should take a deep breath, at least try and set aside its differences and perhaps even scale back on some of the more inflammatory accusations thrown by both sides.
I
Change is certainly needed. Everyone familiar with the problem knows that combating fraud is complex and must be approached simultaneously from multiple angles. Close one potential loophole and another appears. To that end, the Insurance Fraud Taskforce had some strong recommendations on fraud prevention and better regulation of CMCs - further clampdowns on nuisance calls would reduce the incentives that can encourage fraudulent and dishonest behaviour. Citing the referral source on the Claims Notification Form (CNF) could form one part of the battle plan. It may mean that suspect or proven fraudulent claims could be traced back to a particular CMC and action could be taken. Carpenters would have no problem with such an approach. I can however see that some solicitor firms who rely upon CMCs for claims may be reluctant to do so. I suspect that even if a declaration of referral sources was made compulsory, it would be largely meaningless and unenforceable. Firms who wish to protect the source of their claim, for whatever reason, could simply claim that it came through to them from direct marketing. We would have another toothless regulation circumnavigated. This is symbolic of course of the wider problem. The lack of trust between sides, combined with the more dysfunctional parts of the sector, means that any imposed reforms are there to be ‘gamed’ by some with new models and loopholes developed. Whilst it would be naïve to suggest this can ever be stopped entirely, it could be reduced through an on-going dialogue and a more collaborative approach to regulation than in recent years. Donna Scully, Partner, Carpenters.
Sarah Roberts, Marketing Executive, Eclipse Legal Systems.
November 2016
Modern Claims 31
MCM16 Watermans HP AD.pdf
1
17/11/2015
15:58
Got a case in Scotland? Our award winning team are there for you when you need us most and our expertise and dedication to our clients will ensure that you are in safe hands. With coverage throughout Scotland our personal injury specialists and TotalCare rehabilitation service ensures that our clients receive medical and legal expertise whenever they need it. Call us today to see how we can assist you.
01315164 481 www.watermans.ws The Oval Office, 83 The Shore Leith, Edinburgh EH6 6RG
Insurance pedigree plus technical expertise? That’s worth celebrating. Introducing Triton Technical...
We are proud to announce the launch of Triton Technical. Augmenting Triton’s established full service offering, our compliance driven IT services provide state of the art software coupled with our legal, claims and adjusting insurance services. Our expertise range from world class risk management software to IT security and cyber resilience.
Looking for technical insurance support? Call Triton: www.triton-global.com | info@triton-global.com | 0333 010 0000 Triton Global is an independent business, owned by its employees.
EDITORIAL BOARD
The insuretech revolution
Honesty is the Best Policy
What kinds of skills can millennials bring to the claims sector, and how can companies best harness these?
Are there any “Honest Claimants” left?
have just discovered the concept of “insuretech” businesses, a phenomenon given some prominence by the insurance media. This reinforces my view that technology, in the form of rapid and effective systems and speedy unfussy communication, will be the vital component of claims management and resolution in the future. It is millennials who have the skills to play a vital part in that revolution.
I
The millennial generation use technology and social media on a daily basis in their everyday lives, whether it’s streaming films from the internet to their TV, checking social media on their phone, or facetiming a friend on the other side of the world. Companies that can harness these skills and apply them in a business setting will thrive. This has three aspects: 1. Networking; 2. Data management; and 3. Management information. We all know that “networking” has always been perceived to be a vital aspect of the insurance sector, particularly in the London market. Younger employees take naturally to making use of online platforms such as Twitter and LinkedIn. Not only are these free resources, but they can very quickly reach a wide audience, including those in other countries. This is vital for international businesses and enables efficient and cost effective networking with both existing and potential new customers. In the current world, it is often important to be able to undertake volume, fixed fee work at a competitive price. This is an area in which millennials can thrive, as the more automated file handling systems that there are, the less time is taken doing administrative tasks, freeing up more senior employees and reducing the time spent per case. Furthermore, paper files are becoming more and more obsolete, particularly in claims handling: confident and speedy use of claim management systems are essential skills for all claims handlers of the future. Of course the prime value of hi-tech claims systems lies in the ability to process huge volumes of data and provide insurers and brokers with instant access to vital management information. Once again, this is where the skills of the millennial generation come into play, turning the bare statistics into colourful graphs and charts. We should not be surprised to see that such systems are being developed by, and for use by, the generation to whom this is second nature. David Simon and Abigail Taylor, Chairman and Claims Handler, Triton Global Limited.
T
he tide in relation to “fundamentally dishonest” claims continues to swing from Claimant to Defendant and back again.
One specialist insurance law firm claims to have broken a record by establishing eight findings of fundamentally dishonest claims in just one day. That same specialist firm has also given details of the number of findings of “fundamental dishonesty” that they have obtained – although by the same token, they fail to give the number of claims where the issue has been raised by them and not accepted by the Court. In the recent case of Shahid -v- Puddick, where the District Judge agreed with the Defendant that two out of a number of the Claimants were not in fact occupants of the vehicle, the Judge dismissed all three claims, describing the entire action as dishonest, rather than awarding the “genuine” Claimant damages. The door is open for the insurance industry to go after ‘genuine’ Claimants who support others’ fraudulent claims, and there have been a number of reported cases recently where Defendants have had some success. Mr Bernard Parma received a 12-month sentence of imprisonment for fraudulently bringing a personal injury claim worth around £15,000. Two football fans face costs of more than £12,000, after their claims were found to be fundamentally dishonest. The pair were travelling on a bus involved in a minor collision at low speed. Then we have Paul Self, from Milton Keynes, who submitted a fraudulent insurance claim for £7,250 for loss of income following a car crash. Self told police that his solicitors put him up to it. Fraud will unfortunately continue in personal injury claims. The quandary for insurers has always been this: obtain a finding of fraud and the Defendant is unlikely to recover their costs, as they know perfectly well that any ATE insurer will withdraw indemnity (as any insurer would do when they believe a claim is fraudulent). Their tactic has therefore been to suggest that the Claimant “is a lying so-and-so” without actually saying those words, and without specifically pleading fraud. As an After the Event insurer, we believe that this conundrum can only be solved by Defendants positively pleading fraud in such cases, so that this issue is highlighted at an early stage. Indeed, this is beginning to happen more. Claimant solicitors will then immediately draw this to the attention of their ATE insurers, and the Claimants will then normally be warned of the consequences. The claim will then either be withdrawn, or at least all parties will proceed with their eyes open! Robin Selley, In-House Lawyer, Box Legal.
November 2016
Modern Claims 33
Over 20 years of Medico-Legal excellence (Tier 1 MRO) Market Leading Service Unrivalled in-house Medical Expertise D e d i c a t e d Te a m s f o r H i g h V a l u e C l a i m s
www.doctorschambers.com
EDITORIAL BOARD
Do Litigation Funders mark the dawn of a brighter future for PI? he death knell for legal aid has long gone and for 10 years or so it didn’t matter. The reliable cash flow that legal aid provided claimant personal injury (PI) law firms was replaced with the cash bonanza provided by CFA’s where firms could double their money with recoverable success fees and draconian costs rules were nigh on non-existent.
T
Those were the good old days for claimant PI lawyers, where the most basic of litigation caseloads yielded high returns, even those with underperforming staff. The insurance sector were the underdogs working under tight margins, low hourly rates and fixed fees. Change came that saw the end to this disparity and the claimant sector was hit hard on cash flow and profitability as fixed costs were introduced into RTA and then extended into EL and PL. A major rule change or two later plus hard-hitting case law saw the end to recoverable success fees followed by reasonableness then proportionality arguments to slash costs further. Banks got tougher on their risk appetite for PI lending on WIP value and cash flow management remains under their microscope. The cost of court fees and disbursements adds to the heavy financial burden placed on the claimant sector. Insurers draw out claims lifecycles making it harder to litigate and turn WIP to cash easily. So where are we now as claimant lawyers are being starved of cash from all angles? Litigation funding has made its mark in the commercial arena with Burford Capital in the high-end market and Augusta Ventures in the SME market. The foundations of case law are being built to establish a party’s right to recover interest and charges under a disbursement funding loan in Jeffrey Jones and others v The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change and Coal Products [2012] EWCH 2936 (QB) and Angela Jade Powell v Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust, Court No OSY02236, 01.01.2016. As a result, litigation funders are now creeping their way into claimant PI. When used correctly, litigation funding can place a claimant lawyer in an advantageous position, litigating unfettered by cash flow constraints.
The Only Way is Ethics Are alternative business models and their service providers an increasingly ethical concern for the claims industry, or does our fear mask the value of culture and indeed, progress? was recently invited to speak at the Bar Council Annual Conference 2016 to discuss ‘how to make the most of new work opportunities,’ hosted by the Bar Council’s Ethics Committee.
I
The idea that non-traditional models (such as alternative business models like ours) at the Bar are an ethical concern was interesting. For example, where some barristers see competing with solicitors as an ethical issue, it is not actually a regulatory point. What should be of concern is whether our moral code and culture is in line with both regulations and consumer needs. Can we offer them the services they need and, importantly, do our service providers share the same moral code as us? In its research for its ‘Brand Solicitor’ campaign, The Law Society discovered that consumers significantly rank ‘honest and honourable’ behaviour by a legal entity to be of great value to them. Most clients will also trust that lawyers are qualified and insured to deliver. How many times have your clients asked to see your practicing or Lexcel certificate, or your PII documentation? Do we indeed ask this of our service providers? I expect not, but we will watch how they act, how they obtain their (and possibly your) work, and if this is in line with your ethical code. Customers are no different. Our moral code ensures ethical decision-making and behaviour is ‘as standard’. We outline our moral code clearly in our marketing – it’s our first message, not an afterthought. Additionally, we won’t work with those who have a low moral code. Our clients don’t want that, so why should we? If the SRA or other regulators decided to revisit their ban on cold calling, the legal profession must ask itself: is this in line with our moral code and is it what our clients want? Surely the fact that they don’t is a selling point? Less morally-led partners will build ‘em up and stack ‘em high in this industry, but how many legal brands have succeeded in the long-term on that basis? Our alternative business model allows us to be progressive with decision-making and have greater control over the people we employ, partner with, and instruct.
Add this to the Government’s shelving PI reforms (for now), and I see a glimmer of hope on the horizon for the claimant sector against a backdrop of years of adversity. The future’s now just a little bit brighter thanks to innovative funders and bold PI lawyers.
Yes, we run a legal business that challenges the status quo, but that doesn’t mean we can’t meet market needs and consumer expectations in a compliant manner. We invest time to ensure that our service provider partners act in the same way. We like to think we’re a little like John Lewis in that respect. We don’t have to worry about our business model, partners and the concept of ethics, it’s in our blood.
Lesley Graves, Managing Director, Citadel Law.
Stephen Ward, Managing Director, Clerksoom & Clerksroom Direct.
November 2016
Modern Claims 35
EDITORIAL BOARD
Making Progress with ‘Work in Progress’ Personal Injury WIP: Why is it under the spotlight?
A
clear handle on financial management of WIP and assessing operational risk for personal injury (PI) law firms is more critical than ever.
Quality, low operational risk, financial management and a healthy asset base (profitable work and valuable WIP) are the lifeblood of any PI business. Assessment of that lifeblood is also the starting point for business and financial planning. It is also the focus for key stakeholders and new entrant investors. Independent law firm due diligence and caseload review auditing is increasingly on the agenda. Whether this is for internal diagnostic review purposes, business improvement, assistance with bank funding, or within M&A transactions, the process of specialist technical due diligence has tangible value in the current climate. Understandably, banks, funders and investors have in recent years taken stock over the approach to lending in the legal sector. The failure of some notable law firms has left banks and investors thinking more cautiously about the sector. This is not to say that there isn’t an appetite to fund in the market. The impact has driven the desire for a more forensic and granular view of law firms’ finance and performance. The personal injury sector has its own areas of risk, and with this brings its own challenges. The personal injury sector has seen, and continues to see, investment to fund growth. For example, both Switalskis and Express Solicitors (both of which have been granted ABS licenses from the SRA) secured significant funding from high street banks, and have seen successful growth. Of primary concern to external funders within the personal injury sector is the security of the law firm’s WIP asset. Financial stability of the law firm depends upon the ability to generate cash from the WIP asset. In order to secure funding, law firms will have to demonstrate the risk profile of their WIP, coupled with cash conversion and collection procedures. Banks and funders are looking more closely at WIP (including accrued income) than previous years. Getting under the skin of a law firm’s operations, and understanding what lies behind the WIP figures, is invaluable. It is the market’s negative experiences that are encouraging banks to take a more forensic approach to both assessing and supporting law firm customers. Zoe Holland, Managing Director, ZebraLC.
November 2016
Listen and learn What kinds of skills can millennials bring to the claims sector, and how can companies best harness these? he number of studies into the impact of millennials in the workplace and world economy is vast, yet the underlining message from many is the same. Put simply, and in answer to this question, millennials have essential skills in (or attitudes towards) technology and digital media due to them growing up with evolving advances in these areas. Companies should listen and learn.
T
A reasoned response requires a clear understanding of who millennials are and why they are so important. Millennials are those born between 1980 and 2000. It has been said they are poised to reshape the world economy, as their unique experiences will change the ways we make decisions, thereby forcing companies to examine the way they do business. In light of the rapid change from a technology perspective over the past 20-35 years or so, millennials have a set of expectations sharply different from previous generations. But they are now entering a time of spending and will soon be the most dominant generation in the workforce. Life changing events are on their radar: house buying, marriage, parenting. Such events and maturity will include purchasing legal services, potentially becoming embroiled in a claims process, whether for themselves or on behalf of family members – they are a generation of decision makers given their natural affinity with today’s technology trends compared to older generations. Millennials have more of a positive view of how technology is affecting their lives than any other generation, and this approach must be harnessed in the development of how firms in the claims sector consider their own growth and sustainability. Many studies have shown that millennials are driven by experiences. If roles do not offer variety they will leave for another job – loyalty to an employer is not held in the same esteem as for previous generations. To keep hold of key talent, more experiences must be on offer. Also the best technology must be available – millennials are used to instant access to price comparisons, product information and peer reviews. They want to work with the latest innovations in IT and have come to expect it. Rebmark is owned by “near-millennials” (just a few years out), but we combine forward thinking innovation and ambition whilst remembering good old-fashioned values in communication. Call us for a no obligation discussion as to how we may help your business. Mark Hewitt, Managing Director, Rebmark Legal Solutions.
Modern Claims 37
‘‘We are
everywere. So you can be anywhere.’’
With a fleet of 60,000 vehicles operating out of 280 rental stations in the UK, working with Europcar couldn’t be easier
William’s
www.europcar.co.uk
Barristers & Mediators
www.clerksroom.com 0845 083 3000 24/7
chambers
online
mediation
public access
1. The only chambers providing civil Barristers for all courts in England & Wales
1. Online booking available 24/7
1. High settlement rate
1. Online Portal
2. Free to sign up
2. 80 exclusive Barristers
3. History recorded in your login area
2. Competitive pricing structure – less expensive than court
2. Access 1000 accredited Barristers in England & Wales
3. A single point of contact saves you and your staff time and money
4. Online.clerksroom.com
3. Face to face or online mediations offered
3. Detailed profile for each Barrister
4. No travel costs for fast track & Costs claims – CPR rates only 5. Advocacy, Advice & Drafting in 24 areas of expertise 6. Consistent expertise and quality assurance for peace of mind 7. Experts grouped into 13 teams covering civil and family law 8. Excellent communication 9. Free CPD for all client firms 10. 24/7 availability at 0845 083 3000 or clerksroom.com 11. Trusted by 20,000 solicitors in England & Wales
5. You set the fee, we find the solution 6. 80 Exclusive Barristers for fast and multi-track 7.
200 linked chambers, 1000 linked Barristers for small claims and applications
8. Linked to Ashley Taylors Legal Services 9. FREE membership for all chambers
4. Experienced and friendly mediation clerks
4. Advanced search features 5. High level of security
5. Nationwide coverage
6. Online case management
6. 1000 Mediators on National Mediator database
7. Payment processing
7. Wide range of professions and backgrounds 8. Junior, senior and elite level mediators 9. Confidential mediation 10. Independent feedback and league table 11. FREE to join for all qualified mediators
8. Feedback management 9. Bar Standards Board compliance
EDITORIAL BOARD
The Machines are Coming: Technology and the Professions ow is technology changing the delivery and nature of professional services? How will technology change the competitive landscape and client demands in the digital age? We recently invited discussion on these topics amongst a mixed audience of professionals. Some changes on the horizon include the automation of tasks, new ways of servicing, innovative problem solving techniques, and new competitors with different business models. Technology will not only make delivery more efficient, but also open up avenues for the provision of new problem solving services. These changes apply in the law, in accounting, and in consulting. There are examples of success already within the law; the use of new technology-enabled models in such areas as contract and document review, through to hybrid and managed legal services. These changes enable incumbents to thrive, but technology will affect the size and structures of firms in the longer term. To keep pace, investment will be required and this could be a challenge for some firms. Solutions will only be successful if they address client problems. There is the opportunity to deliver more than just efficiency improvements. A focus on value delivery through anticipation of problems may be a characteristic of a consultancy-led style
H
of delivery. The detection of future risks is possible from the use of cognitive technologies. In all instances, however, professional judgement will still be required and demanded by clients. Internal resistance can be overcome by client pressure. Change will evolve and quicken as people get comfortable with the technology. The requirement for innovation may include the acceptance of failure, which is very counter intuitive in a law firm. The financial infrastructure that includes billable hours and partner distribution models will come under pressure. The billable hour system does not lend itself to creative innovation, although explaining fixed fees can be challenging. New remuneration models will evolve in the longer term as the returns from investment become apparent. What are the success factors? These include engagement with clients, finding funds for investment, having the right expertise, and promoting internal champions. There is a degree of the unknown about future change, and the time horizon for change is uncertain. Predictions of future technological change have often proven correct, but only after a longer period than expected. Keith Tracey, Managing Director, Aon Risk Solutions.
Marketing... it shouldn’t be like pulling teeth
www.charltongrant.co.uk 01765 600909
Publishing | Events | Design | PR | Marketing
EDITORIAL BOARD
Paralympic Success – Sports Specific Prosthetics io 2016 was the most successful Paralympic Games for Great Britain since 1988, with the team winning 64 gold medals and 147 medals in total. For those Paralympians with amputations, innovation in prosthetic technology and manufacturing is likely to have played an important role in their success.
R
Although Paralympic athletes at this year’s games used a vast range of prosthetic components, the most prevalent and noticeable prosthetic device used was the running blade. Running blades replicate natural running motion, and their carbon fibre design makes them strong yet lightweight, allowing Paralympic athletes to train at a higher level than ever before. The BladeXT is manufactured by Blatchford. It has all the usual features of a running blade, with added benefits to improve performance. Unlike previous systems, the BladeXT’s traction heel preloads the foot spring to assist progression and support natural posture. This is especially important for double amputees. This feature also improves balance and ground contact, allowing BladeXT to be worn on slopes and over rough terrain. The heel supports the body during changes in direction and controls deceleration. Even with the latest prosthetic technology, possibly the most important aspect of any athlete’s prosthesis is their socket. A comfortable socket will allow the prosthesis to be worn for long periods of time without pain or injury to the athlete’s stump. One issue faced by athletes when increasing their training for an event such as the Paralympics can be the rapid volume changes to their stump. Increased physical activity when training can cause stump volume to increase due to muscle growth, or shrink due to weight loss. Any change in stump volume is likely to cause discomfort or pain, and may result in a break in the athlete’s training schedule. CAD CAM scanning technology shortens the production time for new sockets, allowing a quick response to volume changes, and enabling training to resume without delay. The Blatchford Clinic was proud to support two Paralympic athletes in Rio this year: Dave Henson won bronze in the 200m sprint and Rob Oliver just missed out on a medal in Paracanoe, finishing in fifth place. BladeXT is available through the Blatchford Clinic. To find out more, please visit blatchford.co.uk/private-clinic Mark Ledger, Principal Prosthetist, Blatchford Clinic.
M00041 Modern Claims PC Advert Dec 2015 AW.indd 1
40 Modern Claims
18/12/2015 11:26
November 2016
FEATURES
The Personal Injury Reforms The measures proposed in the Ministry of Justice’s whiplash consultation could have severe ramifications for genuine claimants. Martin Coyne analyses the reasons for the measures, and what consequences they might have. fter some dithering, under fire Justice Secretary Liz Truss has issued the long-awaited “Reforming the soft tissue injury (‘whiplash’) claims process”: a consultation on arrangements concerning personal injury claims in England and Wales. The 87-page document is accompanied by a 98-page Impact Assessment, which to cynical eyes looks as though it may have been cobbled together after a phone call with the ABI.
A
Why Truss decided to issue the consultation on 17 November may well be down to politics. She has been heavily criticised for her tepid defence of the ‘Appeal Court Three’, those judges who ruled against Government plans to invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, and perhaps thought this could buy some cheap applause. Whatever the reason, the Consultation will run only until 6 January 2017 (including the Christmas break) and the government is due to respond by 7th April 2017. The press release used ABI-style phrases such as ‘crack down on whiplash claims’ and ‘motorists could see their car insurance cut’ [by £40] to contextualise the Consultation, but there is no evidence, beyond a verbal pledge by two insurers, Aviva and LV, that insurers will hand back to drivers any savings from these reforms. Neither is there any acknowledgement that whiplash often causes severe pain and discomfort for people suffering an accident. Like the insurance industry, the government’s starting point for this issue is that the British public are fraudsters and their historic rights of redress in the case of accident are no longer appropriate. For a Justice Minister whose job is to uphold and defend the law and justice, Ms Truss is doing the exact opposite, but in this she is merely shadowing her own Prime Minister, whose clarion call outside Downing Street when she took office earlier in the Summer: “When we make the big calls we’ll think not of the powerful, but you (ordinary working people), when we pass new laws we’ll listen not to the mighty but to you,” now looks somewhat hollow. Make no mistake: this reform was designed by insurers, and the beneficiaries will be insurers and their shareholders. There is no pretence at balance in the consultation, more a series of badly aimed cannon shots across the bows of the general public and the claimant industry, which some reports say will suffer up to 60,000 job losses (including support jobs), if these proposals become law. Business secretary Sajid Javid flew to India to plead the case of South Wales steel workers when Tata threatened Port Talbot last year, but there is no-one in government standing up for 60,000 workers in the legal profession. In fact, the profession’s own sponsor, the Justice Secretary, wants to decimate it. Maybe Ms Truss should change her job title to Minister for Insurance.
42 Modern Claims
For a Justice Minister whose job is to uphold and defend the law and justice, Ms Truss is doing the exact opposite So what does the Consultation propose? As the Government press release puts it succinctly: The Consultation paper outlines plans to scrap the right to compensation or put a cap on the amount people can claim for minor whiplash injuries. Capping compensation would see the average pay-out cut from £1,850 to a maximum amount of £425. Compensation would only be paid out if a medical report was provided as proof of injury. Other measures include: • Introducing a transparent tariff system of compensation payments for claims with more significant injuries; • Raising the limit for cases in the small claims court for all personal injury claims from £1,000 to £5,000; • Banning offers to settle claims without medical evidence. All claims would need a report from a MedCo accredited medical expert before any pay out. Justice Secretary Truss said: “For too long some have exploited a rampant compensation culture and seen whiplash claims as an easy payday, driving up costs for millions of law-abiding motorists.” “These reforms will crack down on minor, exaggerated and fraudulent claims. Insurers have promised to put the cash saved back in the pockets of the country’s drivers.” The poverty of the research in the Impact Assessment makes clear that neither the Government nor the insurance industry has done anything to answer the recommendations made by the Transport Select Committee, when it last took a proper look at Whiplash, in 2013. Then, the Committee recommended: “Access to justice could be impaired by Government proposals to switch whiplash claims between £1,000 and £5,000 to the Small Claims Court, particularly for people who do not feel confident to represent themselves against insurers who will use legal professionals to contest claims.” There is still no definitive view on the true level of whiplash fraud,
November 2016
FEATURES
The irony is that, for both claimant firms and insurers, there is a broad consensus on what should be done to resolve personal injury despite an admonishment from the Transport Select Committee to the government and the insurers to undertake some proper research. Yet in the Consultation, the MoJ attacks a ‘predatory claims industry’ for “encouraging exaggerated and fraudulent claims.” The ABI has quoted £50 as the cost of fraud per policy in the past, but these figures have been comprehensively trashed by Access to Justice (A2J), which noted that the ABI calculated the £50 figure by lumping together ‘proven’ fraud and ‘suspected’ fraud. Most people would say proven fraud means a successful prosecution in court or a police caution. Yet according to the insurance industry, if an insurer refuses a policy application, that is a proven fraud. If the insurer repudiates a claim, that is also classified as proven fraud. A2J commissioned Capital Economics to look into the issue, and, using the ABI’s own data, found that, overall, motor fraud is equivalent to £27 per policy, but this includes ‘suspected’ fraud as well as ‘proven’ fraud. This figure falls to around £4 per policy if the ABI’s estimate for the value of ‘proven’ fraud is considered alone. This is based on just under 26 million private car policies written in the UK in 2014. The Capital Economics work will form part of A2J’s formal response to the Consultation. Turning to incidence of whiplash claims, the Transport Select Committee looked in detail at the numbers, and found that “it is apparent from the information now provided by the Government that the number of whiplash claims has fallen since 2010-11 and is now lower than at any time since at least 2007-08. Since 2013, and according to the Compensation Recovery Unit (CRU), whiplash claims fell from just over 410,000 to 336,000 last year. These claims are logged on the system by insurers.
Powerhouse, and A2J will make sure that Conservative and Labour MPs who represent seats in this area of the UK will understand that these ill-thought through reforms will cause significant economic and personal damage. Those job losses will also be felt in the insurance companies themselves, as insurer claims departments that currently handle personal injury will be shut down. A2J has also commissioned experts to look at the proposed £40 saving being offered by the Government. This saving is nonbinding, and we believe it is unlikely that customers will ever feel the benefit. Insurance premiums have risen to their highest level since 2012 and, according to a new study by EY, are almost certain to carry on increasing. Motorists will end 2016 paying £33 more for average car insurance cover, and another £13 next year. Whether the public will agree that their rights of redress should be taken away for the uncertain promise of a £40 bung is moot. In a recent study, 77% of the public said they did not trust insurers to honour their commitments. The irony is that, for both claimant firms and insurers, there is a broad consensus on what should be done to resolve personal injury. A2J will be participating fully in the consultation, but it strongly believes that the insurers and ourselves share similar objectives to the government, namely to remove cold calling, clamp down on fraud, get rid of frivolous claims and ensure the rights of injured people are upheld. A collaborative approach will resolve these issues without the need for costly and time-consuming legislation with potentially unforeseen consequences.
A2J argues that, with claims incidence falling, government claims that there is a burgeoning compensation culture are simply not borne out by the evidence.
With the government in chaos over Brexit, it’s hard to predict the future with any degree of certainty, but these reforms will be bitterly contested and will require parliamentary time. Legislation will be needed to wipe out centuries of Common Law, and neither the Lords, nor Labour, nor indeed many Conservative MPs, will view the prospect with equanimity.
Neither does the MoJ seem especially concerned about the fate of thousands of people who work in legal firms. The Impact Assessment notes coolly that: “Those providing services (lawyers, medical experts, Claims Management Companies) are assumed to find alternative economic activities.”
What is clear is that the personal injury sector, with A2J at the forefront, will not sit by and allow an entire industry, and the rights of the people it represents, to be decimated by a government that purports to care about the ‘JAMS’ (just about managings), but has, in this respect at least, been found seriously wanting.
A2J has commissioned a survey among law firms to estimate the economic impact of personal injury reform, and will use the findings to illustrate that taking tens of thousands of professional services people out of the economy is not worth the potential savings.
Martin Coyne is the Managing Director of Ralli Solicitors and is Chairman for Access to Justice.
The hardest hit areas are likely to be the cities in the Northern
November 2016
Modern Claims 43
FEATURES
A cohesive approach to fraud Charlotte Parkinson, Modern Claims, spoke to the Detective Chief Inspector of the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) about the changing nature of motor fraud and the often overlooked dangers it poses to the public.
Q A
Why does the UK have such a big problem with motor claims fraud?
The UK is quite well organised and aware of the threat of fraud, whereas other countries don’t have the numbers because they’re not looking for it. For years, the police were turning fraud victims away because they didn’t understand, which means official figures on fraud going back ten or fifteen years aren’t very reliable. Now we have national reporting and there are twenty-two thousand reports of fraud a month. There are also still people who won’t report for various reasons - because of shame, or because they think there won’t be any benefit from reporting. It’s good to recognise that the insurance industry, as a sector, is very well organised around the threat of motor fraud. There are legal frameworks, and because of that, there’s a lot of money in the system that attracts people. Some of the people we’ve investigated have moved from other types of fraud to target the insurance sector because they see an opportunity there. In the past, it’s been difficult for insurers to get law enforcement to take action on insurance fraud, and a lot of organised fraudsters carefully plan out what they’re going to do. It’s been under-policed. It’s a very complex industry and there are lots of elements in the chain, all of which have different regulators and stakeholders that overlap. That makes the opportunities for fraudsters to attack quite broad. Fifty percent of what IFED has dealt with since we’ve been running has been motor fraud, but within that, the different sub-types of fraud have been varied.
We have investigated opportunists, such as a man who had somebody reverse into his car while he was standing on the pavement, and he then claimed to be in the car. The CCTV was quite damning and that is an example of unsophisticated opportunism. There is a barrage of claims farming and nuisance calls telling people outright lies to try and motivate them to make a claim.
Q A
What are IFED currently doing to prevent this insurance fraud, and other forms of fraud?
We should be talking about how these criminals are targeting the elderly and lonely people, looking to crash their car into them in order to get some money that may well go into funding other nefarious activities
IFED started up as a reactive enforcement resource. Our stated aim was to turn arresting and prosecution for insurance fraud from a theoretical possibility into a clear and present danger for those taking part in it. We started arresting, interviewing, disrupting and prosecuting people involved in insurance fraud. We take every penny off them; we’re up to £1.5 million taken off fraudsters and given back to victims.
44 Modern Claims
November 2016
FEATURES
Most prevention is being done by the insurance industry itself. They are very cohesive; they have lots of conferences and forums. There’s a really lively ongoing debate to make sure that threats are picked up early Most prevention is done by the insurance industry itself. They are very cohesive; they have lots of conferences and forums. There’s a really lively ongoing debate to make sure that threats are picked up early. The Insurance Fraud Bureau (IFB) does a great job of picking up threats early and passing them around; everybody is stronger together in what is a faster moving world. Increasingly that’s about bringing in the aggregators - the Money Supermarkets and the Gocompares of this world. The role of those organisations is still being explored; if we can block out fraudsters at the front door, we’d save ourselves a lot of money further down the track.
Q A
Are you alluding to the data that aggregators possess?
Yes, they sit on a huge amount of data. There are people coming back time and time again looking for insurance quotes; why do they keep coming back? There’s an opportunity there to have access to some of the data of people who are known fraud risks. Our role is to publicise what’s being done in terms of prosecution in order to deter people, and also to raise people’s awareness of the different ways fraudsters will encourage law abiding people to be a part of their scams.
Q
Do you think there are any specific trends in the industry at the moment that relate to fraud? Have we seen a shift in recent years?
A
Across the fraud landscape, as technologies have come along, fraudsters have moved to a higher volume of lower yield frauds. The clearest illustration of that is in the layering we’ve seen - we carried out a strategic threat assessment in the industry in 2014, and the IFB has just done another strategic threat assessment. If you look at the key risks highlighted by those documents, the picture hasn’t changed significantly between the two. The trend we saw was towards layering - rather than turning a car crash into a five thousand pound whiplash compensation, you turn it into a few hundred pounds of translation fees, storage, credit hire, cognitive behavioural therapy, physiotherapy – has increased. They get the same amount of money out of it, but the mechanics are slightly different. As it gets harder to crash vehicles on the road, fraudsters are looking to exploit existing collisions. There are now more attempts by criminals to corrupt insurance workers and bribe them into giving out accident data. We have a number of prosecutions ongoing, and we have consent from the Director of Public Prosecutions to charge bribery. IFED has a remit in England and Wales, and we’re the only funded unit dedicated to tackling insurance fraud. There does seem to be more of an emerging problem in Scotland and the Republic of Ireland. I wouldn’t be so arrogant as to claim that that’s purely down to our success pushing offenders over the border, but I think it’s a factor.
Q
A
Everyone has banded around various figures about the cost that fraud puts onto individual consumers. We need to refocus people’s minds and say: it isn’t just the fraud. Fraud itself is corrosive, but a lot of the more organised people involved with fraud are getting insurance for people who shouldn’t be driving because they’re not safe. There’s a direct danger to public safety there. If you want to avoid being stopped by police, you’re going to need insurance. With any criminal involved in moving illegal commodities like drugs, firearms, and trafficked people, there will be an insurance fraud element as well. So it’s being used to mask very serious criminality. We have to look at the risk to public safety from crash for cash fraudsters. When they do that, they’re looking for a vehicle that is insured, and they’re looking for somebody who isn’t going to punch them, to put it bluntly. So often we’ll see that they will target commercial vehicles. They are also looking for elderly and lone females. So we should be talking about how these criminals are targeting the elderly and lonely people, looking to crash their car into them in order to get some money that may well go into funding other nefarious activities.
Q A
Is the industry doing enough to collaborate in face of fraud?
There’s a lot of collaboration, but there’s still more to be done. Everybody acknowledges that there are more gains to be made from data sharing and collaboration. Telematics is getting more take up from drivers, and that’s really encouraging. Some of our best cases have come from dash cams. The difference is telematics are also used as a pricing tool. Insurers don’t really champion dash cams, but from what I’ve seen they’re really useful pieces of technology. The industry can always do more, and the answer to a complex problem is more collaboration and more partnership. Everybody in the industry is supportive and aware of that.
Q A
What is next for IFED?
We’ve been going now for five years. The original funding was extended and increased so we took on more detectives to do more enforcement work. We’ve had a reorganisation within the department to invest in the efficiency of dealing with more cases. But we also recognise that insurers don’t have a high degree of trust within the public, at least not as high as police officers, so we have a prevention officer and a prevention strategy in order to do more work with the public. We’ll be engaging with the public to educate them about the issues around insurance fraud, raise their awareness and to try and address those who might be easily targeted by cold callers and high pressure sales techniques from CMCs.
Oliver Little is Detective Chief Inspector at the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED) of the City of London Police.
How does fraud affect the everyday consumer of insurance products and services?
November 2016
Modern Claims 45
FEATURES
Sector Soapbox
Modern Claims’s panel of resident associations outline the burning issues
Motoring Forward The Modern Transport Bill will help resolve the most challenging aspects of automated driving lthough the impact of the EU referendum remains at the top of the political agenda, there is no sign that Ministers are any less enthusiastic for making the UK a world leader in automated driving technology. Indeed, Transport Secretary Chris Grayling used his recent Conservative Conference speech to confirm that the Modern Transport Bill (which had been a key plank of David Cameron’s final Queen’s Speech) would be going ahead as planned, with Parliament likely to debate it in early 2017. This legislation will include the insurance proposals contained in the recent ‘Pathway to Driverless Cars’ consultation. The Government’s intention is to ensure that anyone injured in a collision involving an automated vehicle, whether outside or inside the car, can have their claims settled easily and allow consumers to easily buy an insurance policy covering both automated and manual driving. By setting out how this will work in advance of vehicles coming to market, the Government hopes to give greater confidence to investors. The role of insurers will be to act as enablers, giving consumers the confidence to use this new technology. Therefore, we welcome the Government’s proposed approach to insurance for the first wave of automated cars.
A
However, we proposed a different model to that originally envisaged by DfT officials. Instead of adding ‘product liability’ cover to policies, a better approach is to extend motor insurance to also cover automated driving and then allow insurers to claim from manufacturers after a technology failure. This will avoid a potentially complex review of product liability clauses (such as the 10-year policy expiration and the ‘state of the art defence’ clause) and instead keep the process for settling claims as close to what drivers experience today as possible. Of course, given the scale of the change automated technology could make to driving, there will be plenty of further issues for the ABI, Thatcham, and members of our Automated Driving Insurance Group to discuss. Top of our agenda will be establishing what data will be essential to settling claims involving automated vehicles and agreeing a process to ensure this data is shared in an accessible format. We will also be considering what implications a much more complex repair process could have for insurers. However, the clarity the Modern Transport Bill will offer should make these crucial issues easier to resolve. Ben Howarth, Policy Advisor – Motor & Liability, Association of British Insurers (ABI).
First My Dryer, Now It’s The Phone! hose of you who were kind enough to read my contribution to this publication in the July issue would not have missed my frustration at the fact that my tumble dryer was yet to be repaired by Whirlpool more than 12 months after the potentially dangerous fault had been identified by the company. The good news is that in early September 2016, the modification was completed and all is now well in the world… or so I thought! I am sure that was the view of many people until the news about the recall of Samsung Galaxy Note 7 hit the stands. Although I didn’t buy the phone myself, I truly sympathise with anyone who may have been caught up in both of these defective product situations. The concern with the tumble dryers was that insurers might inappropriately repudiate resultant fire claims even where policyholders had been using the dryer in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions. There was no product recall by Whirlpool. The Samsung situation however, dramatically changed recently when the limited recall of products extended to a total recall. So what if a phone user is unaware of the recall, or chooses to ignore it and continues to use the phone? Where the policyholder continues to use their phone oblivious to the product recall then both their consumer rights and insurance rights should be unaffected. My concern for the
T
46 Modern Claims
policyholder would be that in the event that they purported to be unaware of the situation, given worldwide publicity, there would be little doubt that Samsung had done all that it reasonably could do to recall the phone and the consumer could be exposed. My bigger concern however relates to users who simply ignore the recall and continue to use the phone. In these circumstances, the operation of their own insurance policies, for example in relation to household insurance, could be affected and legitimately avoided under the reasonable precautions conditions where an exploding phone caused damage to a household property. Any personal injury claim brought by a person injured using the phone after the recall could also be affected in terms of contributory negligence; though it must be said that it is unlikely that Samsung could avoid contributing something towards the injury as a result of their defective product. The two particular issues with two widely used products has therefore demonstrated in a short space of time how the actions of a manufacturer can differ widely, as could the consequential effects that their actions could have on the customer who innocently purchased their product. Andrew Gibbons ACII, Managing Director, Mason Owen Financial Services Ltd and Chair on behalf of BIBA of the Industry Claims Working Group.
November 2016
FEATURES
Personal Injury still lagging behind in justice reforms he Government plans radical change in our justice system. The 15 September announcement “Transforming our Justice System” may not take matters much further or come as a surprise, but the intention is clear. For many involved in personal injury claims, there was disappointment that the announcement contained nothing about the reform of soft tissue injury claims. A consultation on those proposals, which includes banning general damages for pain and suffering in low value claims and increasing the Small Track limit in personal injury claims, was originally planned for March 2016. There is still no hint of how the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) plans to link up soft tissue injury reform with the wider issues of the Online Court and access to justice. The extension of fixed fees beyond Fast Track personal injury and intellectual property claims has been long awaited. The Government’s announcement that fixed fees will be extended “to as many civil cases as possible” will be welcomed by the insurance industry. Yet the Government’s announcement has no timetable and only the vaguest indication that “senior judiciary will be developing proposals on which we will then consult” and the promise of legislation “in due course”. The announcement in relation to the Online Court similarly tells
T
us little but does indicate the Government accepts Lord Justice Briggs’ proposals in principle and provides a commitment to digitisation, the Online Court and simplified rules to support it. The Chancellor set out the principles of soft tissue injury reform last autumn. It is probably fair to say that the MOJ underestimated what was involved in achieving his objectives. Most stakeholders, for example, now accept that simply increasing the Small Track limit will not work. A new process for handling pre-action claims that can be accessed by Claimants is needed with an efficient process for those cases that cannot be settled without proceedings. Building such a system will not be quick or easy. The Online Court could be part of the solution but there is a significant difference between the Government’s original timescale for soft tissue injury reform (2017) and the likely start date for the Online Court (2020). One solution might be to bring forward a pilot of the Online Court specifically for personal injury claims. This would help the Government implement its soft tissue injury reforms and test what, on any view, is an ambitious plan to transform our justice system. Duncan Rutter, President, Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL).
30 minutes of free transcription from Accuro, the leading provider of UK based outsourced transcription services. A pay-as-you-go service - no set up costs or subscription charges Transcription on demand – use as often or infrequently as you need to UK based transcribers – secure and accurate transcription Improve efficiency - simple way to clear backlogs of dictation Total peace of mind – cover for staff holidays or absence Transparent charging structure – only pay for what you need To claim your free minutes contact us now on 01565 748000 or email enquiries@accuro.co.uk
www.accuro.co.uk
FEATURES
Firm Focus: Hudgell Solicitors How Hudgell Solicitors secured national industry recognition and a growing profile as 2016 brings progress and success. udgell Solicitors enjoyed a year of further growth and increased national profile in 2016 as it secured industry recognition for its achievements and commitment to supporting victims of personal injury and medical negligence. It remains well within the top ten of all claimant law firms undertaking clinical negligence work and throughout the whole year has enjoyed Trust Pilot client satisfaction ratings in excess of 9 out of 10.
H
With a clear focus on extending its nationwide support to clients, the firm started the New Year by underlining its strong ambitions in the south of England, buying new offices in London’s Fleet Street three years after establishing itself in the capital. This coincided with a move to a paperless environment. It then added another leading legal figure to its team in February, as former Irwin Mitchell clinical negligence and neurotrauma partner Amanda Stevens joined as Group Head of Legal Practice, with a focus on strengthening rehabilitation services, especially for more seriously injured clients, as well as developing the practice more generally.
Going national
National media profile followed as, having represented a number of families who had turned to secret filming as they feared their loved ones were being neglected or abused in care and residential homes, the firm led a national campaign calling on the Government to consider making CCTV compulsory in care facilities. The Love Our Vulnerable and Elderly (LOVE) campaign placed the issue in the national spotlight, including interviews with clients and the firm’s legal experts in front of millions on national television, and resulting in thousands across the UK signing a petition in support. Whilst winning praise for its growth and campaigning, leading individuals were also being recognised for their expertise and success. Matt Tuff, a specialist in supporting those who suffer catastrophic injuries, was named Claims Professional of the Year at the national Modern Claims Awards in April, recognising his track record of managing a large case book of serious injury cases, securing highvalue settlements and providing access to vital rehabilitation.
Part of the community
Playing an active and positive role in the communities it serves has also been a major element of Hudgell Solicitors’ work over the past 12 months. This has seen it lend its support to numerous leading charities supporting those who suffer serious injuries through accidents or as a result of medical errors. The firm played a key role in establishing an innovative community walk-in support centre in Hull, dedicated to helping those recovering from serious brain injuries and opened by brain injury survivor Paul Spence in partnership with NHS Hull Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).
48 Modern Claims
The firm played a key role in establishing an innovative community walk-in support centre in Hull, dedicated to helping those recovering from serious brain injuries The Paul For Brain Recovery facility has filled a crucial gap in the care provided to those facing the huge challenge of rebuilding their lives after a brain injury, with Paul, who acts as an official ambassador for the firm, and his team, providing guidance and support through inspirational and motivational talks, and educational sessions on topics from coping strategies to healthy nutrition, fitness, recovery and well-being. UKABIF have recognised Paul for his tireless work on behalf of people with Acquired Brain Injury and presented him with the Stephen McAleese Award for Inspiration at their conference in November. Support was also provided to national mother and baby charity Baby Lifeline as it launched a new campaign to improve maternity care standards across the UK in September. The ‘Monitoring for Mums Appeal’, for which Hudgell Solicitors helped provide a new fundraising website and secured national media coverage, has won support from leading specialists with its call for a new national standardisation of in-house hospital training programmes in a bid to reduce stillbirth rates, avoid preventable brain injuries and promote normal birth.
November 2016
FEATURES
Having represented a number of families who had turned to secret filming as they feared their loved ones were being neglected or abused in care and residential homes, the firm led a national campaign calling on the Government to consider making CCTV compulsory in care facilities Getting recognised
Further development came in West Yorkshire as the firm moved into new premises in the heart of the Leeds legal district. The purchase of the new £750,000 offices in Park Place, set over four floors, provided an indication of its commitment to the region as it continued to enhance its national reputation. Solicitor Caroline Murgatroyd was shortlisted in the ‘Rising Star’ category of the Yorkshire Legal Awards before Amanda Stevens was presented with a prestigious national award in September in recognition of her dedication to ensuring seriously injured people are provided with the rehabilitation support they need on the road to recovery. She was presented with the ‘Outstanding Individual Achievement’ prize at the Rehabilitation First Awards in London, an award selected by judges to recognise those who have ‘set themselves apart from their peers by the sheer weight and significance of their contribution to the UK rehabilitation industry’. The firm was also highly commended for its own work in this area, notably in respect of support for the family of a young brain injured boy whose mother and sister were killed in a devastating road accident. The 2016 Legal 500 guide listed Hudgell Solicitors for clinical negligence in London for the first time, and again for both medical negligence and personal injury in the Yorkshire and the Humber, before another move into impressive new offices followed. This time it was in the firm’s home city of Hull, as a new threestorey complex in the Fruit Market and Marina waterfront area of the city became its home. It means a firm which now has an increasingly national operation will be at heart of celebrations and events in its home city in 2017, marking its year as UK City of Culture in Hull, for which the firm is a supporting partner as a member of the 2017 Business Club.
November 2016
Hudgell Solicitors Hudgell Solicitors is a specialist personal injury and medical negligence claims firm and is within the top ten of all firms in terms of number of medical negligence cases handled and fees earned. A Legal 500 firm, Hudgell Solicitors has a reputation for providing vital support to those who suffer serious and life-changing injuries and securing impressive settlements for clients, often against strong denials from defendants, while also providing long-term rehabilitation support, delivering positive outcomes for their clients. The firm, which was named after managing director, Neil Hudgell, was established in 1997 with the aim of delivering legal services to the local community. Since then, the firm has consistently grown year on year by ensuring the organisation continues to focus on putting their clients first. It now has offices in Hull, Leeds, Bristol and Central London. In 2016 the firm added Rosamund Rhodes-Kemp and Amanda Stevens, leading legal figures from the personal injury and medical negligence claimant sector, to its team. Both Rosamund and Amanda are drawn from health service backgrounds and have coroner and judicial roles outside of the practice. The firm aims to become firmly established as a national leader in the profession, placing an increased focus on high-value cases and representing clients who have suffered life-changing injuries.
Support was also provided to national mother and baby charity Baby Lifeline as it launched a new campaign to improve maternity care standards across the UK in September
Modern Claims 49
increased court fees
costs budgets and proportionality
cash-flow: WIP to cash
client satisfaction reduced life cycle
Contact us to arrange a preproceedings half day mediation fees for a half day mediation: www.ExpediteResolution .com/fees
www.TrustMediation .org.uk/mediation-fees
info@ExpediteResolution.com
registrar@TrustMediation .org.uk
0844 879 3166
0207 353 3237
for mediation of insurance related claims
for mediation of personal injury claims
To get your copy of our Case Digest of authorities on costs sanctions send an e mail with “Sanctions� in the subject line.
APRSO4857.indd 4
FEATURES
The Not-So-Great Escape With winter approaching, you can expect an annual spike in ‘escape of water’ claims from homeowners. Claire Hird explains the real costs behind these claims, and how both insurers and claimants can prepare for the worst, and aim for the best. ith winter fast approaching and British Summer Time ending soon, this is the time of year that many people start turning their central heating back on. However, some will unfortunately find that their water pipes have deteriorated since the heating was last used and they have to deal with damage caused by a leak.
W
One of the top reasons for home insurance claims made to Legal & General is for leaks or damage to customers’ homes from an escape of water. Of these, the most common claims by far are related to leaks from water pipes, which make up 38% of all water damage claims, followed by damage from faulty showers, toilets/ cisterns and basins. We’ve received nearly 14,600 claims for water damage caused by leaking pipes since the beginning of 2014, for which we have paid out £36m, and in total we have received 38,000 household insurance claims for water damage since 2014, with a total value of £81m. These figures show just how prevalent an issue escape of water is and how many people’s daily lives would have been affected by being unable to use a kitchen or bathroom, for example. Though the industry is constantly evolving and considering innovative ways to handle claims, sensitivity when speaking with a customer is crucial. It is important to keep at the forefront of your mind that the client has potentially suffered severe damage to the most important of possessions: their home. If this is not upsetting enough, claiming can sometimes be a complicated and stressful process that, if handled in the wrong way, can only make the situation worse. It is therefore the broker’s responsibility to invest time into the case and maintain the service promise to policyholders.
A Stressful Situation
It will not be unusual if, when speaking to your client, you find them in a distressed state. Consumers will often demand compensation for costs of damages that are not included in their policy. The cost of locating the problem, repairing it and covering the damage caused are all separate claims. The client may therefore unknowingly believe that the cost of calling out an emergency plumber should be included within their policy, for instance. At the same time, claims spending has to be controlled, fraud minimised and policy indemnities reviewed. It is important that fraudulent claims are identified and dealt with swiftly to minimise any unnecessary disruption. To make sure the process is being handled properly, it should be noted by the claims handler how soon after the event the claim has been made, as well as the type of water damage (a leak, burst pipe, faulty shower or toilet), the type of property (detached, semi-detached), and the amount of damage to the property. By ensuring vital information is gathered from your client, such as photographic evidence, it will help speed
November 2016
It is important to keep at the forefront of your mind that the client has potentially suffered severe damage to the most important of possessions: their home up the process without cutting through any loopholes, which could then lead to a fraudulent claim.
Preparing Your Home
The average cost of a claim for damage caused by leaking, or frozen or damaged water pipes received by Legal and General is £2,390, and for burst central heating pipes alone, the costs are higher at £2,800 on average per claim. Customers are often grateful for advice on how they can prevent an escape of water in their homes before it occurs, and below is our five-point health check for homeowners, which you could discuss with them: • Regularly monitor your water meter readings (if you have one) so you can spot any big increase in usage. • Make sure you know where your main water stopcock or valve is and ensure it is operational. • Check if you have a drain valve on your central heating system, and make sure that you know how to use this in the event of a leak to help minimize the damage. • Ensure that water pipes are lagged correctly in order to minimize the risk of them cracking during the colder months. • Check if you have Home Emergency Cover on your Home Insurance, which could provide 24-hour support and cover for call-out charges, and parts for certain emergency repairs. The best advice brokers and claims handlers can give to their household clients is to be prepared. If we can encourage staff and customers alike to understand preventative measures, this allows a greater chance of your client avoiding any personal upheaval and, in the longer term, save money on their insurance premiums. Claire Hird is Head of Household Claims at Legal & General.
Modern Claims 51
Your Cyber Secure Office Wherever You Go
Spitfire
The Legal Technology Experts
For more information, please visit our website 020 8804 1022
info@dpssoftware.co.uk
www.dpssoftware.co.uk
GIVE US HALF AN HOUR AND WE’LL CHANGE HOW YOU WORK FOREVER
30 minutes of free transcription from Accuro Contact us on 01565 748000 or email enquiries@accuro.co.uk www.accuro.co.uk
FEATURES
Changing the Game Aaron Pearson analyses the current challenges facing the claims industry, from cyber crime and data protection, to new disruptors and client care.
I
“
ndustry Disruptors” is a phrase coined to describe game changers within a given sector.
Twenty years ago, the internet was the game changer of the information age. Today, cyber crime is a developing area that more and more of us are becoming familiar with, either as victim or saviour. The past 18 months have witnessed changes in types of insurance policies and coverage across all kinds of businesses. After Lloyd’s of London carried out research in the summer of 2015, underwriters have looked at how to develop products that are fit for purpose.
How easy is this?
Set against a backdrop of increased threats from hackers is the anticipated arrival of the new EU General Data Protection Regulations (EUGDPR), which will be with us in 2018. This mandates reporting of, and sets down punitive sanctions for, security breaches. Individuals may also claim compensation from organisations for financial loss or any distress suffered. We have seen this happen already in the case of Vidal-Hall v Google. Here, users of Google, whose personal details had been captured by cookies without their permission and then used by third parties, had an action due to the following: (1) the misuse of [their] information was a tort and (2) there could be a claim for compensation for distress alone under s13(2) of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA). Of course, s13(2) would ordinarily allow compensation for distress only when accompanied by pecuniary loss. That was not the case here. Yet, owing to the transposition of Article 23 of the EU Data Protection Directive into UK law, Article 23 of the Directive mandates that data subjects are entitled to receive compensation from a data controller for damage as a result of an unlawful processing operation. The Court of Appeal found that there was no distinction between pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss under Article 23 of the Directive and that it was not possible to interpret section 13(2) of the DPA in a way that was compatible with Article 23. For the record, while granted leave to appeal, Google settled with the claimants. Could this herald the new type of claim, to replace holiday sickness, which replaced disease, which replaced RTAs?
Cutting one’s cloth accordingly has never been more important, and identifying early how to self-sustain goes a long way innovate, and help our clients by developing services and products that work effectively as an ‘MOT’. A full understanding of the client and their business is crucial. We must become an extension of them. That way, it not only promotes trust and confidence from that client, but gives us, the service provider, better opportunities for retention. For any new entrant into the sector, that is vital.
Industry Disruptors
We offer our business clients a key service called Cyber Security Threat Management. Depending on the size and nature of the business, this can be anything from provision of a remedial process overview, to a wholesale review of their insurance policy which purports to give necessary coverage for cyber risks. This means a root and branch review, and assessment of the business risks and trends in the market as a whole when considering the insurance information and governance. Again, it is vital to get a full and proper understanding of how your client works, and then go that extra step.
The old ways no longer work
Despite the challenges, it is not uncommon for larger firms to charge a fee for dealing with a litigated claim which the insurer client had spent quite some time defending. With fixed fee cases, there is little appetite by the firms to go over and above the bare minimum. But for the client, it is vital their interests are put before profit, and it is startling just how little effort is made to engage with the client at an early stage to help them avoid pitfalls that can adversely impact them. Surely a lasting relationship with a client who has their house in order, but knows it can call on you, is better than one faced with an existential threat owing to it being reactionary to problems, whilst at the same time not being fully supported by its lawyer. Aaron Pearson is Director and Solicitor at Three Graces Legal
What about the client?
These are economically challenging times. Cutting one’s cloth accordingly has never been more important, and identifying early how to self-sustain goes a long way. But not all clients or customers know how to do this. The challenge for us is twofold:
November 2016
Modern Claims 53
FEATURES
Destroy All Lawyers Gary Gallen addresses negative perceptions of lawyers and legal professionals, and how the sector can fix these issues. Lyrical Authority
“There’s a plague on the planet, and they went to law school”, sang Mojo Nixon in his song Destroy All Lawyers. Who is Mojo Nixon? What authority or influence does he have, the lawyers may cry? Let’s rock and roll with Guns N’ Roses, therefore, with “Don’t forget to call my lawyers with ridiculous demands” from their song You Could Be Mine. Then add George Harrison with “Bring your lawyer and I’ll bring mine. Get together, we could have a bad time” from Sue Me, Sue You Blues. My point is one of perception. As a solicitor for many years, I accept my profession has a certain negative perception to many people. There are many songs that mention lawyers and the law, from The Clash and The Eagles to Adele. Our fascination with the law, and the breaking of it, is a recurring theme in our society.
Politics, Leadership, Movies and Literature
Fidel Castro was a former lawyer, celebrated by some and not so by others. So too were Ghandi, Nelson Mandela and Abraham Lincoln. Each practised law but were able to overturn initial perceptions and became renowned and celebrated almost universally long after their passing, their advocacy skills as lawyers evident in their careers as leaders. Our newsfeeds are packed with legal issues too. From Supreme Court challenges on Brexit and Article 50, car manufacturer corruption over diesel emissions, bank settlements over misleading investors, to mass criminal investigations over child abuse in football. Then we like to buy books and watch movies or TV about the law and, in particular, various types of crime. From Sherlock Holmes, to Harrison Ford in Presumed Innocent or Prime Suspect, and to John Grisham. So, as a society, we are surrounded by the law in our music, movies, books, television, news and politics. Why, then, does the public still perceive our profession so negatively? We clearly train hard, acquire valuable skills, dedicate years of study and work in a fascinating area! Yet the Competition and Markets Authority has investigated the legal services sector, identifying problems with competition in our industry, and the Federation of Small Businesses similarly reported a number of concerns this year.
As a solicitor for many years, I accept my profession has a certain negative perception to many people 54 Modern Claims
Some will act, others investigate and wait for proof, some let others decide for them, some do nothing and ignore the rules of nature, becoming extinct Mike Cherry, the FSB National Chairman, said: “Many small businesses could benefit from greater use of legal services, but currently the market is complex and difficult to navigate”, amongst other comments ranging from transparency and costs to complaints handling. There is a clear challenge for us all as legal professionals to overcome such negative perceptions. This is not a new challenge, however. As a lawyer working in the crime and regulatory arena, I remember my career commencing with instruction taking under the Green Form advice scheme. Other challenges of high street crime practice then included the Narey Court system being introduced with court duty appointment and solicitor of choice and legal aid franchises, to name but a few.
Evolution
The following statement, often attributed to Charles Darwin, states: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change”. In true legal fashion, however, the authenticity of this quote has been investigated. The “Darwin Correspondence Project” based at Cambridge University classify this statement into the category of Six things Darwin never said. A Louisiana State University professor, Leon C Megginson, in a professional speech in 1963, is credited with the following remarks: “Yes, change is the basic law of nature. But the changes wrought by the passage of time affects individuals and institutions in different ways. According to Darwin’s Origin of Species, it is not the most intellectual of the species that survives, and it is not the strongest of the species that survives; the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Applying this theoretical concept to us as individuals, we can state that the civilisation that is able to survive is the one that is able to adapt to the changing physical, social, political, moral and spiritual environment in which it finds itself.” So, as a profession, will we rise to the occasion? Understand our clients better? Talk to them? Use technology as a tool and become educators and empower our clients? Some will act, others investigate and wait for proof, some let others decide for them, some do nothing and ignore the rules of nature, becoming extinct. Which are you? Gary Gallen is CEO of rradar.
November 2016
FEATURES
Getting Write-Offs Right What can you do to solve the age-old problem in motor claims where customers disagree with engineers on the value of their vehicle in a write-off scenario? Having dealt with this scenario for years, S&G Response designed an innovative new programme to specifically address the problem – a vehicle replacement programme to source substitute transport in the event of a total loss.
M
odern Claims speaks to Paul Wilkinson, the designer of the project, to find out why a need was identified and what the ongoing benefits to the consumer are.
What was the reason for investing the time and manpower into developing a new service?
As a business, we deal with hundreds of total losses per month and despite using Glasses Retail Valuation wherever appropriate, they are largely the most emotive Head of Claim to negotiate and agree with a customer. Many customers develop an affection for their vehicle, and condemning it to the salvage yard can be like waving goodbye to an old friend. Dealing with extrication can be costly, both in terms of the emotional price, and the cost of processing the numerous phone calls, emails and general aggravation that accompanies it. Like many other companies in the motor claim sector, we are always looking for ways to enhance the customer experience. Our drivers are commercial - it’s about competitive advantage - but by placing the customer outcome at the centre of the process, we have driven ongoing growth. So, following a total loss event, we have developed a service to source replacement vehicles regardless of make, model or customer budget. We have partnered with a wide range of vehicle suppliers for both new and used vehicles and are providing access to a comprehensive array of funding options.
How have customers reacted to the service?
The customer journey is paramount to our principles, so we are consistently measured and benchmarked on how we perform. Any new innovation that can push up our customer ratings by even a couple of percent is worth considering investment in. When you consider that between 20- 25% or so of customers have their vehicle written off, we thought that there was a real opportunity to influence and positively affect their experience. Once they have agreed the pre-accident value of their vehicle and received a cheque from their insurer, they are without mobility and are left with the prospect of scouring the market place for a replacement vehicle on their own. This may suit some customers, but our research shows that there is a significant portion of people who found the process either daunting, too time intensive, and are unsure where to start. We take away all the unwanted hassle with our Vehicle Replacement Programme.
Dealing with extrication can be costly, both in terms of the emotional price, and the cost of processing the numerous phone calls, emails and general aggravation that accompanies it We initially launched a pilot scheme to measure the likely uptake as well as test the supply chain and refine the process. The results were very encouraging from both our suppliers and customers alike. The way it works is quite simple, as we have built the service into our current workflow and it falls seamlessly into place. Once the customer’s damaged vehicle has been inspected and deemed a total loss, our call handler will talk to the customer and offer our help to find a replacement vehicle rather than following the old script of saying “Thanks, your cheque is in the post, goodbye”. If the customer shows interest in the scheme, they are guided through the process and the options open to them. The team will ascertain exactly what the client’s requirements for a replacement vehicle are, including budget and funding options. Armed with this information, the team will liaise with our vehicle suppliers to tailormake a solution for the customer. The customer can decide if this suits their needs or not – they can walk away at anytime. We now work on behalf of a number of insurance companies and intermediaries who spend significant amounts of money on attracting new customers, only to lose them a year down the line to a competitor. When we approached them with this concept, they saw this service as a benefit to their policyholders and could see that it would help them retain their policyholder by: a) Providing an enhanced service and improved customer journey; b) Directing them back for their new motor cover, preventing them falling into the welcoming hands of a rival. Paul Wilkinson, Business Development Manager, S&G Response
® Proclaim is the only Practice e v a H Management Software solution Endorsed by the Law Society. you heard? CALL 01274 704 100 www.eclipselegal.co.uk/lawsociety lawsociety@eclipselegal.co.uk
2016 10 Rebmark Ad v3 paths.indd 1
10/10/2016 14:20
FEATURES
The Autonomous Approach The annual Association of British Insurers (ABI) Motor Conference took place on 18th October at the Grange Tower Bridge Hotel, London. Brendan Gurrie, Modern Claims, takes an in-depth look at the autonomous vehicles panel session. he annual ABI Motor Conference is one of the most highly anticipated dates in the claims calendar, and following the announcement that the government had postponed the Osborne reforms, this year’s event was one of the most important yet. Now that there is more clarity on the Ministry of Justice’s plans, it was an opportune time for the industry to come together to tackle another fast approaching disruptor. The role of motor insurance for autonomous vehicles, by far the most popular breakout session of the day, gave attendees the chance to better understand and ask questions about the unknown that is the autonomous vehicle. The panel was chaired by James Dalton, Director of General Insurance Policy, ABI; Matthew Avery, Director of Insurance Research, Thatcham Research; Martin Ellis, Policy Lead on Insurance and Automated Vehicles, Department for Transport; Phil GlynDavies, Senior Manager, Vehicle Safety, Jaguar Land Rover and David Williams, Technical Director, AXA Insurance.
T
Dalton first asked the panel about how confident they were that insurers would be ready to insure autonomous vehicles from the time of their suggested introduction in 2021. Williams said he was “really confident”, referencing the insurance industry’s ability to respond to challenges and the fact that this change will come from shifting liability, not establishing a totally new product. Ellis agreed, remarking that the insurance industry have had a “real can-do attitude” towards the government’s consultation on autonomous vehicles, and discussing the importance of engaging with insurers about the topic.
The capabilities of driverless cars
Avery questioned whether consumers would understand the technology well enough to use it safely, pointing out already existing terms like “autopilot” used by manufacturers are not very helpful, as they are “misleading to the consumer”. He stated that insurers “will play a key part in informing consumers about what autonomy is”, reinforcing the importance of communication between manufacturers and insures in the lead up to autonomy. This is something Glyn-Davies agreed with, acknowledging manufacturers’ “duty of care on how autonomy is publicised”. Nick Starling, Parliamentary Advisory Council of Transport Safety, asked the panel whether autonomy would come in different stages, rather than all at once. Williams noted that Tesla have claimed they will not accept responsibility for accidents involving their autonomous vehicles, and that to him, this means“they will never produce a fully autonomous car”, just an “increasingly technologically advanced car”. Avery said
November 2016
Insurers will play a key part in informing the consumers about what autonomy is, and what it isn’t Matthew Avery, Thatcham Research that the first customer experience of autonomy could come in 2018/19, when you could “let the vehicle steer for you”, as well as operating the throttle, on motorways.
Rules and regulation
Ellis then pointed out that regulatory modifications would need to be carried out before drivers could use autonomous vehicles, including changes to “the Highway Code, the Road Traffic Act, and driver distraction rules”, but also stated that the Modern Transport Bill is giving insurers “clarity” about their role in preparing insurance products for autonomous vehicles. Ashish Khanna, LEK Consulting, asked the panel whether the UK’s position at the forefront of autonomous vehicles was at risk of falling behind Michigan, California and Singapore. In the case of the former two states, Williams said you can “almost write them off,” as the United States is too fragmented to take the lead on autonomy. However, he predicted that “the timetable will be changed” to ensure safety, but that this decision couldn’t be criticised. Edward Smith, Sabre Insurance Co Ltd, then questioned the panel about whether consumers might misuse autonomous technology for drink driving. Glyn-Davies explained that whoever is in charge of the vehicle would be charged as if they were in complete control of it, likening the abuse to “accompanying a learner driver whilst drunk” and saying it’s something people don’t do. However, Avery pointed out the difficulty in identifying just when the driver is in control of a car, claiming that trials to highlight this by putting flashing lights on the cars in autonomy mode have only encouraged other people on the road to “have a go” at the car, “purely because it is autonomous”. Ellis explained that he is also the policy lead for drunk driving, and he “categorically” said there were “no plans to allow people to operate driverless cars whilst over the limit”. He did, however, speculate that drivers may be able to use their mobile phones at the wheel of an autonomous vehicle “at least sometime in the near future”.
Modern Claims 57
HAVE YOU SEEN OUR SISTER PUBLICATION?
OF THE BUSINESS
ISSUE 25 August 2016 ISSN 2050-5744
LAW
THE BUSINESS OF
LAW
ISSUE 26 October 2016 ISSN 2050-5744
NEIL SMITH
t. We are flying the the capital marke more direct peers within our business and and lts resu “We don’t have any our we report al investors” flag in terms of how get our message across to extern we importantly, how Sponsored by
MIRANDA BRAW N “Ensuring fair and equal access to bus iness is important, economy and soc for our iety, and for com panies and individ uals.”
Supported by
Supported by
Sponsored by
To arrange your free subscription please email liam@charltongrant.co.uk
www.modernlawmagazine.co.uk
FEATURES
I can categorically say there are no plans to allow people to operate driverless cars whilst over the limit Martin Ellis, Department for Transport Delving into data
One of the potential benefits autonomous vehicles can bring is the acquisition of valuable data on driving habits. Graeme Trudgill, British Insurance Brokers’ Association (BIBA), asked Glyn-Davies if manufacturers would be prepared to share data gained by their vehicles. He responded that the data is “used in conjunction with algorithms” and“isn’t just raw data”. It is therefore important to understand how that data can be shared “outside of those algorithms that are required to process it”. He added that some of the data will be perceived as “proprietary”, and not suitable for sharing, and so there needs to be a “country-wide agreement” as to how the data is used. Avery emphasised the importance of clarifying which vehicles have full autonomous capability, as in the event of a collision a driver may argue that they weren’t in control of the vehicle. He said that data needs to be “open and accessible” in order to understand who is liable when there is a crash. Williams agreed, saying, “if we don’t get access to this data, how are we able to price competitively, or make judgements about liability?” He claimed that without being able to price properly, drivers would have to purchase insurance from a manufacturer, meaning “if there is a collision, it’s possible that the only person in possession of the relevant data is one of the defendants”, a situation he branded as “completely wrong”. Ellis expressed an “expectation and hope” for a “collaborative approach”, explaining “it’s in everyone’s best interest to determine what caused an accident and who is liable”, and “ending up in court all the time” would mean “market failure”.
Educating the public on the capabilities of driverless vehicles was a recurring point in the session, and Tim Marlow, Ageas, asked the panel how this could be done. Avery said that “a lot of responsibility lies with the manufacturer” through the “training of technicians and salespeople”. He also suggested a possible need to“re-evaluate” what goes into driving tests and the highway code, in order to “cover autonomous vehicles”. He expressed doubt that the public would be so quick to accept driverless cars, explaining that drivers are “very concerned and conservative” with current driving systems and claiming people with adaptive cruise control only use it “about 20% of the time”. He also advised that MOTs and the upkeep of the technology must be considered, calling this “a big win for insurers”. The discussion then turned to the role of insurers in the world of autonomous vehicles. Williams was confident that insurers would still have a place. He said even in a situation “wherein motor manufacturers are solely responsible”, that they’re not used to dealing with motor insurance claims “like we are”, and therefore the insurer would still have an important role to play. He stated that insurers “need to be consistent” and “need to be proud to be facilitating safer roads and lower insurance premiums”. Brendan Gurrie is Editorial Assistant at Charlton Grant Ltd.
The trolley problem
Next, David Cresswell, ABP Club, asked the panel what their thoughts were on the trolley problem, which questions whether an autonomous vehicle will choose to save its passengers or pedestrians should the situation arise. Glyn-Davies said that as original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) they need a “consensus that’s supported by legislators” that will let them“define a framework for making these kinds of decisions”. Avery predicted that autonomous vehicles will simply obey the rules of the road, and “will stick within their lanes” and “try to avoid the crash as best they can”. Williams thought that the trolley problem is “completely the wrong question”, because autonomous cars “are going to be so much better at avoiding accidents than we are”, and “they won’t even have to make that decision.”
Insurers need to be proud to be facilitating safer roads and lower insurance premiums David Williams, AXA
November 2016
Modern Claims 59
CASE STUDIES
Eclipse’s Proclaim Practice Management System supports new start-up, Virtus Law Ltd ew start-up firm, Virtus Law Ltd, is implementing the Law Society Endorsed Proclaim Practice Management solution from Eclipse Legal Systems.
N
The new Manchester-based firm has been founded by Director Rossanna Schurink Darren Gower and will be primarily focusing on Personal Injury. Having worked in a number of large national firms, Rossanna decided to set up Virtus Law Ltd to provide clients with expert advice and guidance through a process which can often be traumatic. This ambitious new start-up plans to expand in the future, continuing to offer a personal touch that can often be lost in larger practices. Virtus Law Ltd will be implementing a ready-to-go Proclaim Personal Injury solution enabling a secure and instantaneous approach to matter management. Proclaim’s integrated practice accounting and financial management toolset will provide a seamless approach to billing and overall practice management, supplying a detailed analysis of operations.
Additionally, the practice will take advantage of Proclaim’s integration with the MoJ’s RTA and EL/PL Claims portal via a seamless Application-to-Application (A2A) method, enabling comprehensive management of claims through the Proclaim desktop. Furthermore, as a solution to the ‘know your customer’ problem, Virtus Law Ltd will benefit from the integration between Eclipse and CRIF, the ID/AML checking service. Ideal for a busy new start-up practice, the ID checking service will allow Virtus Law Ltd to request ‘one-click’ ID and AML checks directly from the Proclaim desktop, with search results returned directly to the relevant client files. Rossanna Schurink, Director and Founder of Virtus Law Ltd, comments: “As a new start-up business, it was imperative that I implemented the correct Practice Management solution to help me reduce as many administrative overheads as possible, and therefore focus solely on my clients. Proclaim stood out due to its unrivalled reputation and experience within the market, providing me with the confidence to know the software is entirely future proof.” For further information, please contact Darren Gower, Marketing Director at Eclipse Legal Systems, part of Capita plc, via darren.gower@eclipselegal. co.uk or call 01274 704100. Alternatively, visit www.eclipselegal.co.uk
S&G Response revs up for further growth with a trio of senior appointments otor claims outsource specialists S&G Response are gearing up for further expansion, with the appointment of three industry experts to deliver the increasingly complex contracts the business is securing.
M
First to join is Sarah Wilcox, who was previously Sales Director at Northgate plc before spending five years as Group Head of Key Accounts at Nationwide Accident Repairs plc. In that time, Sarah managed customers with an annual repair spend of over £40M, and with a particular attention to detail and service level adherence. Sarah is a champion of customer service and Sarah Wilcox delivery, ensuring client expectations are exceeded. Sarah joins the team as Head of Corporate Accounts, with the remit of developing S&G’s quickly growing reputation in the area of repair management and cost control. Louise Smith joined the company on the 1st November with an inter-departmental remit to drive process benefits, reduce costs, and focus on the delivery of marginal gains within the operation. Louise has 11 years Insurance industry experience, having previously held the position of Personal Motor Claims and RAC Accident Services Business Manager within Aviva. In that time, Louise championed Louise Smith customer and business process improvements across operations and the end-to-end motor claims value chain.
November 2016
The latest member of the team is Dan Chesney, who joins as Head of Commercial. Dan was previously Group Head of Marketing at Speed Medical, where he led a successful repositioning of the business managing a team who developed and delivered award-winning campaigns. An established “black-box” thinker, currently working to the Institute Dan Chesney of Leadership & Managements (ILM) highest qualification, Dan’s remit includes product, services and revenue development, and the strategic positioning of the company within its target markets. Commenting on the additions, Andy Whatmough, Managing Director said: “These appointments are an important and necessary next step in the development of S&G. We’ve seen some rapid growth over the last 24 months with customers requiring us to do more for them. Sarah, Louise and Dan will give the existing management team the necessary increase in bandwidth to continue to deliver the solutions our customers demand - on budget and on time.” For further information, please visit www.sandgresponse.co.uk
Modern Claims 61
10 MINUTES WITH
Simon Stanfield Q A
Has the industry changed drastically since you started working in it?
Since I entered the profession in the late 1990s, we have had the Civil Procedure Rules in 1999 that changed the civil litigation landscape, the introduction of predictable fees in 2003, the RTA Portal in 2010, LASPO in 2013, the vertical and horizontal extension of the Portal, MedCo, and now the small claims consultation. There have been many others as well. So the answer is most definitely, the industry has changed substantially.
Q A
What has been the key positive or negative impact of change in your area of the market?
Some of these changes, such as the formation of the Portal, have been positive, creating a more efficient process for managing claims, but many have been too rushed with not enough thought put into the possible consequences. Sadly, it appears the Ministry of Justice is about to make these same mistakes.
Q A
Who inspires you and why?
My father, who is a wonderful and remarkable man. I’ve worked alongside some great people in the claimant community and there are obviously lots of truly inspirational people both here in the UK and internationally. But he is really the one who has and continues to have the biggest impact on me.
Q A
Have you had/got a mentor? If so, what was the most valuable piece of advice they gave you?
Yes, I’ve been fortunate to have several during my nearly 20 years in the profession, but they are all too modest to appreciate me naming them. Collectively, they have imparted four pieces of advice that I’ve tried never to forget: do not miss limitation dates; comply with court directions; have an excellent attention to detail coupled with a willingness to go the extra mile; and develop your technical ability.
Q A
If you were not in your current position, what would you be doing?
Some of these changes, such as the formation of the Portal, have been positive, creating a more efficient process for managing claims, but many have been too rushed
Despite all the challenges, I’ve never regretted studying law as my first degree, which set me off into my career with Colemans and now Simpson Millar. I love my job and, having recently taken over as the Chair of MASS, it is certainly going to be an interesting couple of years with the proposed changes. I guess I might have been an accountant or something instead, but in my fantasy world I’d have been a professional sportsman.
Simon Stanfield is the new Chair of Motor Accident Solicitors Society (MASS).
SAVE THE DATE Doctors Chambers Modern Claims Awards Thursday 27th April 2017 New Dock Hall, Leeds CONTACT Event enquiries | ellie.campbell@charltongrant.co.uk | 01765 600909 Sponsorship enquiries | kate@charltongrant.co.uk | 01765 600909
62 Modern Claims
November 2016
Finding the right outsourced claims management provider just got easier
Industry leading claims management… direct from solicitors. As one of the most experienced organisations in outsourced claims handling, our focus is on innovation, efficiency and process development. This - coupled with our deep knowledge of the personal injury market - means we deliver the highest level on-shore customer experience for all claim types. • Innovative solutions
• Process development expertise
• A focussed, end-to-end customer journey • Proven, post-LASPO model
• FNOL, Portal, out-of-Portal, litigation and multi-track claims
To find out how we can help you, call 0800 038 0758 www.simpsonmillar.co.uk
Simpson Millar LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales: No. OC313936. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. Registration number 424940.
Wondering how to profit in the new era of PI? The Personal Injury sector has changed – to compete, you have to use the very best Case Management system.
Proclaim is the UK’s leading Case Management software solution, in use by 23,000 professionals. Proclaim maximises efficiencies, cuts costs and enables you to provide a superb service experience. 3 3 3 3 3 3
Portal-ready for RTA and EL/PL claims Automates procedures and document production Manages your full range of claim types ABS-ready – manages everything through one system Provides instant online services for clients and customers Integrates with business partners
Get the competitive edge
Call 01274 704 100
visit eclipselegal.co.uk or email info@eclipselegal.co.uk