header-logo header-logo

28 January 2016
Issue: 7684 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Insurance fraud report “hijacked”

Apil claims Insurance Fraud Taskforce went far beyond its remit

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (Apil) has accused the government and insurance sector of “hijacking” a year-long review into insurance fraud.

The Insurance Fraud Taskforce (IFT) published its final report last week. Its recommendations include greater data sharing between the insurance sector and regulatory bodies through databases such as MyLicence. It proposed that recoverable costs be reduced by 50% where a minor personal injury claim is notified six months after the accident, a system of predictable damages for soft tissue injuries and a rebuttable evidential presumption that no injury was suffered where claims are lodged after a specified period of time.

Jonathan Wheeler, president of Apil, said he welcomed the opportunity to discuss the topic with “colleagues from the other side of the fence”.

He added, however, that it was “all the more disappointing that the outcomes of those discussions were seemingly not taken seriously by the Taskforce; that the Taskforce went far beyond its remit in its approach to issues such as the small claims limit and its recommendations to effectively cut legal representation for people whose claims are brought more than six months from the date of an injury”.

“The work of the Taskforce appears to have been hijacked by the agenda of the insurance industry and this government in its plans to do away with the rights of the genuinely injured to compensation,” he said.

However, insurance lawyers welcomed the proposals. Duncan Rutter, president of the Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL), says: “In particular FOIL supports the aim of encouraging the public to regard insurance fraud as a criminal activity.

“We hope these recommendations will gain widespread support, including from organisations supporting claimants and that going forward both claimant and defendant bodies can work together to tackle dishonest claims.”

Welcoming the report, the Association of British Insurers says it will do “whatever it takes to protect honest customers”.

Justice minister Lord Faulks said fraudulent and exaggerated claims must be tackled.

Issue: 7684 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll