-
AA research shows drivers welcome independent medical panel
-
Independence of medical assessment is being challenged
-
11% see ‘nothing wrong’ in claiming for injury even if none was suffered
The panel was launched in April as part of a raft of Government reforms designed to slash the number of false whiplash injury claims that has soared, despite falling numbers of collisions on Britain’s roads.
Until launch of MedCo, claims management companies or solicitors could use their own retained doctors to make a diagnosis. Some such ‘examinations’ were even conducted by telephone. Under the new system, Medical Reporting Organisations (or MROs) must register with MedCo and confirm they have no financial links with claims firms or personal injury solicitors, so that claimants can be referred to them on a random basis.
The AA research showed that overall nearly eight out of 10 (79%) of respondents to the study(1) believe that MedCo will cut the number of people making whiplash injury claims, 36% strongly so.
However, 83% don’t believe the medical assessment alone goes far enough, agreeing that it is important to consider other circumstances such as damage to the vehicles or witness statements, so that an informed assessment of the likelihood and severity of injury can be made.
Just over half (54%) believe that collisions of such a low speed that no vehicle damage occurred should be dismissed as a matter of course.
And two thirds (66%) believe that where whiplash injury has been suffered, compensation should be paid through care provision such as physiotherapy – rather than in cash.
Stephen Gaywood, director of counter fraud at AA Insurance, says he welcomes these findings; particularly that compensation should in large part be in the form of medical treatment for the injury.
“Too many people are willing to make a whiplash injury claim even if they haven’t suffered injury and they are encouraged to do so by some unscrupulous claim firms. This isn’t a victimless crime because the cost of these claims is borne by motorists who pay around £50 more(2) for their car insurance as a result.”
However, Mr Gaywood has expressed concern that loopholes in the new process could be exploited by MROs setting up multiple registrations which could enable them to handle a disproportionate number of low-value whiplash injury cases, compromising the independence of the panel.
“The objective of MedCo is to provide a portal for independent MROs to assess claimants, removing a potential conflict of interest where they may be linked with personal injury claims solicitors.
“However it appears to be possible for a claims firm to make several local (or ‘Tier 2’) registrations under different names, all using the same medical practitioner, which would give an unfair advantage to claims management firms and solicitors referring cases,” he says. “The ministry of Justice recognises this threat and has issued a statement(3).
“Nevertheless, MedCo is in its early stages of development and it is an important step towards stemming the growing tide of those prepared to rip off their insurers.
“It should contain robust controls to ensure validation of legitimate claims as well as a distinct rehabilitation track for low-value whiplash claims, rather than cash. Most insurers would like to see that and it’s clear that most drivers think so too.
“Anyone who has been injured needs to receive appropriate treatment that enables them to get their life put back on course as quickly as possible.”
Mr Gaywood points out that earlier research by the AA(4) revealed that a startling 11% saw nothing wrong with making some money from insurers by claiming for non-existent injury.
“That’s a shocking indication of how much the concept of making a turn on an insurance claim has become embedded many peoples’ thinking,” he says.
“It’s important that effective ways are found to ensure that those who are genuinely injured are properly compensated as well as getting the rehabilitative treatment they need while blocking fraudulent claim attempts.
“We have informed the Ministry of Justice of our findings and I hope that they take them into account when they review how well the panel is working.”
|
