Overhaul of clin neg fees wouldn't be so bad

They argue that fixed fees will limit access to justice, adding insult to the injury already inflicted by negligent medical practitioners and those failing ?to deliver adequate patient care. Their fears are understandable. 

The primary motivation is to halt the NHS’s rising legal bill. ?In a climate of public spending cuts, the latest headline figure ?of £1.3bn in fees and damages is politically and economically hard to take.

Also, previous attempts to streamline the claims process and therefore reduce legal costs on both sides are yet to bear fruit. It’s hard to find anyone in the legal or health sector who believes that the much-heralded ‘duty of candour’ (where medical professionals admit to mistakes when injuries have been inflicted negligently) has taken root.

It’s also possible to argue that radical change is not necessary as the impact of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 changes on clinical negligence costs are yet to be assessed.

Despite all of this, the optimist in me can’t help thinking that aspiring to a system of fair fixed fees is actually a significant opportunity to correct many of the failings in the current system and deliver a better solution all (some say that I’m a dreamer).

Any medical negligence solicitor worth the name ?would welcome a faster and fairer model. Greater speed ?and simplicity means a quicker turnover and shorter gap between hours accrued and ?fees paid, which makes it easier ?to run a business and manage ?cash flow.

The key is for the whole process to incentivise behaviours that promote ?a fast and fair settlement – for example, a true duty of candour with admittance on the letter of claim where appropriate. Also, both sides can agree to use a single expert witness where relevant, with sufficient flexibility to incur larger costs for experts when needed.

If trust is to be maintained, both sides need to play ball, ?and therefore the use of financial penalties and rewards should be employed to keep all concerned on the straight and narrow path towards fair resolution.

Operational change must ?also be part of the solution. ?The changes to remedy the well-reported failings of the NHS must continue with pace – harm fewer patients and bills will fall. 

Similarly, law firms need ?to look at new processes of managing claims, ensuring clients are moved seamlessly through the claims process ?with the appropriate level ?of oversight and expertise at each stage. 

We are on the inevitable path to a lower legal bill for the NHS, but that doesn’t have to mean ?a worse system. Eliminating wasted time, accepting the obvious, and focusing time and resources on the complicated can benefit all concerned.

Ed Fletcher is CEO of medical negligence and serious injury law firm Fletchers Solicitors @EdwardBFletcher www.fletcherssolicitors.co.uk

Copyright & permissions