An open account (Compensation culture)

Member Name: theworker

Product:	Compensation culture
Date:	31/03/08 (124 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: Future Financial Protection

Disadvantages: Open To Abuse

After reading a number of reviews on compensation culture, I thought I would throw my hat into the ring, primarily from a legal perspective, and moreover my own views; which ultimately is what doo you is about. Working for a law firm dealing in personal injury and employment tribunal representation I hope to give some insight on how this works, as there are a few reviews that talk a good game, and then bring it all down to "my taxpaying money that funds all this." Not necessarily so. I would like to offer my most sincere apologies in advance for what may be deemed as a banal and eye watering boring account of this in legal terms.
Compensation is a vast and open array of legal complexities. For the purposes of the review I will stick to the "no win, no fee", "where there is a blame there is a claim" and my personal favourite; "fast cheques for car wrecks."
The majority of claims for compensation in this country are for Road Traffic Accidents. RTA's account for around 80% of all direct suing, and is literally between a driver and everybody injured as a result of his or her negligence. In fact the term "accident" should not be used. In the eye of the law there is no excuse for crashing a car; there is always somebody at fault. People don't just "come out of nowhere", or even if the driver in front "slams on" then in adherence to our driving lessons and the highway code, we have either been driving too fast, not watching where we are going or need our eyes testing. Now that is not my personal opinion, but it does make you think. How many "accidents" are avoidable?
Now bearing in mind the view of the law on this matter if somebody has driven into the back of you, then you are more than likely thinking, "why should I pay for the damage to my car?" You may have to take a day, a week off or even a year from work with no pay. You may even be paralysed. So your first step is to call your insurance company. And believe me; they cannot wait for that call. Firstly you may have to pay the excess on your vehicle. You will then submit your details about the accident and Mr Insurer is rubbing his hands together, for if you decide to claim he will sell your claim onto a solicitor for a fee of around £500 for your details. Can't be bad can it? So far you have only just crashed your car and your insurer has got at £700 out of the accident.
You may decided not to claim at the outset, but are walking down the high street when we are more or less accosted by a sharp young man in a tie, "have you had an accident in the last three years?" He questions, grinning from ear to ear. (Three years in accordance with the limitation act 1990, children have three years from the date of their 18th birthday to claim.) Yes, I have actually, you reply. And in a total breach of the law, your details are sold on to a solicitor for £500.
If you are to claim, go direct to a solicitor - cut out the middleman and stick with one of the most regulated industries out there; the law.
A point that a few people have made concerns the varying degrees of compensation awarded. E.g. A man beaten up outside his house only received £1200 for a broken jaw, yet the chap across the road who doesn't even work got £3000 for whiplash.
The reason behind this is that acts of a criminal nature such as an assault is paid for by the government through the CICA (criminal compensation authority) we pay this compensation from our taxes, as thugs and terrorists rarely carry brutality insurance, in order to pay their victims. All drivers (if insured) will have their insurance company pay this out, so awards are much higher and not a strain on them.
The same applies to uninsured drivers, due to the increasing number of uninsured on the road insurance comapanies are having to donate 5% of each policy to cover compensation awards for drivers hit by these motorists. The more unisured on the road, the more your policy will increase.

Local councils often have private insurance too, so if claimed against it is not our direct taxpaying that is spent on that. As for the morality of claiming, I don't personally see anything wrong with it - if genuine of course. Part and parcel of this life is that there are many schemers and no good doers, who will take advantage of the system; primarily your insurance company. There is a continuous pot of money here that flows between claimant, insurance companies and the government, and as easy as it is to poke at the compensation scheme we have in this country, I think that we all sleep a little easier knowing if we are severely injured, then we can take care of our family; financially at least.

Summary: Provoking