Reform of the Insurance Industry in Ireland

suicide_circus

Thats unfortunate but the rewards in this country are utterly insane and totally out of line with similar countries. They have to come down. Your solicitor, like the judges, has a personal interest in rewards remaining high.

Yurt2

New Zealand model please.

No-fault injury compensation for auto accidents rolled into motor tax and on fuel levies. Completely removes legal industry from the process as it is centrally administered.

Insuring the vehicle itself is not legally required.

I don't give fiddlers if someone's phone or laptop is insured, nor do I care if their Audi or Passat is written off or scratched. It's the people inside the vehicle the state should be concerned about, which the NZ system puts to the fore.

NZ, and some provinces in Canada operate this way and it works (the vast majority elect to take out insurance on the vehicle anyway, and it's affordable and no-nonsense).

If an Irish government tried to introduce this, the insurance lobby would go nuts and probably send out hit squads, because their rentier free-money scheme gig would be well and truly up.

Yurt2

yabadabado wrote: »

I don't think anyone has a problem when someone is compensated for injuries sustained .
If you are injuried or your property is damaged then it's only right to be fairly compensated.

The issues are with the people who are making fraudulent or frivolous claims and are paid out handsomely when in reality it's a scam or completely at odds with their injuries.

There are people in this country who are actively looking for ways to make claims with several payouts made over the years.

In this country it seems if you are injured because of your own stupidity the first thing to do is see who you can blame to get a few grand compo.

Research a couple of years back indicates that fraudulent or dubious claims add about 50 euro to peoples' car insurance annually. Not defending dubious claims, but given that there are billions of euro of car insurance premiums collected here annually, something entirely else is going on with the insurance sham in Ireland. Uncompetitive cartel behaviour.

And the lobby spends money hand over fist on both ads about dodgy claims, and on PR firms convincing policymakers that dodgy claims are the reason for the outrageous premiums. The problem, while doubtless there, is ridiculously overstated and designed to distract from sh*tty behaviour from the industry.

Not overtly having a go at you here, but you're not the only one that has swallowed that hook line and sinker.

fritzelly

Should be a disclaimer in any compensation rewards...

Should you have been where you were when it happened
Should you have been doing what you were doing when it happened
(and a good few other questions)

If the answer to any of the above is no then no payout and the solicitor wants his money thank you very much - just look at some of the ridiculous payouts because people are stupid or rather know how the law works and take advantage of it

Also should be made illegal for solicitors to chase clients to make a claim

FishOnABike

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

There needs to be a fine balance between adequately compensating a genuine case and making a chancer think twice about taking the risk. My suggestion would be for a basic cash settlement to be paid, in addition to paying for any ongoing treatment. The chancer won't be bothered with that

That would not be good for either the injured party or insurance companies.

The insurance companies would be left with open ended liabilities on their accounts whereas the current lump sum system allows a claim to be closed off.

The injured party could be left with ongoing expenses with nobody to pay for them. Just think of the number of insurance companies which have gone to the wall over the years, Quinn, Setanta, PMPA, etc...

If I was seriously injured as a twenty or thirty year old wouldn't like to be dependant on the certainty that an insurance company is still going to be around for the next sixty years to meet any ongoing payments.

CarProblem

angela1711 wrote: »

our solicitor still said that it would affect everyone

This isn't true - all talk of reform has focused on lower level injury awards. Catastrophic cases will not be impacted, in fact if the discount rate is lowered (likely) they'll increase. No impact studies carried out by firms has considered reductions in catastrophic awards. None

Solicitors love to present themselves as white knights standing up for clients - they (not unreasonably) are worried about their own income stream

Take the PIAB/Injuries Board. Actually increased awards but was still attacked by solicitors who felt (again probably correctly) their share of the pie was shrinking

Harry Palmr

This is pretty danming stuff if true and presumably it is

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/personal-injury-awards-expected-to-be-cut-despite-opposition-from-some-judges-40104160.html

Following leaks from the report, ISME last week wrote to Taoiseach Michéal Martin urging him to legislate for a cap on damages.

In letter to Justice Minister Helen McEntee yesterday ISME chief executive Neil McDonnell said a considerable number of judges had relatives actively involved in personal injuries litigation and that it would be inappropriate that they should be involved in consideration of the recommendations. He called for the Attorney General to communicate this to the Chief Justice.

A spokesman for Ms McEntee would not be drawn on the letter, but said the minister was awaiting the outcome of the deliberations.

Chinese walls really need putting in place.

Kivaro

Harry Palmr wrote: »

This is pretty danming stuff if true and presumably it is

In letter to Justice Minister Helen McEntee yesterday ISME chief executive Neil McDonnell said a considerable number of judges had relatives actively involved in personal injuries litigation and that it would be inappropriate that they should be involved in consideration of the recommendations. He called for the Attorney General to communicate this to the Chief Justice.

This is something that I highlighted in my previous post when I spoke about the tight knit legal community of family members of judges working in law firms around the country. I am amazed that somebody of importance actually came out in public and said it. It stinks to high heaven and the government better not capitulate to the obvious cronyism in the Irish legal system. We scoff when we read about corrupt practices happening in third world countries, and yet here in Ireland ............

Kivaro

Looks like the Judicial Council voted to adopt guidelines relating to personal injuries. Initially it was looking like they would not adopt these guidelines, but something/someone convinced them otherwise. These guidelines will replace the existing Book of Quantum, which is a good thing.

Also good to hear Minister McEntee saying today that if these reforms do not reduce our insurance costs, then Government will step in to make sure it happens.

BattleCorp

Kivaro wrote: »

Looks like the Judicial Council voted to adopt guidelines relating to personal injuries. Initially it was looking like they would not adopt these guidelines, but something/someone convinced them otherwise. These guidelines will replace the existing Book of Quantum, which is a good thing.

Also good to hear Minister McEntee saying today that if these reforms do not reduce our insurance costs, then Government will step in to make sure it happens.

Colour me sceptical when it comes to judges lowering awards. I would be delighted if that happens.

I regularly see PIAB awarding lads €15k to €20k for minor injuries that kept them out of work for a week or two. I'd be delighted to see more realistic awards but I won't hold my breath.

What happens if poor Jacinta or little Rhianna trip over a box in the supermarket? Surely we cant expect them to be happy with 4000 rather than 80,000..

Harry Palmr

On the face of it this is good news but proof is in the overall level of payouts from here on and what the renewals are in say a year (cos the effect won't be instant no matter what).

BattleCorp

Harry Palmr wrote: »

On the face of it this is good news but proof is in the overall level of payouts from here on and what the renewals are in say a year (cos the effect won't be instant no matter what).

Hopefully this will stop people with very very minor injuries from taking frivolous claims. One can only hope.

enricoh

Solicitors not happy about it, which is good news for 95% of the population!

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/judges-vote-to-slash-personal-injury-awards-but-cuts-dont-satisfy-insurance-costs-campaigners-40166009.html
Personal injuries solicitor and former Law Society president Stuart Gilhooly described the award cuts as “savage

Harry Palmr

Also, it happens but not nearly enough - arrest fraudsters and those who enable their actions.

Kivaro

BattleCorp wrote: »

Colour me sceptical when it comes to judges lowering awards. I would be delighted if that happens.

I think that is why Justice Minister McEntee immediately talked about government intervention if there was no reduction in insurance costs as a result of compensation reductions.

fritzelly

enricoh wrote: »

Solicitors not happy about it, which is good news for 95% of the population!

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/judges-vote-to-slash-personal-injury-awards-but-cuts-dont-satisfy-insurance-costs-campaigners-40166009.html
Personal injuries solicitor and former Law Society president Stuart Gilhooly described the award cuts as “savage

Wouldn't expect any less - easy money out the door now

BattleCorp

How long before the Book of Quantum is either revised or shown the door?

Kivaro

BattleCorp wrote: »

How long before the Book of Quantum is either revised or shown the door?

I believe that these new guidelines will replace the Book of Quantum.

BattleCorp

I found that PIAB was where the main problem was. Far too generous with their awards.

Awards by judges make the headlines but only about 5% - 6% of cases ever get in front of a judge.

Eric Cartman

They should weigh compensation for adults against income. Theres a massive issue with people who never work and never will work using PI as a lottery, would change their tune if they only got a few hundred quid

Neagra

BattleCorp wrote: »

I found that PIAB was where the main problem was. Far too generous with their awards.

Awards by judges make the headlines but only about 5% - 6% of cases ever get in front of a judge.

the piab was introduced supposedly to reform the system.
the injuries board in itself has increased the claim culture and the levels of payout.
the increased work required by the piab from medical professionals, engineers, solicitors, barristers, has increased costs considerably. These professionals will not reduce their fees, they are currently increasing them.
also note the insurers professional representatives will also not budge on their fees.

so that leaves the person bringing the claim as the fall guy which for me is wrong.
you surely cannot have a position following a RTA where the injured party gets LESS then the combined legal, medical and engineering professionals involved.

if they want to reform insurance pay-outs, then prosecute and jail parties taking fraudulent claims and investigate the professionals who prepared reports backing those claims.
that's all that's needed. simple and easy.

LuckyLloyd

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What happens if poor Jacinta or little Rhianna trip over a box in the supermarket? Surely we cant expect them to be happy with 4000 rather than 80,000..

One of the things that needs to change is allowing a divide and conquer narrative free reign in societal conversations around insurance. Premiums are artificially high across the board. Fraud is an over amplified explanation for why this is the case. Companies are operating in a cartel like fashion and the legal system feeds off compensation.

We all need to avoid buying into a finger pointing culture at “Jacinta” and instead vote for whichever political party promises to clip the wings of the industry via legislation.

El Gato De Negocios

Full guidelines here.

https://judicialcouncil.ie/assets/uploads/documents/Personal%20Injuries%20Guidelines.pdf

I've just glanced over it so far but one of the key changes is as follows.

Massive cuts in whiplash / soft tissue like injuries, brilliant to see.

Once implemented insurers must follow through with their promises of reducing premiums.

El Gato De Negocios

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

One of the things that needs to change is allowing a divide and conquer narrative free reign in societal conversations around insurance. Premiums are artificially high across the board. Fraud is an over amplified explanation for why this is the case. Companies are operating in a cartel like fashion and the legal system feeds off compensation.

We all need to avoid buying into a finger pointing culture at “Jacinta” and instead vote for whichever political party promises to clip the wings of the industry via legislation.

If you look at fraud in the literal sense it is over egged but insurance fraud has many faces. Cases where there was an accident and the person injured embellishes their injuries or symptoms is rampant, I see suspicious cases every day of the week. Anecdotal of course and you can choose to believe me or not, I don't particularly care, but fraud in insurance, particularly motor claims is endemic and imo driven largely by the amount of compensation available currently.

BattleCorp

El Gato De Negocios wrote: »

Full guidelines here.

https://judicialcouncil.ie/assets/uploads/documents/Personal%20Injuries%20Guidelines.pdf

I've just glanced over it so far but one of the key changes is as follows.

Massive cuts in whiplash / soft tissue like injuries, brilliant to see.

Once implemented insurers must follow through with their promises of reducing premiums.

Will PIAB use these guidelines or are they only for judges?

BattleCorp

El Gato De Negocios wrote: »

Full guidelines here.

https://judicialcouncil.ie/assets/uploads/documents/Personal%20Injuries%20Guidelines.pdf

I've just glanced over it so far but one of the key changes is as follows.

Massive cuts in whiplash / soft tissue like injuries, brilliant to see.

Once implemented insurers must follow through with their promises of reducing premiums.

I wonder will we see solicitors and barristers pushing (exaggerating) the special damages aspect of claims seeing as these guidelines appear to box off the general damages end of things?

cnocbui

BattleCorp wrote: »

I wonder will we see solicitors and barristers pushing (exaggerating) the special damages aspect of claims seeing as these guidelines appear to box off the general damages end of things?

A €100,000 non compensatable fee for lodging such actions would sort that.

BattleCorp

cnocbui wrote: »

A €100,000 non compensatable fee for lodging such actions would sort that.

That's not realistic though. Nor would it be fair to someone who has a valid claim but doesn't have the funds to pursue it. The courts shouldn't only be for the rich.

cnocbui

BattleCorp wrote: »

That's not realistic though. Nor would it be fair to someone who has a valid claim but doesn't have the funds to pursue it. The courts shouldn't only be for the rich.

Insurance shouldn't just be for the rich, either. The principle of the greater good has to prevail.