David Prosser: How to put the brakes on personal-injury claims
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Outlook Admiral, the car insurer that shocked the market yesterday with results mired by the cost of personal-injury claims, has an odd take on the debate about reforming the law. Unlike the Association of British Insurers, it does not want a ban on referral fees, earned by insurers that pass claims to lawyers, but a cap on legal fees.
To be fair to Admiral, its motivation does not appear to be a cynical regard for its own referral income, since this accounts for just 5 per cent of profit. Rather, it says a ban would not attack the root cause of the problem – presumably greedy lawyers persuading people to sue insurers. That may be true, but a ban would at least make it more difficult for such lawyers to find would-be clients, a useful first step.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments