Cycling UK has hailed a “victory for common sense” after the government announced today that cyclists will be exempted from legal reforms which could have affected their ability to claim compensation for injuries that were someone else’s fault.
The charity has campaigned for more than a year and a half for cyclists to be excluded from the proposed reforms, first announced by the government in December 2016, to raise the small claims limit from £1,000 to £5,000.
The measure is primarily aimed at curbing spurious whiplash claims from occupants of motor vehicles involved in a collision, something that costs the insurance industry millions of pounds every year.
By raising the small claims limit to £5,000, successful litigants would be unable to recover legal costs if awarded damages below that amount, compared to the £1,000 that currently applies.
But with an estimated 70 per cent of civil cases brought by cyclists who have been injured resulting in compensation below £5,000 being awarded, most would not have received the full amount due to having to pay their own compensation under the proposed reforms.
Today, during the second reading of the bill in the House of Commons as Parliament returned from recess, Secretary of State for Justice David Gauke confirmed that cyclists would not be subject to the new rules.
Other vulnerable road users such as horse riders, pedestrians and motorcyclists will likewise be exempt.
The small claims limit for them will however be raised to £,2,000, which Cycling UK highlights is above the £1,500 recommended by the House of Commons Justice Select Committee.
Duncan Dollimore, the charity’s head of campaigns, said: “Cycling UK is relieved the government has at last listened to reason and dropped plans to increase the small claims limit for vulnerable road users to £5,000. This is a victory for common sense and ensures the interests of victims are put first.
“Increasing the small claims limit from £1,000 to £5,000 would have cheated pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists from full compensation after being injured on our roads.
“Common injuries including among these groups include fractured collarbones and wrists, all of which usually sit below the proposed £5,000 threshold.
However, if previous proposals had gone through, 70 per cent of vulnerable road users would have been prevented from recovering their legal costs even when someone else is to blame for their injuries.
“That’s neither fair nor right” he said, adding that with today’s announcement, “both balance and victims’ rights have been restored.”
Add new comment
6 comments
With all respect, the “government’s” reason for action is the power of the insurance industry, not some apolitical knowledge of whether particular claims have merit. My point is there’s a justice system to sort out claims that insurers should be compelled to pay from spurious ones. When politicians say we need to shut the courthouse door people (especially cyclists and our loved ones who may need to rely on the justice system) should be aware who is going to profit, and shouldn’t be cheering.
Just curious @Simon MacMichael how do you know this entire category of smaller claims is “spurious”? Where I come from that is for the judge or jury to decide, rather than the insurance industry, or law-makers they fund, or bike website authors. Spurious claims generally fail such that a solicitor who pursues one is taking on a poor risk. Always the insurance industry wants to collect premiums and not pay claims. It’s not time to cheer when a profit-seeking industry succeeds in undermining public confidence in the justice system or shutting the courthouse door on one group. Next time it will be a group that includes you or me or people we care about.
It says there are spurious whiplash claims that cost millions, not that the entire category is spurious.
That's unfair. Spurious claims (particularly for whiplash) are the government's reason for lloking to increase the limit - and not the opinion of Simon or this site.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmjust/659/65904...
I think this is more of a problem for the personal injury industry rather than individuals. It simply prevents the ambulance chasing dregs of the market from racking up large legal bills for themselves to recover meagre injury compensation for the victim. The victim will now get their meagre payout directly from the insurer on the submission of a medical report.
This affects only the personal injury aspect of minor claims and should* make the process quicker and more straight forward for the claiment. For anything more serious or if you really think you deserve more then the option to engage a solicitor to assist in recovery is still there, but you may see an end to the no win / no fee culture when there is a distinct risk that the solicitor will not be able to reclaim their fees should the final award be below the threshold.
*And pigs may fly, but in theory....
Headline should be "Less shit news ..." since the limit is still being increased to £2,000