10 Years Of No Win No Fee Compensation Claims

The legal profession recently celebrated 10 years of ‘no win, no fee’ personal injury compensation claims. Since their introduction in 1998, ‘no win, no fee’ or Conditional Fee Agreements as they are also known, have been popular and controversial in equal measure.

It was claimed that the purpose of conditional fee agreements was to provide financial help claimants, who might not otherwise be able to make personal injury compensation claims. On the one hand, the advent of ‘no-win, no fee’ opened up access to justice to thousands of people who had been injured in accidents that were not their fault. On the other, cynics of the system have accused it of creating a compensation culture, and if anything, limiting people’s access to justice.

Background

No-win no-fee deals first arrived in 1995, for a range of court cases in England and Wales. Three years late, they were extended to all civil cases, apart from family courts.

The 1999 Access to Justice Act, introduced in April 2000, increased the number of no-win no-fee deals significantly, as judges could now make the losing side pick up the bill.

At the same time, legal aid for personal injury cases was abolished, making ‘no win, no fee’ the only viable choice for people in their quest for justice.

At the time of their introduction, Labour Minister Geoff Hoon heralded No-win no-fee as a step in the right direction, stating: “no win, no fee conditional agreements will result in better access to justice”

“Access will be given to the many people who fall between those who are very rich or those who are so poor that they qualify for legal aid.”

Some have argued on the contrary, that ‘no win, no fee’ has in fact limited people’s access to justice and that the move was simply intended to ease the burden on legal aid funds.

Traditionally, for a case to meet the criteria for legal aid, it has to be reviewed by an independent regulator who must be satisfied that there is a reasonable case.

In the case of ‘no win, no fee’, the case is reviewed by the solicitor directly, and they have a vested interest, as they are responsible for the financial burden of the case.

As a result, cases which should be brought to trial but are deemed to be high risk could be turned away.

Ethical Legal Practice

Liverpool Personal injury compensation claims company Aegis Law have a fully ethical policy of deciding which cases to take on as Gina Simpson LLB states:

“We are not claims farmers; we are in the business of getting justice for people. Of course we look at the chance of success, to decide whether or not we take on personal injury compensation claims, but this is not our sole motivation. We judge each case individually on its merits.”

Article by Gina

About the Author: Gina is well known author and has been writing Articles for aegis-law.co.uk, the site provide specialist legal advice for family law and personal injury compensation claims throughout the Wirral. For more information visit www.aegis-law.co.uk