JOHN McNulty continues his scrutiny of how claims for compensation work, and whether the UK now has a compensation culture

Q I have been injured, but I do not like the idea of being a Personal Injury Claimant. It just seems like an easy way to make money.

A You only get the award that you are entitled to. Your injuries will be independently assessed by a medical expert; any monetary losses you claim will have to be proved.

Q Why have I heard of people receiving thousands of pounds more for an injury, similar to mine?

A Each case is unique. The monetary losses may be very different. One week’s loss of earnings for a high- flying executive may be significantly greater than that for a clerical officer. I remember being involved in a case concerning an amateur boxer who was tipped to be an ABA Champion, who had an injury to his hand at work (he was a bricklayer). Assessing his compensation, we had to take into account his loss of potential earnings.

Q Is there not a danger of this country becoming like the USA, which has a much more litigious culture?

A The two systems are markedly different. Compensation claims in the UK are considered by judges, whereas in the USA they are made by juries. In the US, there is a system of punitive damages applying to compensation claims that does not operate in the UK. Hence you get the famous claim of the person suing Starbuck for thousands of pounds for burning themselves on a spilt cup of coffee. Such a claim could not be made in the UK.

Q Is it not the case that injury solicitors exploit claims for their own financial gain and they are simply prone to drag on, making the solicitors more and more money?

A This is not the case. Protocols have been agreed between solicitors and defendant’s insurance companies to try to reach settlement of cases before any court proceedings can begin. It is only when there is a failure to admit liability or admit that the accident caused the injury that cases are likely to go on.