By Stephen Higham, solicitor

I’m pleased to confirm that the firm has recently been awarded corporate accreditation status from the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers.

Apil is one of the leading solicitor bodies whose sole aim is to work in the interests of accident victims. As one of the best personal injury firms in the country, we have been long-standing members.

After an exhaustive process we have been awarded this rare title which marks our firm out as an exceptional practice.

Also, five of our top solicitors (including 3 partners) have been awarded Senior Litigator status, another ‘kitemark’ recognising the high quality, dedicated lawyers we have.

We are proud to be associated with Apil (click on the link to read more about the work they do) and to be recognised in this way is a huge boost for us all.

You can read more about this in the news section (click on the link).

By Stephen Higham, solicitor.

The Lord Chancellor, Ken Clarke QC, recently announced that the government intends to implement most of the Jackson Reforms.

This is of concern to all of us, not just personal injury solicitors like me.

I have written about my concerns and the well-known legal writer and blogger, Mike Semple Piggott (writing as ‘Charon QC’), has kindly given them room on his website.

You can read, and comment, on my thoughts over at Charon QC.

By Stephen Higham, solicitor.

Our expert actions against the police solicitor Iain Gould is at it again.

Following his recent success on behalf of Audrey White, a campaigner who was assaulted at a stop the war rally, he has recently settled a claim for a grandmother following a horror CS gas assault by a West Yorkshire Policeman. The case highlights the issue of the police using CS gas to restrain people, and the importance of CCTV or mobile ‘phone footage to counter the often used defence that the police acted ‘reasonably’.

You can read the full story of how Iain Gould dealt with Debbie O’Reilly’s case on our website and on the BBC website.

By Stephen Higham, solicitor.

I’ve just written about a recent case my colleague Iain Gould dealt with.

He represented Audrey White, 59, a prominent member of the Stop the War coalition. She instructed him after being assaulted by police officers in Manchester at the Labour Party conference in 2008.

Mrs. White had the temerity to protest against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, holding a mock ‘cheque’ and wearing Gordon Brown facemask. For this provocative act the mask was forcibly removed from her and she was injured as she fell to the ground.

The police refused to apologise, so Iain Gould got involved. He forced them to admit that they acted unlawfully, pay Mrs. White compensation, and apologise in writing.

Mrs. White’s lawful protest has been vindicated, and her demand for justice heard. It is hoped that the police will learn from this mistake and think twice before acting unlawfully when faced with peaceful protesters.

You can read the full story about this action against the police by clicking on the link.

When ‘alternative business structures’ are introduced next year alongside independent solicitors, there will be shock waves around the industry for both the lawyers and the clients equally. The introduction of the new wave of practices like ‘Tesco Law’ promise to change the landscape of legal services as we know them. For those of you who are unaware of the change, Tesco (along with other big high street names will be offering legal services).

Solicitors have already admitted, unsurprisingly, that they are worried about the repercussions these new services will cause. Supermarkets, banks and other businesses will be able to set up these structures and they will be in direct competition with conventional no win no fee solicitors.

Some people are claiming that bigger corporations are choosing to end working with high street solicitors in preference of large volume providers because of referral fees. However, this has been vehemently denied by the corporations.

Solicitors’ fees are now commonly compared and are becoming highly competitive on price as although the economic climate is already difficult, now lawyers are being forced to compete pricewise because they are in danger of losing business if they don’t.

This all means that as well as there being new players on the legal scene, meaning traditional solicitors have to employ newer tactics to compete for work available, clients are also faced with lots of confusing and new fangled choices for legal representation. With mass marketing of legal services and the supermarket convenience straight-off-the-shelf package, it is a whole new world of law out there.

The most concerning issue though, is that anybody searching for a solicitor to help them with their accident claims and other cases, might be met with fewer legal options next year if traditional solicitors continue to suffer from the adversity which they are facing now. Therefore, there would consequently be ‘a reduction in access to justice’ as Linda Lee, the president of the Law Society put it and as she also says it ‘cannot be in the public’s interest’.

One dreads to think what ‘Value: Accident Compensation Claim’ will look like.

The Serious Organised Crime Agency (S.O.C.A – is there a non serious version?) will publish the names of 22 convicted fraudsters, drug traffickers, money launderers and others online in an attempt to prevent them from reoffending. The agency has further plans to release more names over the year in order to send a signal to repeat offenders that they are being watched.

In a move that is likely to provoke panic amongst civil liberty groups and an increase in twitchy curtains, S.O.C.A hopes that the public will get involved in not only identifying these people but to also report any signs of sudden acquired wealth.

Ken Pandolfi, the head of Centurion (S.O.C.A’s career monitoring programme) said:

‘The traditional law enforcement approach is investigate a case, secure a conviction and move on to the next job. But that ignores the high level of repeat offending. Now, for the right people, we will impose lifetime offender management. If we think you pose a continued threat from prison or upon release, you will go on our books and stay on our books until you are no longer a threat. That could mean you are on our radar for decades and decades.’

Mr Pandolfi continues -

‘By making the names public we want to enlist the help of the public in monitoring them. Public information on their lifestyles, “has one of these people got a new sports car parked outside his house?” will help us.’

This move fits in nicely with David Camerons’ ‘Big Society’ idea or the abbreviated E.F.H concept (Everyman for Himself) that has proved popular under Conservative governments.

Criminal Defence Solicitors have already been challenging similar orders (such as those that seek to restrict association with other like minded offenders and the use of mobile phones) in court and this will no doubt increase, with up to 100 names set to be published this year. Essex police have already had a similar idea overturned in court under the Human Rights Act, over a breach of privacy, when they put up posters of repeat offenders in 2003.

It remains to be seen whether or not this scheme will be a success in deterring repeat offenders. One potential issue could be over vanity with some offenders unhappy at not being on the list. For the CPS and solicitors the more worrying trend of potentially unreliable witnesses could be a factor (especially with new car envy).

I believe the Latin terminology for both S.O.C.A, repeat offenders and the public is “aut viam inveniam aut faciam”.

An update regarding the login details for solicitors and the RaPID scheme – now with added helpdesk:

Additional Portal Support Services

A further Helpline has been put in place to assist users having log in problems or where passwords are not working. The Helpline number is: 0207 265 5753 and will be manned from 9-5pm, by IDSL.

The helpline has been set up in addition to the email support available at supportATrtapiclaimsprocess.org.uk All queries emailed to the support address will receive a specific response within 24 hours.

For technical queries please email helpATrapidclaimsettlement.org.uk

Registrations Update

Work continues to clear the registration back log, and IDSL acknowledges the frustrations caused by the delays. In recognising concerns over the delay, an extra independent project resource has been tasked to investigate and assist in redressing the backlog. As a result of the initial work, previous information on timeframes for clearing the backlog require revising, and work is underway to provide a concrete timeframe for clearing the remaining backlog.

In addition, it was identified that a batch of logins were issued 12th May, which included some incorrect details, resulting in some passwords not working. This was due to an administrative processing error which has since been rectified by CRIF. The Administrators of those organisations affected will be contacted by the CRIF Helpdesk to advise when their login details will work, and it is anticipated that this will be completed by Tuesday 24th May.

Please contact the Helpline number above or supportATrtapiclaimsprocess.org .uk as we have found that login detail emails have been caught in the spam filter of some organisations.

All new registrations received from 19th May will take a maximum of 5 working days for log in details to be forwarded.

****IMPORTANT NOTE FROM ABI****

Interpretation of when VAT payable

There are reports that some compensators are refusing to pay VAT on the stage 1 fixed costs in the process, instead stating that this is payable in stage 2. The Civil procedure rules for the process (at rule 45.29 (6)) refer to VAT being payable on the fixed costs listed in Table A. this should be interpreted as meaning that VAT is payable at each stage, rather than an alternative interpretation. Claimant and defendant stakeholder representatives are agreed on this and advise that the practice of refusing to pay VAT on stage one costs is an incorrect interpretation of the rules.

Although it is reassuring to note that a back log has been acknowledged, it’s perhaps not so if you were either a) sent the incorrect Login details b) your email was marked as Spam.