In Back Care Awareness Week, from 4th to 8th October, personal injury specialists National Accident Helpline called upon the government to recognise the massive disparity in the amount the public can claim in compensation for back injuries incurred through no fault of their own - but depending on where their injury took place - on a road, at work or in a public setting.
It was found by analysis that for the same severity of injury, accidents in the workplace - where the employer is at fault - could result in eight times higher compensation when compared to a road traffic accident compensation.
As those suffering these injuries are not at fault, the National Accident Helpline are asking why there is so much inconsistency in the claim amounts - and what can be done to rectify it.
Recent road traffic whiplash reforms, introduced by the government in May 2021, have been found to be the cause of the disparity. The reforms centre on a desire to lower the cost of insurance premiums by reducing the value of minor, exaggerated or fraudulent road traffic claims. Instituting fixed tariff damages - whilst increasing the size limit of claims that could be managed through the RTA small claims track - was deemed to do this and has resulted in both the potential amount of compensation awarded for RTA injuries - as well as the associated costs for claims - being lower.
However, the National Accident Helpline analysis highlights inequality that may have arisen from this policy change.
Prior to the pandemic, around 650,000 motor claims were made each year, with around 85 per cent of these whiplash related. The changes to the claims process meant that there are many members of the general public who will be out of pocket through no fault of their own.
Commenting on the whiplash reforms earlier this year, the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers noted that:
The Whiplash Injury Regulations 2021 will put into force a new tariff of compensation for pain and suffering for some people with whiplash injuries after a car crash. The amounts in the tariff which have been produced by the government, however, are derisory, offensive, and certain to result in under-compensation.
This potential for a victim of an RTA injury to receive unfair compensation is highlighted when compared to other forms of compensation. As an example, someone sustaining a three month back injury in an RTA would recover just half the amount of compensation that they could receive if their flight was delayed at an airport.
Jonathan White - Legal and Compliance Director National Accident Helpline - said:
“We're calling out to the government today to look into the shocking disparity in compensation claims for back injuries that people have sustained through no fault of their own. To have up to eight times more compensation for the same back injury, but due to a different cause, is not ethically right. Ultimately, the person who receives the injury is going to be affected in the same way and so should be compensated in the same way. We're keen to help raise awareness of the differences in compensation for the same injury to ensure people are no longer left out of pocket, or financially impacted, through an accident that wasn't their fault.”
