Sparks fly over Jackson report at Claims Conference
This year's Claims Management Conference was the scene of heated debate as the realities of the Jackson report were discussed by leading experts.
The controversy started early as Justin Jacobs, head of the Motor Claims division of the ABI, gave the insurance industry's view on LJ Jackson's recommendations.
Fully supporting the proposed curbs on referral fees and ATE insurance funding, Jacobs' views were difficult for delegates from the claims management sector to swallow.
But his excellently delivered presentation served as a wake-up call for those in the industry that were not ready for reform.
Chair Neil Rose, the widely-respected legal commentator who has been covering the industry reaction to Jackson in considerable depth, led the panel through discussions on implementation time-frames and the impact of the forthcoming election.
There were numerous questions asked around the definition of the term "referral fee" and the many potential loopholes likely to open up.
The panel agreed that Jackson's definition is too wide-ranging, and that a more detailed definition was required in which a clear distinction was made between money paid directly for the referral of claims, and money spent on outsourced marketing of legal services.