RTA portal beats predictions with 630,000 claims

Print This Post

By Legal Futures

5 August 2011

RTAs: around 12% of claims were either mistakes or multiple filings

The RTA claims portal processed around 25% more claims than anticipated during its first year of operation – with more than 630,000 claims submitted to compensators – as the system’s behaviour committee prepares to approach regulators to help stamp out bad practice by users.

The portal – which manages non-contested claims for road traffic accidents worth up to £10,000 – went live on 30 April 2010 with the prediction that more than half a million people injured in accidents would receive compensation much more quickly under the streamlined compensation system.

RTA Portal Co has confirmed the final figures was over 130,000 more than expected, with 630,468 claims submitted to compensators.

As reported last week by Legal Futures, the portal is undergoing its annual review for the Ministry of Justice, which involved calculating the number of claims that were submitted. The system was designed to calculate the number of claims notification forms (CNFs), however, rather than the number of claims, so RTA Portal Co had to go through the data and count how many CNFs were created or partially created but not submitted to an insurer.

Tim Wallis, independent chairman or RTA Portal Co, revealed that 683,387 CNFs were filed during the first year, which means a gap of 52,919 between the number of CNFs submitted and the final number of claims submitted. This means that roughly 12% of CNFs were either mistakes or multiple filings.

The hope is to further reduce the number of surplus forms created but not forwarded to a compensator. The RTA Portal Co’s behaviour committee was tasked with reviewing a number of issues raised by users regarding how some parties operate within the system. The committee is now getting in touch with the appropriate regulators, including the Solicitors Regulation Authority, to draw their attention to the matters and look at possible action.

Mr Wallis said: “We get regular feedback from users and probably the most common issue relates to more than one solicitor submitting a CNF in respect of one claim or claimant. Another issue is where an insurer approaches claimants direct, notwithstanding that they know from the CNF that a solicitor is acting. These issues have been referred to the behaviour committee.”

Tags: ,

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

McKenzie Friends – a storm in a teapot

Legal Futures Conference 2011Photo by Jonathan Goldberg

If the recent furore about McKenzie Friend Marketplace shows anything, it is that the profession remains acutely sensitive to the apparent threat of competition by unregulated entrants into the legal landscape. But for an outside observer, the whole McKenzie Friend debate remains curiously overblown: if not a storm in a teacup, a storm at least in a teapot. For all the characteristic sturm und drang of the Law Society’s response to last year’s senior judiciary consultation, there was pretty widespread agreement among most respondents that McKenzie Friends are here to stay.

April 28th, 2017