Creating a sustainable PI business model
Over the last few years, those firms wishing to remain in claimant personal injury (PI) have adopted a number of different strategies. Simply by living within their means, a number of smaller firms are adjusting to life post-LASPO by consolidating their activities to one or two particular streams. But the number of firms still prepared to spend excessively on the acquisition of new work, to keep their machines primed, is surprising.
The cab-rank rule – are its days numbered?
‘The cab-rank rule is dead, long live the cab-rank principle’, or words to that effect, may be heard before too long. More than two years after the prescriptive-rule-versus-laudable-principle debate was sparked, the Bar Standards Board appears ready to consider converting the rule and its many exceptions into an outcomes-focused foundation of barristers’ practice.
The need for speed
Achieving high time velocity is increasingly the key to law firm competitiveness. But what exactly is it? High time velocity comprises these elements: The time gap between when an activity is actually worked and then subsequently recorded; the time gap between when an activity is worked and then submitted to the billing system; and the time gap between doing the work and then sending the bill to the client.
Choose your partners carefully – collaboration is the key in the PI world
All of those involved in claimant personal injury work knew the post-LASPO environment would be challenging. Less revenue would undoubtedly mean the need for greater efficiency for those staying in the market. In fact, perhaps the most obvious question was whether to go or stay. So for those that have stayed (and for those still unsure), what does greater efficiency mean? The answer is far from obvious.
Noise-induced hearing loss – is it really the new whiplash?
As the market begins to settle down following the legal reforms surrounding general personal injury, solicitors and insurers are now assessing the positive and negative ramifications of these changes. The spotlight has now turned to what is perceived as another ‘growth area’ of negligence claims suddenly coming out of the woodwork, with noise-induced hearing loss now being the root of all evil, with the headlines comparing it to whiplash.
