It's sometime between 11.54 am and the lunch break, it's 'session 2' and the insurer's are in. They always come in after the solicitors, that's how it works guys and gals. You see, no one gets a brass farthing, unless them underwriting your claim, say so. Your claim has to be worth the risk, your Slater & Gordon type firm is willing to make. It's extremely complicated, so much so, Mr Scorer has to explain it to his clients repeatedly, so I'm not even going there. But, before we get to the insurance guys, lets reflect upon something the lawyers say regarding your cat in hell's chance, claim, if the defendant is not solvent !
Now, just THREE of the Savile NHS claims entailed significant sums of money. Remember the stink about how little the victims got, while the lawyers seemingly, raked it in ?
No expert opinions sought there then ! No, trawling through lever-arch files going back ten, twenty years. Of course, Savile was dead, and he was still solvent, so hey, no need to prove anything, not even negligence. The NHS employed Savile, they are thus - vicariously liable !
In March 2015, it was reported that THREE victims had been paid £60,000 between them. Liz Dux represented fifty claimants at the time
Just a month ago, 47 had been paid an average of just £9,500
Now, get this ! Of the three that attracted the big money, and thus, we assume, some input from some expert or another, one was the woman who claimed to have been raped by a porter when she was 12. Yes, that one !
I'm not going there again !
Not sure, how much of that £40,000, any of those three victims actually received ! What's all the secrecy about, for goodness sake ?
Mr Daniels is referring to his costs, not the claimants payout. Mr Scorer, clearly has problems with defendant's solicitors defending their clients ! The bastards, how dare they !
It's not easy, working out how all this fits into the Savile case. Or, any historic child sex abuse case, for that matter. One statement that got my attention, clearly nothing to do with him was this ! Is this true ? Really ?
Unless, of course, someone dares ask the question : Did the NHS have any experts of their own, who were doctors and nurses, or even psychiatrists, when those Savile assaults were alleged to have taken place ? From memory, I don't remember any being consulted by Sue Proctor's crew, though, as always, I'm always happy to be corrected.
But, back to the lawyers, and their risks, and their limitations.
But, it's not, just about the money, apparently, some claimants actually want some sort of apology to go with their early settlement ! The real surprise being, that, they rarely seem to get one !