No-win, no-fee claim laws were passed by Congress and the States to help protect victims of personal injuries. In most states, it is illegal for a personal injury attorney to ask for payment upfront. The law basically states that if you were involved in a personal injury, you can sue the other party and their insurance provider will have to foot the bill. Even if you lose. There were a number of arguments for and against this legislation, whose impact upon America has been wide-spread.
Pro: It's only right for the victim. This is the argument that carried the day. Congress was full of testimonies from victims who have been involved in a personal injury case which was not their fault. Few of them were able to get appropriate representation in court. Today, a victim can hire the best personal injury attorney around and know they will not pay a dime even if the case is thrown out. We are one of the few countries in the world that provides this level of protection for our citizens.
Con: America has developed a reputation as the most litigious country on earth. The liberty our claimants enjoy to sue for free has had an unexpected backlash: Mass abuse. And as economic conditions get worse, the number of frivolous claims increase. In all 50 states, people sue "just for the money," creating a back-log in the courts and compromising the legitimacy of real cases.
Pro: No-win, no-fee has turned us into a more just society. In the past, the size of your bankroll often played the biggest role in the size of your compensation package. If a wealthy person choked on a piece of glass in their steak, their lawyers would win claims in the millions of dollars. Whereas our less-fortunate citizens would routinely suffer with no chance of winning a settlement. Today, you are entitled to an attorney and free legal services (paid for by the other party's insurance) irrespective of social class. That is definitely an improvement.
Con: No-win, no-fee is one of the culprits behind the health care crisis. It has been cited by multiple Congressional panels as such; Abuse of no-fee, no-win has resulted in a wave of frivolous lawsuits against hospitals and doctors. It is estimated now that only 1/3 of medical malpractice suits are legitimate. This ratio has driven insurance costs for healthcare providers through the roof, and they passed all this cost down to you and us.
Pro: Individual access to care and long-term recovery has greatly improved. Back when claimants used to depend on legal aid or the other party's insurance company to help assess the claim, settlements were pathetically low. They would not take into account long-term problems that occurred as a result of a personal injury. Insurance companies would rush to stuff a pile of bills in a victim's pocket, hoping it would shut them up. Often enough, it did. But they would go on to see a range of issues later in life, from muscular/joint pains, to phobias, to chronic ailments. They had no chance of being compensated for medical expenses or loss in pain and suffering. Today, your personal injury attorney will assess your case and make sure you get a settlement inclusive of those conditions, and adjusted for inflation and rising health care costs.
Pro: It's only right for the victim. This is the argument that carried the day. Congress was full of testimonies from victims who have been involved in a personal injury case which was not their fault. Few of them were able to get appropriate representation in court. Today, a victim can hire the best personal injury attorney around and know they will not pay a dime even if the case is thrown out. We are one of the few countries in the world that provides this level of protection for our citizens.
Con: America has developed a reputation as the most litigious country on earth. The liberty our claimants enjoy to sue for free has had an unexpected backlash: Mass abuse. And as economic conditions get worse, the number of frivolous claims increase. In all 50 states, people sue "just for the money," creating a back-log in the courts and compromising the legitimacy of real cases.
Pro: No-win, no-fee has turned us into a more just society. In the past, the size of your bankroll often played the biggest role in the size of your compensation package. If a wealthy person choked on a piece of glass in their steak, their lawyers would win claims in the millions of dollars. Whereas our less-fortunate citizens would routinely suffer with no chance of winning a settlement. Today, you are entitled to an attorney and free legal services (paid for by the other party's insurance) irrespective of social class. That is definitely an improvement.
Con: No-win, no-fee is one of the culprits behind the health care crisis. It has been cited by multiple Congressional panels as such; Abuse of no-fee, no-win has resulted in a wave of frivolous lawsuits against hospitals and doctors. It is estimated now that only 1/3 of medical malpractice suits are legitimate. This ratio has driven insurance costs for healthcare providers through the roof, and they passed all this cost down to you and us.
Pro: Individual access to care and long-term recovery has greatly improved. Back when claimants used to depend on legal aid or the other party's insurance company to help assess the claim, settlements were pathetically low. They would not take into account long-term problems that occurred as a result of a personal injury. Insurance companies would rush to stuff a pile of bills in a victim's pocket, hoping it would shut them up. Often enough, it did. But they would go on to see a range of issues later in life, from muscular/joint pains, to phobias, to chronic ailments. They had no chance of being compensated for medical expenses or loss in pain and suffering. Today, your personal injury attorney will assess your case and make sure you get a settlement inclusive of those conditions, and adjusted for inflation and rising health care costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment