(Estimated reading time: 1 minute 33 seconds)
When it comes to your client’s personal injury claim, at some point you will need to obtain medical evidence – either through direct instruction with the expert themselves or via a medical agency. Whichever option you choose, each will come with their own pros and cons. Here we take a look at recent developments and offer a ready-made answer.
A number of agencies will provide a deferred payment scheme, where settlement of the invoice will be made upon receipt of the disbursement costs from the Defendant. Of course, with instructions through a medical agency, an uplift is included in the cost of instructing the necessary expert.
Unfortunately, the recent decision of Deputy District Judge Akers in Powles v Hemmings to rule that these additional medical agency costs are already included within the fixed costs regime, and therefore not recoverable from the Defendant. This leaves firms in a difficult position with the outstanding balance.
Temple Funding alleviates this risk by providing disbursement funding up front for any claim with a Temple ATE policy in place. This allows firms to avoid panel experts and instruct the most suitable expert directly without the additional agency fees or the risk of these not being met by the Defendant. However, the use of medical agencies will still work, but the uplift for the privilege of deferred payments would be extinguished.
Our disbursement funding is fully integrated into the Temple Online Policy System, along with our ATE policies making the process of applying for funding and making drawdowns quick and easy.
With one of the most competitive interest rates available, now is a good time to consider the benefits to both yourselves and your clients.
If you would like any additional information or would like to explore Temple Funding further, please contact us on 01483 577877 to start the journey towards your funding solution.
