60% Disagree That ‘Easy Money’ and Big Payouts Are Reasons for Large Volume of Injury Claims

brown and white bear plush toy

23 May 2024

A significant portion of the population does not believe that high volumes of compensation claims for injuries are being made because it is easy to get payouts.

Many also disagree with the notion that the high value of payments when there is a settlement encourages people to make a claim, according to research conducted for the Injuries Resolution Board.

The market research found that 60% of those who responded do not feel claims are made because payments are easy to get or because of the big payouts.

This might clarify why two-thirds of adults believe the claims process is fair, despite concerns about fraudulent claims and excessive compensation amounts, said Amárach Research, which conducted the survey.

The board, which has changed its name from the Personal Injuries Assessment Board, commissioned the research to mark 20 years since it was established.

Reforms have been instituted in the last few years to address what insurance reform campaigners have said is a perceived “compo culture” in Ireland.

The notion that it is easy for some people to make claims has been highlighted by insurers to justify the high cost of cover.

Amárach research found claims are predominantly made for legitimate reasons. It discovered that those injured seek to recoup financial losses or to compensate for pain and suffering caused by the injury.

This is especially true for the over-55s, who have a higher likelihood of making a claim as they are more prone to experiencing an accident.

The board stated: “For the most part, it is believed claims are made for genuine reasons.

“However, 60% do not believe claims are made because payments are easy to get or because of the value of claims.”

When asked if they had been injured in an accident, 60% said they had not been injured, and only a third of those who had been injured went on to make a personal injury claim.

This is equivalent to 87% of the wider population not engaging in the claims process.

Researchers found there is strong awareness of the board, with the highest awareness among those aged 55 and over.

The compensation claims process is widely believed to affect insurance costs.

Half of adults reported experiencing increases in the premiums they were charged last year and this year, particularly among the over-55s.

Last month, the Supreme Court affirmed that the personal injury award guidelines voted in by judges three years ago are legally binding.

Insurers had promised to reduce the cost of cover if these reforms were implemented.

The guidelines have led to a reduction in award levels by up to 40%.

Duty-of-care legislation has been updated to benefit insurers, and a dedicated garda fraud office has been established.

However, motor, home, and health insurance costs are rising again, with the industry citing various reasons for the higher costs of cover.

The cost of motor premiums increased for the eighth time last month, according to Central Statistics Office figures.

Brian Hanley, of the Alliance for Insurance Reform, argued it was “impossible to justify” continuing increases in the cost of premiums when the volume of claims and the size of awards were decreasing, and government reforms had been delivered for insurers.

He said the Injuries Resolution Board-commissioned research indicated that premiums were rising for the majority of people.

The most recent figures, for 2022, show insurers’ profits have increased by 55% compared to the previous year, Mr. Hanley noted.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Injuries board reports 10% rise in claims last year

The Injuries Resolution Board (IRB) has seen a 10% increase in claims made to it during 2023, resulting in €170m being paid out in personal injury awards, new reports show. According to the latest annual report from the IRB, formerly known as the Personal Injuries...

Understanding the Recent Norney v. Dr. Michael Watt Case

On 3 October 2024, the High Court in Belfast delivered a significant judgement in the case of Martine Norney versus Dr Michael Watt and the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust. Martine Norney was awarded £50,000 in damages after it was determined that her treatment...

Ryanair facing DPC probe over facial recognition

Ryanair is facing a Data Protection Commission (DPC) inquiry into its customer verification process, which includes the use of facial recognition technology. The DPC has received a number of complaints regarding the budget airline’s practice of requesting additional...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...