8 July 2010
20 April 2010
29 July 2009
28 April 2009
12 September 2008
23 July 2008
16 July 2008
16 July 2008
6 June 2008
30 May 2008
|
27 June 2004:
Good news for rehab
BICMA’s latest initiative in the field of rehabilitation and early intervention in injury claims is a model agreement, which some are calling the BICMA agreement. This complements the Rehabilitation Code (see above) and is designed to provide assurance as to the commitment of the parties to implement the assessment’s recommendations insofar as they relate to “immediate needs”. It is a practical format. It does not replace the Rehabilitation Code and BICMA does not suggest its use by those who are content with the non-binding nature of the Code. Under the Code, both sides undertake only to consider the report’s recommendations - there is no sanction for ignoring them and the report still remains ring-fenced from the litigation process. The agreement requires a party unwilling to implement the suggested action to give reasons within 28 days, and provides for an unimplemented report to be put before the court. It was important, given this sanction, to set out clearly for all concerned (including the assessor) what constitutes “immediate needs” for the purposes of the agreement.
BICMA’s initiative follows debate surrounding suggestions of adversarial rehab. Problems can arise where practitioners (insurers, defence and claimant lawyers) do not play the game‚ in the spirit of the Code.
For some, it is said, the report serves only to enable an early Part 36 offer. Also, that some practitioners, whilst in favour of rehabilitation, will only support it if they have sole control. Such practices throw away the benefit to the injured person of collaborative rehab and may simply perpetuate disability.
Wide-ranging views have been expressed concerning the extent of the problem. The agreement should be regarded as an option. If it helps anyone to get rehabilitation, it has done its job - if no one needs it, that’s great too.
|
