This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

CAMHS won't see you now

16% rise in legal claims against GPs, says MDDUS

Medical defence organisation MDDUS saw a 16.4% rise in legal claims against GPs last year, it has said.

The indemnity provider said this showed a 'growing trend for increased litigation', but added that the rise was also driven in part by an 8.2% growth to the organisation's membership.

In light of the development, it has written to the minister for NHS Productivity, Lord Prior of Brampton, to urge the Government to fast-track plans to cap compensation payouts for medical negligence claims, as discussed in the recent GP Indemnity Review.

In the letter, MDDUS CEO Chris Kenny said that the 'absence of effective controls on the amount of costs which can be recovered in negligence cases' was 'a key driver' behind rising costs of indemnity to GP members and that 'substantive action is required on the underlying causes of these increases'.

According to a Pulse survey, indemnity fees soared by around 26% in the 12 months leading up to November 2015.

Mr Kenny told Pulse: 'Part of the increase in clinical negligence claims notified against GPs can be attributed to a growth in MDDUS GP membership of 8.2% in 2015, with our overall GP membership rising 61% since 2011.

'We also continue to see a growing trend of increased litigation overall with a rise in the frequency of claims against doctors over the last few years. From our experience, these rises are no reflection of a drop in clinical standards which remain high.'

The Government is set to reimburse GPs for inflation to indemnity costs from April 2017 amid fears it is putting too much pressure on practices. It will also repeat its winter scheme to reimburse the increase in costs for working out of hours.

Meanwhile, Pulse revealed this week that the UK’s three medical defence organisations have boosted income for their top executives by hundreds of thousands of pounds in the past three years.

Readers' comments (6)

  • and no one is doing a darn thing about it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The other glaring problem is that there doesn't seem to be a mechanism to make a counter-claim against questionable litigants. For no-win no-fee firms, this amounts to a one way bet.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | Sessional/Locum GP24 Aug 2016 5:03pm

    Yes I would love to hear from a 'legal source' as to why we can not counter sue.

    My belief is that in fact we can sue, but medical defence organisations will not fund this and many of those that make unproven allegations have few funds. Still it might just start to act as a deterrent.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • You can sue but good luck getting anything as they will likely have no funds

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Like everyone else, I find the whole business of professional indemnity to be very confusing. It was easier to live with my confusion when the costs were lower.

    MDDUS have been making a lot of their relatively small subs. Have their members' subs been large enough to cover their members' future liabilities?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What do we expect when every TV channel has an advert on medical negligence.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say