Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

NHS 'compensation culture' reduces patient access to GPs

Patients are shooting themselves in the foot when deciding to bring unnecessary claims against GPs, a medical indemnity provider has warned.

The Medical Defence Union (MDU) said rising rates of claims, and higher sums paid out, is leading to higher costs for GPs and ultimately a smaller workforce.

Speaking at a Westminster Health Forum today, MDU chief executive Dr Christine Tomkins said that the impact of England's high compensation claims was having a 'catastrophic' impact on general practice and the NHS more widely.

She said this comes as MDU’s GP members are 'facing unprecedented pressures' and 'seeing more patients, with increasingly complex medical conditions'.

She added: 'All this when there is an acute shortage of GPs, partly because indemnity costs are forcing early retirement or change of practice mid-career.

'On top of this, the legal environment promotes litigation over resolving concerns in other ways and stimulates increasing numbers of claims. It makes the job intolerable for some, and GPs are powerless to do anything about it.'

In response, the MDU is calling for legal reform, arguing that 'the current system benefits no one'.

Dr Tomkins said this was underlined by the fact that during 2016, 85% of medical claims closed found that the patient had not been negligently damaged and the claim against the MDU member did not success.

She said: 'This must have been distressing for the claimants and equally distressing for doctors who were subjected to the claims process. We must move to a fairer way of doing things.

'We have long argued that only radical legal reform will halt the rising costs of claims and restore some equilibrium to the system and have been fighting for this through our Fair Compensation campaign.'

She said the need 'became even more urgent' following the March discount rate change which had led to some GP claims 'valued at over £20m'.

She concluded: 'GPs just can’t pay these sums and nor should they. Claimants must be adequately compensated but the compensation must be fair and must not damage the access to healthcare we all need.'

It comes as the Ministry of Justice revealed a plan last week to stem a rise in payouts for personal injury claims related to the discount rate. Ministers will propose new legislation which would mean more predictability over how the rate - which affects the cost of GP indemnity fees - is reviewed in future.

However the MoJ said this did not mean any immediate review of the rate set earlier this year.

 

Readers' comments (6)

  • 'This must have been distressing for the claimants and equally distressing for doctors '

    Yeah

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Rogue1

    I don't see why we cant remove patients from the list if they complain. After all getting solicitors involved in vexatious claims certainly breaks my trust in anything they say in future consultations. All it does is encourages me to refer them to hospital at every opportunity, for a second opinion, so that everything has been done without any delay.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Doctor McDoctor Face

    Indeed Rogue1, when I was a boy GP if a patient was abusive we would ask the receptionist to send the notes back to the Family Practitioner Committee. No one died and the world was a better place to work in. No recruitment problems then.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • doctordog.

    Ah yes but these days, the patient is always the victim and can't help their behaviour

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Absolutely. When you consider the overall time we spend in reviewing notes, consulting with MDOs, writing apologies, responding to criticisms from CCGs/LHBs, as LOST CONSULTATION TIME. it is unfair to the good patients who are actually ill.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Has the compensation/litigation culture, actively encouraged by previous governments, actually led to a safer service to patients? I am all for patients who have been harmed by negligent practice being appropriately apologised to and if necessary compensated. But this trend towards a US-like negligence culture was always going to end in tears, for patients, clinicians and the tax-payer alike.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say