Guidance

Official Injury Claim (OIC) Advisory Group meeting: 24 January 2025, 10am to 11:30am

Updated 10 March 2025

Applies to England and Wales

Summary minutes and actions: 24 January 2025, 10am to 11:30am

Attendees

• Ministry of Justice (Chair and secretariat) (MoJ)
• Motor Insurers’ Bureau (OIC service operators) (MIB)
• HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS)
• Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) 
• Motor Accident Solicitors Society (MASS)        
• Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL)                
• Association of British Insurers (ABI)                
• MedCo
• Civil Procedure Rule Committee (CPRC)

Item 1: Introduction

1. The Chair welcomed attendees, outlined the agenda and provided the following update on the actions from the previous meeting:

i. MIB to update the OIC glossary to differentiate between claims marked as ‘pending removal’ and those marked as ‘pending withdrawal’ – Action completed;

ii. MIB to ensure that any OIC exit data presented to the group clearly differentiates between claimant withdrawals and defendant removals – Action completed;

iii. Advisory Group members to liaise with their members to monitor whether the OIC messaging system is being used inappropriately to circumvent the OIC process and to provide feedback on their findings. Action ongoing although one member confirmed that they were still consulting with their members about this (see Item 6); and

iv. MoJ to reflect on whether any changes should be made to the Advisory Group and to bring any proposed changes to the January meeting for discussion. These considerations remain ongoing, and action is deferred to next meeting.

Item 2: MoJ Update

2. The chair introduced Josh Ivinson to the group. Josh took on the role of Head of Personal Injury in June last year but was unable to attend the October meeting.

Item 3: OIC data and performance update

3. MIB provided an overview of the latest quarterly operational data, which was published on the OIC website on 10 January 2025.

4. A discussion was held on dormancy and limitation affected claims. Random sampling is being carried out to obtain a better understanding of why some cases are, for example, stuck at the ‘liability-denied’ stage and have neither been withdrawn nor progressed to Court. This leaves them dormant on the system.

ACTION POINT 1: MIB to update the group with any data obtained from their random sampling on dormant claims.

5. There was some discussion on the latest figures for average claim time frames from submission to completion. It was pointed out that the latest quarter’s figures are significantly skewed by the archiving of older dormant cases and limitation-affected claims following the September OIC update.

6. MoJ suggested it would be helpful to include the number of cases removed from the system each month due to limitation in their regular data packs in future.

ACTION POINT 2: MIB to include the number of cases removed from OIC each month for limitation.

7. A brief discussion was held on exit data, specifically on how many claims were exiting OIC due to value and going into CPL following the Rabot decision. It was acknowledged that although data shows how many claims exited OIC due to value, it was not possible to know from that data if they subsequently entered CPL. It was suggested that it would be useful to know how many cases were exiting CPL for OIC. However, the same issue applies in that there is no way to monitor whether CPL exited claims start again in the OIC portal.

ACTION POINT 3: MoJ to obtain data from CPL to show how many cases were exiting which should have started in OIC, and explore whether it is possible to obtain data on how many cases that leave OIC due to value actually do go on to start a claim in CPL.

Item 4: Overview of implementation of updated tariff – Whiplash Injury Regulations

8. MoJ introduced the item. An update on the result of the review of the Whiplash Injury Regulations 2021 was provided, along with plans for implementation. The amounts in the tariff are to be uprated by inflation using the Consumer Price Index measure, but no changes are to be made to the tariff structure or the judicial uplift for exceptional injury or circumstances. Some work is also to be carried out to provide additional guidance regarding defining minor psychological injuries.

Item 5: Overview of implementation plans for Medical Reporting Consultation

9. MoJ introduced the item. An update was provided regarding plans for implementation of the various decisions that came out of the medical reporting consultation.

10. The first set of implementation decisions relate to MedCo operational issues. This involves updates to the Qualifying Criteria (QC) for medical reporting organisations and the rules for direct medical experts, with the aim of implementing them in April.

11. The uprated fixed cost medical report regime changes will be implemented next. An additional stakeholder survey is currently being conducted on new figures uprated (using the Services Producer Price Inflation measure) to account for inflation since the original consultation was issued. The survey closes on 31 January 2025 with a view to also implementing the changes on the common commencement date of 6 April 2025.

12. The next strand relates to developing new rules and QC for administration agencies. MoJ will work with MedCo to agree draft QC and the CPRC RTA sub-committee to agree rule changes, along with a suitable implementation timetable. A consultation on these changes will then be carried out for stakeholders to provide feedback before the new QC are finalised and implemented.

13. The final issue relates to changes to the medical reporting journey. Part one of this work relates to the requirement for represented claimants to wait for a liability decision before obtaining a medical report (as currently happens for unrepresented claimants). Following this, a longer-term change will involve MoJ working with stakeholders to explore the creation of an aligned medical reporting process to suit both represented and unrepresented claimants. MoJ will bring this back to the group to consider the options and the framework for engaging with stakeholders in due course.

Item 6: Member feedback

14. The Chair asked Members for any general feedback they wished to put forward, and in particular with regards to Action Point 3 from the previous meeting - Advisory Group members to liaise with their members to monitor whether the OIC messaging system is being used inappropriately to circumvent the OIC process and to provide feedback on their findings.

15. One member said they were still consulting with their members about the issues raised regarding the use of the messaging system.

Item 7: Next steps and AOB

16. One member suggested a discussion regarding how OIC would fit into any requirements for digital systems that would be developed in the future by the Online Procedure Rule Committee, but the Chair indicated that the Advisory Group was not the appropriate forum for this.

17. The MoJ summarised the actions arising and next steps, and confirmed that:

a. the minutes will be circulated to members for approval before publication on gov.uk; and

b. the next meeting will be held in April and a firm date will be sent out with the meeting minutes.

18. Members were encouraged to feedback to their members and to send any suggested topics for the next meeting to the MoJ secretariat.