Controversy over the new regulation of traffic compensation

Justice and Economy are working on a proposal that aims to reduce fraud in traffic accidents and proposes tightening the criteria that insurers use to pay for minor injuries.

The Ministries of Justice and Economy are preparing a reform of the compensation scales in cases of traffic accidents and which, foreseeably, could be presented to the Council of Ministers in mid-February. The measure has already raised controversy, to the extent that the different agents involved do not agree on its real consequences.
In a letter sent to the General Directorate of Insurance, Adevi (association of lawyers for the victims) assures that, in practice, compensation for minor consequences is eliminated, mainly those related to the spine and what is known as whiplash. .
However, the insurance sector employer Unespa emphasizes that the reform of the scale does not mean the end of these compensations, but they will only be paid if they are objective. In fact, that is where the big discrepancy arises.
In general terms, all the agents involved, from the Prosecutor's Office to the victims' associations, including the insurers, are in favor of the reform, as stated in a letter dated October 2014 sent to the ministries of Justice and Economy and signed. by the presidents and general directors of the main associations in the country.
The objective of the scales is to strengthen the resolution of traffic accidents in an amicable manner, decongesting the courts and reducing the expenses incurred when litigating in these processes. Currently, 90% cases are resolved amicably, thanks to the scale system that came into force in 2004.
Now, Justice and Economy plan to review this system, increasing compensation for serious cases but, above all, tightening the criteria for recognizing minor injuries and thus avoiding the fraud that occurs in this type of accident.
From Adevi, they insist that they are in favor of insurance doctors checking the victims as many times as necessary and even creating databases to prevent these frauds.
However, they consider that, as the new proposal is worded, not only are the compensations to be received reduced in some cases, but diagnostic tests are also required for injuries "that in the current state of medical science are not possible." "they can verify through medical evidence." This is common, for example, in the case of neck pain, which is very difficult to demonstrate.
The wording of the proposal requires the impossibility of carrying out a specific and significant activity for there to be slight damage due to loss of quality of life, while currently it is sufficient, for example, for that capacity to be limited, but not impossible.
What does the proposal say?– The new proposed scales include an increase in the payment of compensation paid for injuries considered serious.
– The criteria for paying are tightened when it comes to accidents or minor consequences.
– For example, it will not be enough for the patient to claim to have neck pain and for this to be confirmed by a doctor, but objective diagnostic tests will be needed to certify the existence of this pain.
– Minor damages due to loss of quality of life, which are currently recognized when the performance of an activity is limited, will only be taken into account if the victim is unable to perform that activity.
– The proposal could reach the Council of Ministers in mid-February, although its wording is not final and will depend on the evolution of the legislative process.
www.expansion.com