Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Viscount Eccles (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 20 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Compensation Bill [HL].


Compensation Bill [HL]

I offer the Minister one more example. In a foundry in the west midlands the annual wage increase was 1 per cent less than the management had first envisaged because of the number of industrial injury claims that had been put in in the previous year. We battled it out with the representatives of the workers in the foundry and it was accepted—and, of course, the claims fell. As in that case, the difficulty is often a business decision, because your insurer is always extremely keen that you should settle, if it is a matter of a squashed thumb or bruised shoulder. From the point of view of the insurance company, the business decision is to settle and not to fight to the end.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c278GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Complaints Compensation Abuse Courts Damages Advertising Evidence Drugs Drunkenness NHS Personal injury Local government finance Public bodies Marketing Negligence Schools Regulation Voluntary work Risk assessment Claims management services
Legislation
Compensation Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk