How can case managers, solicitors and insurers work together more effectively to speed up cases and the claims process ? Many thanks for inviting me to be a part of this panel discussion today. With the changes that have occurred over the last couple of years within the field of PI and the focus of BABICM and CMS-UK in spotlighting CMs professional responsibilities in this area I am sure my perspective on this issue will fuel discussion

What is Case management? Case management is defined as a process which : Is active and progressive Facilitates independence and QOL whilst acknowledging safety issues Is a collaborative process Leads and is responsible and accountable for the rehabilitation process.

Is not part of the litigation process or team and should not be unduly influenced by the timeframes or commercial agendas of ongoing compensation case. Is a process which must make reference to its own professional guidelines and that of the professionals involved directly in the rehab of the case.

Unite Professionals complete much of their work on a joint referral basis. Why is it that many within the PI field feel strongly opposed to CM’s working in this way? The challenge and benefits of working on a joint referral basis and how this may influence timely progress of cases to settlement.

Does the terms of referral under which the case manager works have an influence on the length of intervention? Are delays observed as a result of the impact of “expert opinions” which have a more commercial focus potentially conflicting with the CM evidence observed at the “coal face”?

What is good about the joint referral ? Provides a CM with “balances and checks” and can do what they are best ; Mitigate individual circumstances. CMs can work objectively without undue influence or pressure from one particular party be that TPI or solicitor. They can set the “pace” of this intervention and decide when the evidence indicates a sustained picture and therefore potentially discharge from CM.

What’s not great about the joint referral? Time delays in funding. A lack of commitment to the total need of the rehab process which may involve “cherry picking “ recommendations and costs. Feeling like “piggy in the middle”. Lack of trust from the client / family. Witness of fact status and not being approached to substantiate aspects of the claim.

How can we avoid slowing down cases ? In my opinion the intractable issue is that of conflicting agendas. The only way in which I believe we can buffer the impact of this slowing down is if case managers are given more autonomy, especially in the later stages of the rehabilitation during which time many more interested parties often become involved and key aspects of the claim are progressing guided by expert evidence being gathered to substantiate these needs and therefore costs.

The information and real time evidence a case manger can provide is valuable to the claim but may not always agree with the expert evidence provided. Sometimes the importance to the client of being comprehensively compensated may compromise the CM ‘s ability to achieve the true potential of a client to sustain maximum independence. Case managers in my opinion need to recognise when this stage is reached and decide how they address this issue with the client / family and funding parties and their own professional accountability.

Many thanks for listening.