The government’s post-implementation review of the whiplash reforms marks a key moment for RTA Claims practitioners. Several years after the introduction of the Civil Liability Act 2018, the OIC portal, and the whiplash tariff, claimant solicitors can now provide detailed feedback on how the whiplash reforms have affected access to justice and the handling of road traffic accident claims.
MASS’ Response to Whiplash Reforms
MASS’ response to the government’s post-implementation review has been shaped by the lived experience of its members. As Vice Chair, I have been closely involved in discussions with practitioners across the country, all grappling with the same issues: clients struggling to navigate the system, disputes being channelled through a process never designed to accommodate them, and outcomes that frequently fail to reflect the reality of injury. MASS’ submission is a practical one rooted in what members are seeing every day.
How the Whiplash Reforms Have Changed Low-Value RTA Claims
One of the clearest messages from the MASS response is that the reforms have materially changed the way low-value RTA Claims are handled – but not always for the better. The whiplash tariff, coupled with the extension of the small claims limit, has resulted in widespread under-compensation for genuinely injured claimants. For practitioners, this has meant difficult conversations with clients about awards that feel out of step with the pain, inconvenience and disruption they have experienced.
The issues are particularly stark where claims fall within the OIC portal. While the system was intended to be simple and user-friendly, many RTA Claims that appear straightforward at first glance quickly become complex. Liability disputes, allegations of contributory negligence, delays in obtaining medical evidence, and arguments around causation are now commonplace within a framework designed for unrepresented users. MASS’ response highlights how often these cases stall or fall out of the portal altogether, creating inefficiency for claimants, compensators and practitioners alike.
Practitioner Experience of the Post-Reform Landscape
From a practitioner’s standpoint, another significant concern is the way mixed injury claims are dealt with. Although non-whiplash injuries can technically be valued outside the tariff, the interaction between tariff and non-tariff damages in RTA Claims remains confusing and inconsistent in practice. MASS members report ongoing disputes over valuation and approach, leading to delay and uncertainty – precisely the issues the reforms were supposed to reduce.
At Winns, as with many specialist RTA firms, we have had to adapt rapidly. Processes have changed, resources have been reallocated, and teams have developed new expertise to support clients navigating the post-reform landscape. That experience is mirrored across the MASS membership. The response to the government reflects not just isolated frustrations, but a shared understanding of how the reforms have reshaped practice.
What is particularly welcome about the MASS submission is its emphasis on evidence. Members have contributed data, case examples and practical insight to demonstrate how claims are progressing through the system and where the pinch points lie. This includes concerns about delay, insurer behaviour within the portal, and the impact on vulnerable claimants who are least equipped to pursue a claim without advice.
Why Claimant Representation Still Matters
The response also recognises that claimant solicitors continue to play a vital role, even in a reformed landscape. Despite the rhetoric that accompanied the reforms, the reality is that many injured people still need guidance, reassurance and representation. Where solicitors are involved, cases are more likely to progress efficiently, issues are identified earlier, and disputes are resolved more effectively. MASS has been right to emphasise this in its submission and to challenge the assumption that legal advice is unnecessary in the majority of cases
For member firms, including Winns, MASS’ work in this area is a reminder of the value of collective representation. Individually, firms can adapt to reform but collectively, through MASS, we can influence how those reforms are reviewed, refined, and improved. The post-implementation review has shown the importance of having a forum where practitioner voices are heard and presented coherently to policymakers.
As the review progresses, it will be important for practitioners to stay engaged. The reforms are not static, and neither is the claims environment. MASS’ response makes clear that there is scope – and need – for further adjustment if the system is to function fairly and efficiently. Continued input from the profession will be essential in ensuring that future changes are informed by real-world experience.
The whiplash reforms have fundamentally altered RTA Claims practice. The post-implementation review is an opportunity to assess what has worked, what has not, and what needs to change. We now await the response to the review and as always MASS will keep its members updated on this important area.
The Motor Accident Solicitors Society
It is essential following any road traffic accident that you use an independent, experienced solicitor. The Motor Accident Solicitors Society is a national society of solicitors who specialise in road traffic accident claims. Its Members are required to adhere to a strict service charter providing you with the peace of mind that your claim is being handled by experts. Whilst specialising in road traffic accident claims, Members can also advise on a wide range of legal disputes encountered on a daily basis.
To contact the society, visit our Contact Us Page and fill out an enquiry form. Alternatively, you can also reach us by email on enquiries@mass.org.uk or by telephone on 0117 925 9604.
‘The Whiplash Reforms & MASS’ response to the Post-Implementation Review‘ is a MASS original blog, written by Adam Thorpe – MASS Vice Chair, and Associate Director – Head of Litigation at Winns Solicitors