Compensation Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am very pleased to see the liability insurance industry taking a real interest in the Bill. I do not think that the noble Lord will mind if I pay tribute to Norwich Union and the many other companies which have been involved and which have offered extremely valuable advice and support to us all. I have no argument with the emphasis being on ““mending the person”” and doing so as quickly as possible. That would be a very positive way forward. I also appreciate the efforts made by the insurance industry to be more efficient in dealing with claims, to improve customer services and to ensure that full redress is provided to genuine claimants speedily. The definition in Clause 2 includes actions taken by those responsible for meeting the claim. That is because the outer limits of what could be regulated need to be as wide as possible—it is my ““funnel”” approach—so that absolutely no loopholes are available for unscrupulous providers to exploit. However, as the noble Lord is aware, the application of regulation will be controlled by order under Clause 2, specifying the regulated areas and regulated activities, and under Clause 4 to carve out any exemptions within the regulated areas and activities. I have also said that I intend to draw up an exemption covering insurance companies, insurance brokers and their agents in respect of claims by their policyholders and persons for whom they had arranged insurance. That is designed to cover the normal business of insurance companies and their claims-handling agents—an activity already regulated by the Financial Services Authority. I have been very impressed by the keenness of insurers to capture the person injured by their policyholder and to provide a ““package”” of claims services, including rehabilitation—I agree with the noble Lord that that is very important—to deal with a claimant’s claim without any intention of recovering the cost of that service. I am sure that that is largely driven by the motivation to get the person back to where he was before the accident. However, as the noble Lord knows, it seems that because these activities concern a third party, they are not fully regulated by the FSA. At this stage, irrespective of the merits or otherwise of the amendment, this is a matter that would benefit from further thought. I certainly do not wish to place in the Bill a limit on the scope of regulation but I am prepared to take away the issue and consider it in relation to the order that we will be bringing forward under this clause. I hope that that answers the noble Lord’s point but in a slightly different way and that, on that basis, he will be prepared to withdraw the amendment.