Public perceptions of the civil litigation system and third party litigation funding
Findings from quantitative and qualitative research conducted by BritainThinks
Ben Shimshon, Founding Director, BritainThinks
What we did
*The survey focuses on the population of England and Wales (rather than Great Britain or the United Kingdom) because of significant differences between the legal system in Scotland and Northern Ireland compared to England and Wales.
Qualitative phase
Quantitative
phase • Online methodology
• Fieldwork dates: 31
stJuly – 4
thAugust 2015
• Data weighted to be representative by gender, age, region and socioeonomic grade
Survey of 1,261 adults aged 18+ in England and Wales*
• Split by socioeconomic grade: 3 focus groups of ABs and 3 focus groups of C1/C2
• Spread across three locations in England
• Fieldwork dates: 6
th– 9
thOctober 2014
6 focus groups among adults aged 18+
The public is more likely to feel the legal system in England and Wales is moving in the wrong direction than the right direction
Perceived symbols of this negative shift include increases in claims filed, advertising for mis-selling, no-win-no fee cases and other legal services
These views are consistent across the population, but older people are particularly concerned about this growing ‘compensation culture’
Against this backdrop, public responses to the practice of third party litigation funding (TPLF) tend to be very negative
The most compelling reasons for TPLF relate to access, but for most, these are outweighed by concerns about profiteering at the expense of justice
There is widespread support for greater control of TPLF practices, and in particular a mandatory code of conduct
2 3
4 5
6
1
21%
38%
41%
Moving in the right direction Moving in the wrong direction Don't know
35%
65%
The public are twice as likely to see the civil litigation system as moving in the wrong
direction than the right direction
Q1. Given what you know, do you feel that civil litigation in England and Wales is...
Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
The population overall: Those who express an opinion only:
Those who have been involved in a civil case in the past 10 years are much more likely
than average to say that the system is moving in the wrong direction (52%)
The majority of the public describes an
increase in claims filed in the past three years
Compensation for misselling of products (e.g. PPI)
No-win-no fee cases Advertising of legal services People ‘trying their luck’
to get compensation Personal injury and workplace accident claims Sales calls or texts from lawyers
More
frequently Less
frequently
79%
73%
71%
71%
70%
50%
11%
15%
16%
15%
17%
21%
1%
2%
3%
2%
2%
5%
About the same
Q5. Thinking about the past three years in the UK, based on what you have experienced, seen or heard, do you feel that the following things happen more frequently than they used to, less frequently than they used to, or about the same as they used to? Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
And most of these practices are seen as having a negative effect on the justice system in
England and Wales – some overwhelmingly so
6% 6% 21% 31% 35% 47%
-89% -89%
-67% -59% -55% -45%
People 'trying their luck' to get
compensation
Sales calls or texts from
lawyers
Advertising of
legal services No-win-no fee
cases Personal injury and workplace accident claims
Compensation for misselling
(e.g. PPI)
Negative impact Positive impact
Q6. You said that the following things happen more often than they used to. For each, do you think this has been positive or negative for the justice system in England and Wales?
Base: All respondents who consider each to happen more than it used to (n=629–1,002)
“There are so many really aggressive adverts like ‘you deserve your money
and you deserve it now’!”
“I’ve already received compensation for PPI and still the number of calls I get saying I’m entitled to it – it’s ridiculous. They’re just
completely bogus companies.”
Consistently, members of the public describe a growing ‘compensation culture’ in England and Wales
“It seems that everyone is claiming for the smallest thing. Employers, businesses and even family and friends can be sued over the silliest thing. Health and safety has taken over common sense.”
“People are being encouraged to extract money from companies and other people.... some people think it is an easy touch for compensation when really they have no claim to anything.”
83% of the public agrees that ‘there is a growing compensation culture in England and Wales – nobody takes responsibility for their own
actions any more’
79% of the public agrees that ‘small businesses are under threat of being sued in England and Wales’
Q8. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
These views are consistent across most sociodemographic groups, but concern is particularly high among older people
Agreement that ‘there is a growing compensation culture in England and Wales’ is highest among…
72% 80%
Older compared to younger people
of over-55s
of under-35s
Right compared to liberal/left-leaning voters
of Conservative / UKIP voters
of those who voted for others
71%
Those who believe our system is becoming
more like the US’s
of those who agree
of those who disagree
Q8. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
Base: Varies for each sub-group
89% 92%
94%
56%
31%
13%
Agreement/disagreement that civil litigation in England & Wales is becoming more like the US
Disagree Don’t know Agree
81%
19%
For many, this trajectory is summed up as the
‘Americanisation’ of the litigation system
Q3. To what extent, if at all, would you agree or disagree with the following statement? “Civil litigation in England and Wales is becoming more like the United States.”
Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
Those who express an opinion only:
The population overall:
Against this backdrop, public responses to the practice of third party litigation funding tend to be very negative
Q13. How positive or negative do you feel about the increase of third party litigation funding in England and Wales? Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
2%
12%
34%
29%
23%
Very positive Quite positive Quite negative Very negative Don't know
Third party litigation funding is where financial firms (for example, hedge funds and private investment firms) that have no direct connection to a legal dispute invest in
the case. These firms identify cases where there is likely to be a large settlement and pay the associated legal and administrative fees on behalf of the claimants. The third party litigation industry in the UK is growing.
If the case is successful, the financial firm funding the case claims a significant share of
the financial settlement awarded to the claimants (generally 30%-40% of the settlement). If the case is unsuccessful, the
funder and the claimants get nothing.
Respondents were shown a short passage explaining TPLF:
Then asked to rate how positive
or negative they felt about TPLF:
The most compelling reasons for TPLF among the public tend to relate to access to justice…
-25%
-20%
-18%
-11%
9%
TPLF is an innovative form of investment, offering investors new opportunities for wealth creation TPLF creates a level playing field for consumers, who can hold businesses to account TPLF helps consumers stand up for their rights, making the consumer voice stronger TPLF helps consumers stand up to big businesses and make them do the right thing Legal Aid has dried up in recent years - TPLF will change that, funding cases that might not otherwise be brought to court
Net agreement (% agreeing minus % disagreeing)
Q14. You will now see some of the arguments that people have made in favour of third party litigation funding. Please state the extent to which you agree or disagree with each argument.
Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
Net agreement with each argument
…while the strongest reasons against relate to a perception that TPLF is purely about
delivering profit, rather than justice
Q15. You will now see some of the arguments that people have made against third party litigation funding. Please state the extent to which you agree or disagree with each argument.
Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
48%
52%
54%
56%
56%
59%
If there's one thing we've learnt from the financial crisis, it's that innovation on the part of financial firms can do more harm than good TPLF diverts money away from the rightful claimaints to greedy businesses Third party litigation funders do not care what is in consumers' best interests Financial firms fund the cases that will make them the most money Third party litigation funders exist to make a profit, not to deliver justice These firms only fund the cases they think they can win, not the cases they think are just
Net agreement (% agreeing minus % disagreeing)
Net agreement with each
argument
“It seems to go against the foundation of what we see as justice in this country.”
“It’s corruption, there’s no other word for it.”
“The cases that should go forward morally won’t be the ones that go ahead. They will
pick on businesses with a weak defence.”
…while the strongest reasons against relate to a perception that TPLF is purely about
delivering profit, rather than justice
There is widespread support for greater control of the practice, particularly a
mandatory code of conduct and a cap on fees
A mandatory code of conduct with meaningful penalties A cap on the fees funders can charge and proportion of settlement they can claim Government licensing of all third party litigation funders Ban the practice of TPLF altogether Keeping the voluntary code of conduct for TPLF with no other regulation
Agree Disagree
84%
81%
77%
41%
22%
13%
15%
18%
33%
21%
3%
4%
5%
26%
57%
Don’t know
Q19. To what extent, if at all, do you agree or disagree with each of the following options to manage third party litigation funding? & Q20. And if you had to choose one, what would you do to manage third party litigation funding? Base: All respondents (n=1,261)
