Solicitors have warned the government there is no way to fast-track employer and public liability claims through the existing low-value scheme.

The Ministry of Justice met key stakeholders yesterday for discussions on the proposed expansion of the road traffic accident (RTA) portal scheme.

Prime minister David Cameron has made extending the RTA portal, to increase the value of claims handled from £10,000 to £25,000 and include liability claims, a key priority. The MoJ is believed to want the changes implemented when the Jackson reforms become law in April 2013.

In round table talks yesterday, claimant groups told justice minister Jonathan Djanogly that the RTA portal model can not be applied to other types of case.

Deborah Evans, chief executive of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers said there were significant differences between public and employers’ liability and RTA claims, including locating insurers and the complexity of medical reports.

‘Cases are diverse and liability is invariably denied, which means automatic exit from the portal,’ she said.

‘There is still no clear evidence about how the RTA portal is working and members still report technical problems with it.

‘If there are to be portals for EL and PL all these issues need to be properly considered, and sound evidence must be collected to establish what the work actually costs. The process will need to be mapped, costed and then bespoke portals created.’

As well as modifications to the pre-action protocol and electronic portal, the government is also looking into the level of fixed, recoverable costs at each stage of the process for RTA claims.

Labour peers in the House of Lords attempted to halve portal fees earlier this month through an amendment to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders bill.

Djanogly wrote to stakeholders last month saying the government planned to revise costs, subject to the consultation. Those affected by the changes can give their evidence by 25 May on the MoJ site.

Evans said that APIL is concerned that the government had made up its mind to cut portal fees without considering the consequences on service levels. ‘All professional services – not just legal services – have a cost attached and what the government has to remember is that an indiscriminate cutting of costs without proper research or evidence can have a serious impact on the quality and professionalism of the service provided.’