Scotland may share a border with England, but when it comes to injury claims, litigation costs, and legal procedures, the differences run deep. For insurers and brokers, misunderstanding those differences can lead to missed risks, lost recoveries, and costly surprises. As the Scottish claims market grows in complexity and volume, insurance professionals must adapt or risk being left behind.
“There’s a tendency to assume the rules are the same across the UK, but they’re really not,” said Andy Lothian (pictured), partner at DWF. Based in Scotland, Lothian is part of a specialist team handling high-value injury and complex claims, as well as pre-litigation outsourcing for insurers.
“Scotland is a ‘foreign country’ for the purposes of litigation,” he said. “The forms are different. The timelines are often tighter. And the costs, particularly in low-value claims, are disproportionately high.”
Unlike England and Wales, where reforms have curbed legal fees in smaller cases, Scotland has seen little such movement. “Our data shows that at the very lowest end, the majority of indemnity spend is going on costs rather than damages,” Lothian said. “And at the moment, the Scottish Government has no appetite to address that.”
At the opposite end of the scale, fatal injury cases carry significantly higher exposure. “In England, bereavement damages are fixed and relatively low,” he said. “But in Scotland, you could be looking at 10 times that amount for a loss of society award. So if an accident happens north of the border, the potential exposure is greater.”
Scotland’s historically unsaturated claims environment, particularly after the whiplash reforms in England, has attracted a wave of new claimant firms. “Margins are higher in Scotland,” said Lothian. “We have seen a lot of new entrants, particularly at the lower-value end. And that’s driving volume growth.”
That growth is also changing behaviours. “We’re seeing more scattergun tactics,” he said, particularly through pre-claim subject access requests. “Before a claim is even intimated, customers are getting GDPR requests for accident reports or witness statements. Sometimes they respond without speaking to their broker or insurer, which can create real problems.”
Many firms operating in Scotland have moved toward more integrated claims handling models, with pre-litigation teams working closely alongside litigation specialists. “Because Scotland’s pre-lit model is so different, we’ve developed a cradle-to-grave service,” said Lothian. “That means the strategy we build at the outset carries through if the claim litigates, especially around claimant solicitor conduct, delivering real savings.”
Insurers operating across the UK must also factor in Scottish-specific risks when designing claims strategies. Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (QOCS) - introduced in Scotland five years ago - gives claimants added protection, but without some of the balancing mechanisms used in England and Wales. That further incentivises low-value litigation.
“For insurers, the solution is either having a claims team that really understands Scotland, or outsourcing to someone who does,” Lothian said.
Lothian’s key message is simple: treat Scottish claims as their own category. “Just be alert. If something has a Scottish address, or the paperwork looks different, it probably is.”
While Scotland still represents a smaller share of UK-wide claims, its unique legal and procedural risks can have outsized impacts - especially in serious injury and fatal cases. Lothian urges brokers and insurers to escalate early to Scottish-qualified experts. “The Scottish footprint needs to be taken into account,” he said. “It might only come up once in a blue moon, but when it does, it matters.”
For brokers advising UK-wide clients, understanding the Scottish system isn't just helpful, it's essential to risk management.
