BHR and Rate Experts

With apologies that it has taken me so long to update you after the two sessions we had in Manchester and Gatwick. It is because I have been working behind the scenes to deal properly with the evidence from Arbitrate and WhichRate.

I have not given up on an approach involving a legal challenge. However, rather than basing that challenge on the slight hope that we can drag something evidentially out of the rate surveyors, either in correspondence or trial, or that we could get counsel to focus on the right issues, or that we should continue with a strategy predicated on serving rebuttals, I took the view that we needed to have a more positive basis to advance our argument and deal with this properly.

Several of you came back to me after the sessions and made some helpful and valid suggestions and offered your support and assistance. To that end, I thank Steve Cairns from MSL, Adam Thorpe from Winn Solicitors, and Andrew Komodromos from Lighthouse Claims for their detailed ideas. They were all helpful. However, they all involved a level of diligence and effort which whilst might have some tactical advantage in isolated cases would be easily scalable or sustainable amongst all CHOs. I think that is what we need if we are to address the challenge properly.

And just as a reminder, because I have left it so long, the challenge is that a large element of the evidence from the opposition is either unfairly selective, deliberately exclusionary of factors that support our case but might harm theirs, or just plain disingenuous or dishonest. So, what’s the plan?

Well, in part it’s adopting the adage that if you can’t beat them then join them. Craig Budsworth and I have spent some time scoping out a low-cost CHO friendly basic hire rate solution that I think is a core part of the response for reasons that I can articulate in some detail. However, I wanted to pick up the idea I floated at the last CHO gathering and invite those of you that want to contribute to the solution and the over-arching strategy to join with Craig and I on a Zoom call next Monday (15^th September). I will walk you through what I have done, what I ruled out (and why), and the concept we have both developed that might form the foundations of a coherent and scalable plan to deal with the opponent’s rate evidence. We also want to get an idea of whether there is support for the offering.

If you would like to attend (allow up to an hour) please let me know by return and I will send you a link for the session. Unlike previous sessions I have run, Craig and I want to tease out your views, objections, suggestions, and reactions and so we may limit the session (but share a recording afterwards) to a dozen or so Forum members if the demand is too high. I have tried to share this invite with just one member from each organisation that supported the two seminars, even though some of you had several delegates attend on the day. I am happy for you to share this internally so that you have the right person attend the session if you want to attend.