I was once told by someone at the Compensation Recovery Unit (CRU) that if a compensator won a case and so it was agreed that the offset paid to CRU was not down to the injury claimed for, then the claimant might be owed some of the money repaid to the compensator when the certificate of recovery was revoked. In that instance the compensator lost the case, so I gladly stuck my head back in the sand regarding the whole subject of compensation recovery.

I now have a case where a compensator has won a case and the certificate has been revoked and the compensator has been reimbursed (NB well before my involvement in the case!). So I blithely told the solicitor involved what the CRU had told me and the solicitor has (perhaps not unreasonably) asked me to inform them on what basis I am making this outrageous claim.

Does anyone know??

Just a general comment, but might some clues be found in the terms of the settlement itself?

For example, if the agreement was that the compensator would pay the client £5 000 plus whatever the CRU unit wanted, then I don't think any arguments about the amount the CRU get has any effect on the client.

If, however, the agreement was to pay £5 000 to the client less any payments to CRU, then it would affect the client if the amount the CRU are able to recover is varied.

As long as the agreement is lawful, the terms should be enforceable.

I am not sure what the regulations have to say on this matter.

Thanks Emma