Key takeaways
Low value, non personal injury claims can quickly become operational and strategic headaches
Claims that fall outside those reportable to NHS Resolution may be low in value however can still require significant trust resources.
Early fact finding remains important
Findings from incident reports, property logs and CCTV help to ensure fair outcomes and prevent unnecessary escalation.
Small claims often reveal wider operational weaknesses
Giving trusts an opportunity to strengthen processes, reduce recurrence and minimise future spend.
Personal injury claims arising within the NHS are ordinarily reported to NHS Resolution (NHSR) and either handled under the Clinical Negligence Scheme for Trusts (CNST), which covers clinical negligence claims or the Liabilities to Third Parties Scheme (LTPS), which deals with employer liability and public liability claims.
However, NHS trusts increasingly find themselves dealing with small, non-personal injury claims that fall outside these schemes. These matters demand direct trust management and although low in financial value they lack the procedural clarity and costs protection provided by NHSR schemes and can be surprisingly resource intensive. When handled inconsistently, they may contribute to unnecessary expenditure, increased staff time and create the risk of developing a 'claims culture' among patients, visitors and employees.
This article outlines the types of small claims trusts may receive and offers practical guidance on how they can be assessed, resolved and prevented in an efficient and proportionate way.
Common types of small claims
Small claims tend to fall broadly into two groups, those brought by employees of the trust and those made by patients or visitors.
Staff may bring claims following certain incidents, for example where personal belongings such as glasses are damaged during an incident involving violence and aggression, or where vehicles are damaged while parked on trust premises. Patient and visitor claims are often rooted in lost or damaged personal belongings whilst being on a ward or in a clinical area.
Even though these types of claims are low in value, they can escalate quickly when individuals feel they have not been listened to or that processes and procedures for making such claims are unclear.
Assessing and resolving small claims
A large proportion of small claims begin as complaints and if handled well the complaints process can be one of the most effective tools trusts have for early resolution. Prompt and empathetic engagement can help to defuse frustrations, understand what has happened, gather accurate information while memories are still fresh and where appropriate offer an explanation or apology that resolves the issue.
If the matter progresses to a formal claim, the trust should have clear systems in place that assess credibility and gather the relevant evidence required. For example, this may include obtaining CCTV footage and contemporaneous incident reports. When dealing with a patient claim, property logs can help to confirm that the items being claimed for were in fact brought onto trust premises which can be especially important when patients allege the loss of high value items. Furthermore, the collation of staff statements can provide firsthand insights as to whether correct procedures were followed.
There will be scenarios where settlement is not only pragmatic but beneficial for the trust. This is particularly the case where:
There is clear evidence of liability
The time and administrative burden outweighs the value of the claim
The incident caused understandable inconvenience or distress
A goodwill gesture would help maintain trust and avoid further escalation
However, trusts should equally feel confident in defending small claims where:
There is insufficient evidence
The claim appears to be exaggerated
The circumstances of the claim are contrary to trust policies or fall within clear exclusions (e.g. claims relating to the loss or damage of prohibited items or incidents occurring in areas where 'no liability' signage is clearly displayed, such as car parks)
A fair but firm approach is essential as it signals that while the trust is committed to resolving genuine concerns, payments will not be made where there is no evidence of fault or where doing so would undermine established polices. Maintaining a strong stance helps to avoid the creation of unhelpful precedents and reduces the risk of encouraging a broader 'claims culture' where individuals expect compensation for any minor inconvenience.
It is important to recognise that where liability is unclear, the matter is resource intensive, the claim is unusually high in value or where reputational damage is at risk the instruction of external legal support may be beneficial. The instruction of external legal support can help the trust to navigate complex issues in a way that minimises risks and avoids setting unhelpful precedents.
Recommendations for trusts
To manage small claims effectively and reduce unnecessary spend, NHS trusts may wish to:
Develop a clear, trust wide criteria for when small claims should be investigated, settled or rejected (including thresholds for when to instruct external legal advice).
Strengthen early engagement and fact finding through the complaints process to resolve issues before they escalate to a formal claim.
Ensure all evidence is captured through reliable incident reporting, CCTV retention, clear property logs and staff statements.
Identify recurring themes, such as weaknesses in property handling or unclear ward processes and use these insights to inform risk management and trust wide learning.
Strengthen preventive measures, for example through clearer communication, improved no-liability signage and consistent, standardised trust wide policies.
Use external legal support when liability is unclear, the claim is high value, resource heavy or carries significant reputational risk.
Conclusion
Small claims may be low in monetary value however their cumulative impact on a trust’s time, resources and culture can be significant. When not managed consistently, they can lead to unnecessary expenditure and contribute to the development of a broader claims culture that can be difficult to reverse.
A structured and consistent approach which is underpinned by effective complaints handling, strong evidence captures and targeted preventative measures helps trusts to not only resolve issues proportionally but offers a strategic opportunity to tighten processes and reduce the risk of avoidable escalations.
This article was co-authored by Paralegal, Sophia Lotrecchio.
