Sir, - As an audiologist of 30 years' standing I cannot allow Kevin Myers's Irishman's Diary on Army deafness (November 15th) to go without reply.
It is regrettable that he belittles army personnel by what in my view is merely an ill-informed and sarcastic sounding off.
Contrary to what Mr Myers implies, there are ways of ensuring that incorrect or fake responses during an audiogram can be detected and kept to a minimum. In my experience of testing Army personnel I have found them to be genuine people and willing to accept my advice where I find what I consider to be no basis for a claim. Furthermore, I have encountered many soldiers who are embarrassed by the huge number of claims and who would not dream of jumping on the bandwagon - this in the face of daily tabloid advertising by solicitors inviting members and ex-members of the Defence Forces who feel they might have a hearing difficulty, to contact them. This latter is blatant soliciting by lawyers.
The real concern lies, not in the volume of claims per se, but in the "ambulance chasing" by the legal profession. What a pity Mr Myers backed off from addressing this side of the coin - there is far greater cause for public outrage in this area. My concern is, and has been from the outset, that because the Government has nothing in place to deal with the unprecedented number of claims by army personnel other than on a case-bycase basis using the adversarial legal system, the situation has become a bonanza for lawyers. The Government has allowed the lawyers to hijack the handling of claims.
Some months ago I wrote a lengthy letter to the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, a copy of which I sent to every TD in Dail Eireann and to other interested parties, expressing my concerns at the lack of Government action. I called for a proper scheme to be put in place instead of the present case-by-case method which is generating colossal attaching legal costs. I outlined an alternative method which would be fair, efficient and would cost only a tiny fraction of the present system.
As a result of my efforts, the matter was raised during Question Time in the Dail and the Minister for Defence at the time, Mr Andrews, acknowledged the gravity of the problem and accepted that something would have to be done to cut down the legal costs. Following a very positive response across the board, I presented Mr Michael Smith, the new Minister for Defence, with submissions and offered my expertise and experience. I have also responded to Mr Jim Mitchell, Chairman of Public Accounts Committee who has publicly stated his intention to do something.
The true position on amounts needs to be clarified. Firstly, it is estimated that claims for compensation could reach £500 million - not £400 million as stated by Mr Myers. Secondly, of that £500 million, a crazy amount of £180 million will go to the lawyers. Yes, Mr Myers, the legals are set to get £180 million if the present system prevails. Thirdly, the average settlement is running at about £25,000 per claimant, but the average legal costs are 60 per cent of that amount, or £15,000 per case, making a total of £40,000 per case to settle. These are the figures as stated by Mr David Andrews in his Dail speech - they are not mine. May I repeat that at £15,000 per case for legal fees, and with an estimated 12,000 claims expected, the figure for legal costs will amount to an obscene figure of £180 million. This is a scandalous situation and in my view totally unnecessary.
As Mr Myers saw fit to put pen to paper at all on the subject of claims by Army personnel, why did he direct his facetious and sarcastic remarks at those whose hearing has been damaged and who are perfectly entitled to claim compensation, while he makes scant reference (a) to the responsibility of successive Governments both as to the cause and the handling of this problem, and (b) to those possessed of the real greed culture: the lawyers in this equation? - Yours, etc.,
From Sean Hussey Mishaa
Capel Street, Dublin 1.