[Gllug] ``Confidential`` .sigs

[David Damerell]

On Monday, 6 Dec 2004, Martin A. Brooks wrote:
>David Damerell wrote:
>>Actually, as you would know had you looked at the link to actual facts
>>I sent, you would see that there were around 10% fewer in 2003/2004
>>than in the three previous years.
>Okay, you're right.  Clearly a report written by a bunch of suits in 
>government office know more about the frequency and trend of PI claims 
>than a PI lawyer who works on a firm specialising in PI claims.

Ah, yes; if you don't like the facts, deny them.

Perhaps it has not occurred to you that the government has exact
figures on the number of court cases, what they are about, costs,
awards, etc. ? Do you suppose that courts keep the number of PI cases
a jealously guarded secret from the government?

In contrast, it ought to be obvious to anyone that the demise of two
large firms of ambulance chasers might cause another firm working in
the sector to see an increase in their business in spite of a net
contraction of the sector. So might simple competence.

It's exactly this tendency to find one's own preconcieved ideas and
anecdotal evidence more convincing than any rigorous study that
permits nonsensical ideas to circulate.

-- 
David Damerell <damerell at chiark.greenend.org.uk> Kill the tomato!
md5sum of prediction: 89be0710131233cf4d73f15ebd10310c
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug