Recovery Before Resolution: How the Rehabilitation Code Can Start Treatment While Fault Is Still in Dispute

A serious injury seldom waits for the legal process to catch up. Liability may take months to investigate, medical evidence may take longer still, and yet the practical needs of an injured person — therapy, equipment, a suitable place to live, help with washing and dressing — begin on the day of the accident. The Rehabilitation Code exists to narrow that gap.

What the Code actually is

The document is formally titled the Code of Best Practice on Rehabilitation, Early Intervention and Medical Treatment in Personal Injury Claims, and it is usually shortened to the Rehabilitation Code. It was first produced in 1999 by representatives of insurers and claimant lawyers working together, and it has been revised since. It applies to claims pursued in England and Wales.

It is important to be clear about its status. The Code is a voluntary framework, not legislation. It does not compel an insurer to fund anything, and it does not decide who was at fault. What it does is set out an agreed way of working: early notification of a claim, a shared focus on the injured person's needs, and a mechanism for assessing those needs without waiting for the liability question to be resolved.

Why timing matters more than most people expect

Clinicians who work with major trauma, spinal injury and acquired brain injury tend to make the same point: the first weeks and months after injury shape what becomes possible later. A delay in specialist therapy, the absence of a hoist or a hospital bed at home, a discharge into unsuitable housing, or months spent without structured activity can all create secondary problems that are harder and more costly to address than the original need.

That clinical argument sits alongside a commercial one. Insurers understand that early rehabilitation often reduces the eventual size of a claim, particularly where it shortens hospital stays, avoids avoidable admissions, or supports a return to some form of work. The Code works because both sides have something to gain from acting sooner rather than later.

The Immediate Needs Assessment

In practice, the Code operates through an assessment. A solicitor acting for the injured person notifies the insurer early and requests that the injured person's needs be assessed. That assessment is normally carried out by an independent rehabilitation provider — commonly an occupational therapist, physiotherapist or case manager with specialist experience in the relevant injury.

The resulting report, often called an Immediate Needs Assessment, identifies what is required in the short to medium term. It might recommend a block of physiotherapy, specialist equipment, support worker hours, transport, a period of case management, or alterations to the home. Each recommendation is usually costed. The report is shared with both sides, and the insurer then decides what it will fund.

Keeping liability in its own lane

The feature that makes the Code workable is the separation it creates. Funds released for rehabilitation under the Code are not an admission of liability, and the question of fault continues to be investigated on its own timetable. An insurer can therefore pay for therapy without conceding the claim.

There is a practical caveat. Reports produced in this process may become disclosable if the claim later goes to court, and both sides are expected to engage with the process in good faith rather than to use it tactically. A solicitor will usually advise on how instructions to an assessor should be framed, so that the report is useful for care planning without becoming a hostage to fortune.

How to ask for an assessment

For an injured person or family, the route in is straightforward, though it benefits from being deliberate:

• Raise rehabilitation with your solicitor at the earliest opportunity, rather than waiting for the medical evidence to be complete.
• Ask for a written request to the insurer, identifying the injury, the immediate needs and the urgency.
• Ask who will carry out the assessment, and check that the provider has genuine experience of the injury in question.
• Agree a timescale for the assessment and for the insurer's response, and ask for it to be confirmed in writing.
• If the insurer declines or delays, ask what alternative funding is available — an interim payment application may be the next step.

The Pre-Action Protocol for Personal Injury Claims expects parties to consider rehabilitation, and the Serious Injury Guide agreed between insurers and claimant representatives reinforces the same expectation for the largest claims. Neither guarantees a particular outcome, but both give weight to a reasonable request.

What insurers will weigh up

An insurer receiving an assessment will generally look at whether the recommended support is reasonable, proportionate and linked to the injury. It may agree some recommendations and defer others, or propose a staged plan with a review date. Recommendations that appear unconnected to the accident, or that anticipate a level of care not yet supported by medical evidence, are the most likely to attract scrutiny.

Where the Code is not the answer

The Code has most to offer in claims involving significant or catastrophic injury. In smaller claims, and in cases where the diagnosis is still unclear or causation is genuinely contested, the process may add little. It also does not replace legal advice, and it does not resolve the substantive dispute about responsibility.

Realistic expectations

Rehabilitation under the Code can begin quickly, but it is not automatic and it is rarely comprehensive. Funding may be partial, further assessments may be needed, and disagreements can arise about what is appropriate. What the Code offers is a recognised route to earlier help, separate from the settlement itself, with the legal questions left to run their course. Documenting requests, recommendations and responses as you go will make the position clearer whichever way the claim develops.