Bikers and cyclists involved in serious accidents are being treated inhumanely by insurance companies who deal with them in the same way as people claiming potentially phoney whiplash injuries, a specialist lawyer has said.

Brenda Mitchell, founder of Motorcycle Law Scotland, has called for insurers to recognise the needs of the seriously injured rather than sweep them into the lawyer referral system which has sprung up as part of the industry's explosion of minor personal injury claims.

Motorcyclist Graham Clark, 56, from Inverurie in Aberdeenshire, was involved in a serious collision with a car in October 2011 on the A96, which left him with numerous fractures and a traumatic brain injury.

"His insurance company quickly put him in touch with its appointed solicitor," Ms Mitchell said. "But, instead of being given the support he needed, 10 months later, finding it hard to hold down his job and still struggling to come to terms with his injuries, he had not even been offered an appointment to meet him. As far as Mr Clark is concerned, the system let him down. Despite sustaining serious injuries that had significant impact on his life, he felt as if he was being treated as just another file number."

Phil Greig, 49,a motorcyclist from Banchory, Aberdeenshire, broke his back in a May 2009 collision with a car which pulled out in front of him. On leaving hospital, Mr Greig was told his back injury would affect his ability to work and would almost certainly get worse with age.

"As a self-employed garage owner, who was responsible for not only his employed apprentice but the welfare of his family, he had very real concerns about his future," Ms Mitchell said. "However, his appointed solicitor made no attempt to meet him and offered no support or reassurance." The case has recently been settled.

Mr Clark said it was only following a chance meeting with the specialist lawyer, at a motorcycle event 10 months after his accident, that the extent of his injuries was fully investigated and the process to determine liability and possible compensation put in motion.

He said: "My injuries were fairly extensive. I was in a lot of pain as I went through numerous operations and was having difficulties with mood swings and memory loss which affected both my job and my personal life. But, during all this there was no word from my solicitor at the time about how to seek some recompense for my changed circumstances."

Mr Clark went on: "I went along with the insurance company's choice of solicitor, believing that having paid for legal cover this was in my best interest, but to them I was just another accident statistic, a claimant handed on to the next person in the chain and no attempt was made to understand what had actually happened to me."

In Mr Clark's case, the motorist involved was convicted for driving without due care and attention, fined £750 and disqualified for 50 days. But insurance company Axa had refused to admit liability, forcing the motorcyclist to raise a court action. Facing a specialist lawyer and comprehensive reports from medical experts, Axa offered a six-figure settlement, more than two years after the collision and three months before the final court hearing date.

The lawyer, whose firm is based in the Borders with offices in Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen, commented: "This is quite deep-seated and goes back to what Jack Straw called the industry's dirty little secret, that insurance companies sell client details to personal injury lawyers. What we are seeing is this explosion in whiplash claims, but there is another side to that - what happens to those who are very seriously injured, are they referred to panel solicitors and what does the insurance company do to make sure that solicitor is able to cope with a seriously injured person?"

Following publicity generated by Mr Straw and others, referral fees between insurers and law firms were banned 19 months ago, but many insurers side-stepped the change by taking control of law firms enabling them to share profits.

Ms Mitchell commented: "There is often a financial relationship between an insurance company and their 'appointed panel solicitor' whereby the solicitor pays for the case. This can result in a service becoming a process which may be acceptable and convenient for low value, straightforward claims, but may not be in the best interests of seriously injured accident victims."

She added: "It's the client who has to be placed at the centre of the process not the fees available to referring insurance companies and appointed lawyers."

Malcolm Tarling, spokesman for the Association of British Insurers, said form-filling and initial paperwork was essential for the claimant to be fully informed, adding: "Industry best practice guidelines do ensure that the claimant is made aware of their right to seek independent legal advice." He said referral fees had now been banned and were now therefore "not a factor". Any settlement to an injured claimant would be "based on robust medical evidence", on judicial guidelines and case law.

Ms Mitchell said that for claims against at-fault motorists, add-on legal services insurance was a waste of money.