WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE PORTAL? INSURERS CONTACTING CLAIMANTS DIRECTLY: STILL

6 Responses

1. 

   Kevyn Thompson · March 1, 2016 at 13:31:56 · →

   Let it exit the Portal on lack of insurer response and make sure that in the ensuing proceedings you emphasise that you are treating their allegations of fraud seriously Justifies moving to the Multi Track. If they settle with your client direct then on the Edmundson decision in the Court of Appeal they pay you in any event. Emphasise that you will be relying upon conduct to invite an order for costs on the indemnity basis

2. 

   Robert Pettitt · March 1, 2016 at 13:47:39 · →

   My first thoughts are:

   (1) Financial Ombudsman complaint

   (2) Serious consideration of libel action if they are persistently sending letter to Client

   (3)(a) Suggest that approaching CL direct indicates preference by D to take claim out of portal and proceed accordingly

   or

   (3)(b) Ignore their extra hoops (obviously write to tell them you are not going to give them the extra info) and proceed outside of protocol when time is up

3. 

   Simon Anderson · March 1, 2016 at 16:16:39 · →

   I would argue that CPR 45.13 applies in that the conduct of the insurer in alleging fraud amounts to “exceptional circumstances”.

4. 

   Lee Kipling · March 1, 2016 at 17:10:36 · →

   Dear Gordon,

   Perhaps Kerry should refer Travellers to the Claims Portal Behavioural Committee Guidance (found at http://www.claimsportal.org.uk/media/91275/BC1-direct-contact-with-represented-clients.pdf) which states “The Behaviour Committee is clear that once an Insurer or other compensator is aware that a solicitor is acting there should be no contact with the claimant except through that solicitor. […] The Behaviour Committee believes that it may be appropriate that Claimant Representatives should raise individual cases with the FCA and the Information Commissioners Office so that they aware of the concerns. It is then a matter for the regulator to consider”.

   Thanks,

   Lee

   Lee Kipling
   Trainee Solicitor

   t: 0191 276 1000 f: 0191 265 7969

   Calls are welcomed by Text Relay by dialling 18001

   [cid:imageed95a0.JPG@c9becbb8.47993870]

   Brinkburn Street, Byker, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 1PL

   A list of directors names is open to inspection at our registered office of Brinkburn Street, Byker, Newcastle upon Tyne NE6 1PL (Email solicitors@winnsolicitors.com) (VAT No. 780 5176 20). Authorised and Regulated by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority No. 00400385. Registered in England and Wales No. 5084463. The Authority’s rules can be accessed at http://www.sra.org.uk

   The information contained within this e-mail is confidential and privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited, please reply to let us know you received it in error and delete this e-mail immediately. We cannot accept any responsibility for viruses, so please scan all attachments.

   Winn Solicitors Limited reserves the right to monitor all email communications through its networks. All calls may be recorded for training and monitoring purposes.

5. 

   Tim · March 1, 2016 at 17:58:19 · →

   Can we see a copy of the two letters (with redactions, if appropriate)?

6. 

   Kerry · March 2, 2016 at 13:10:16 · →

   Hi Tim

   Please contact me and I will send you copies with redactions.

   Had another today from Aviva who have been notified on the Portal in respect of a pedestrian accident occurring in September 2015 and where the Claimant suffered a fractured leg. We have been asked to provide a copy of signed CNF (signed by the Claimant) or a form of authorisation to act from the client to enable Aviva “to consider your Client’s claim”.

   oh and they are ….”Genuinely surprised to receive an injury Claim from your client at such a late stage as such claims are pursued within the first few weeks” and the “delay has compromised our ability to investigate and gather evidence”.

   Clearly limitation now is less than 6 months!

   In my opinion this is being done to escalate costs to justify the need for small claims limit to increase.

Comments are closed.