APIL Question Insurer's Promises
Injury Lawyers Have Become Wary of Fair Compensation from Insurers
Oct 14, 2009
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has hit out at a statement released by the Association of British Insurers (ABI) claiming that anyone looking to make ac claim after a road accident doesn’t exactly need legal representation to make a claim. This statement was released in response to claims made by the Northern Ireland Law Society which highlights bad behaviour among insurers who have approached injured people direct to settle compensation claims.
The Association of British Insurers View
The statement reads “independent research has shown that claimants do not need legal representation to get fair compensation and that legal advice does not lead to higher payouts. Nethertheless, insurers should always advise claimants that they have the right to legal advice. Helping get care and compensation without legal advice can help bring down motor insurance, as legal costs currently add 10 percent to the cost of motor insurance.”
The ABI’s statement is a subtle attack on what many official bodies believe to be hyper inflated legal costs which can sometimes drive up the cost of things such as motor insurance. In response to the ABI’s comments APIL have released a press release giving fighting back, APIL's press release can be found here. Denise Kitchener, chief executive of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) commmented in the press release saying, she was appalled by the ABI’s assertion that insurers “want to help innocent victims…get the care and compensation they need.” “It is a ludicrous comment to make,” she said. “Insurers do not work for innocent victims – their first duty is to their shareholders.”
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers View
Denise Kitchener said in the statement released in September 2009 said “the Law Society’s report is very welcome, not only because it demonstrates the problems injured people face when insurers approach them direct, but it also adds weight to the nationwide campaign which APIL, alongside others, has been running for some years. Hopefully the Financial Services Authority will now sit up and take notice and start taking this problem seriously.”
She continued to say that “We have been saying for years that the practice known as ‘third party capture’ must be regulated, because we hear time after time about injured people being approached direct by insurers who offer them paltry amounts of compensation, and subject them to shoddy treatment. Many are pressurised to settle a claim without seeking independent legal advice,”
“The ABI consistently quotes its old research and maintains people get a better deal without lawyers – but we know for a fact this research is flawed and cannot be relied on. The researchers themselves actually say the data should be treated with caution – it’s simply not reliable and certainly does not excuse or justify the way many injured people are being treated by insurers.”
Third Part Capture, is it Beneficial?
APIL’s statement has defended an attack and what may well be described as a threat to what has become a cash cow for many injury lawyers. Third party capture essentially cuts out the middle man driving down legal costs for many insurance companies how are resentfully having to pay for legal costs under no win no fee agreements.
This argument between injury lawyers and insurance companies could roll on for a while yet Denise Kitchener highlights the fact that third part capture is relatively unregulated, so like with a lot things whilst the powers that be duke it out it is the innocent victims who are vulnerable and left out in the cold.
 |
