Insurers plan advertising campaign for personal injury claims
Thursday 22 October 2009 by Jonathan Rayner
A number of insurers are gearing up to launch advertising campaigns to persuade personal injury claimants in motor accidents to bypass solicitors and deal directly with the responsible party\’s insurer, it is believed.
The news comes as the Financial Services Authority confirmed that it does not intend to regulate insurers when they gather claims through \’third-party capture\’, but is instead seeking an \’industry-led solution\’.
Solicitor Robert Webb, a founding member of the Accident Compensation Solicitors Group (ACSG) which campaigns against third-party capture, said he had been told that a number of insurers were planning to target the public in advertising campaigns.
He said the regional claims manager of one major insurer had \’loosley confirmed\’ that an advertising campaign was scheduled for just after Christmas. \’The result will be more under-settled claims as insurance companies pressure injured people to accept compensation without the advice of a solicitor, \’ he said.
Meanwhile, the FSA has said that it is \’exploring with trade bodies\’ whether there could be an \’industry-led solution\’ to the regulation of insurers when they act for non-policyholders. However, it does not intend to take on this regulation itself. FSA insurance sector director Ken Hogg had previously said he would decide by the end of September whether it would take any action on third-party capture.
ACSG member Saffora Choudri, partner at SC Law, said she was not surprised the FSA was \’washing its hands\’ of third-party capture. \’We have been trying for 18 months to set up a meeting with the FSA, but without success. The Ministry of Justice and Association of British Insurers also seem unwilling to tackle this growing menace.
‘The prospect for claimants is bleak and the insurance industry will be the only winner.’
3rd Party capture
Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 22/10/2009 – 14:39.
What can one say other than for all the obvious reasons it\\\’s an appalling idea I ask you do turkeys vote for Christmas are insurers going to be fair and generous I think not. Also what happens when a claimant finds they have been short changed who funds that litigation. Unless claimants receive totally \’independent\’ legal advice then it\’s inevitable that they will suffer. If it\’s the insurance companies aim to reduce costs then may I suggest they stop defending so many case that are often indefensible. If it\’s not liability they argue causation