As one of the UK’s leading insurance law practices we understand your commercial needs.
Our specialist motor insurance team is recognised for its proven track record across all types of claims handling, advising on matters ranging from fixed fee claims, small and fast track litigation, fraud and low velocity impact, large and catastrophic injury, through to subrogated recovery schemes, criminal prosecutions and police interviews, legal expense insurance schemes, credit hire and inquests.
With over 30 years’ experience, working for some of the industry's leading insurers, our approach is distinctively direct, innovative and authentic. Our motor claims experts work with you to underpin your claims process with a clear strategy and strong supply chain management.
Insurer LV= and International law firm DWF have successfully fought a motor fraud case, leading to the conviction of nine people for an organised ‘crash for cash’ scheme.
Insurers are unable to recover the costs that they had paid on cases that were submitted to the Portal, but did not go any further than Stage 1. Delivering the judgment of the Court of Appeal in J C & A Solicitors v Iqbal & EUI Ltd (2017), Lord Justice Briggs held that the Pre-Action Protocol made it clear that costs would be paid at the end of each stage, irrespective of what happened next so that solicitors could be paid for the work that they had done. The rules made no express provision for repayment of the costs and none should be conferred by the Court.
Mimms v Mulsanne Insurance Company Limited Dartford County Court Before EJ Russell 21/3/17
Beaumont & O’Neill v Ferrer
16 July 2014
On 2 August 2016, the FCA published a Feedback Statement on rules and guidance in relation to PPI and Plevin complaints.
Speed Medical has failed in its attempt to judicially review the MoJ’s decision to randomise selection of MROs in the MedCo search function. At a “rolled up” hearing last week (11 December), Mr Justice Cranston concluded that the Secretary of State's decision to configure the search offer in the way his Department did, did not intefere with competition and was not irrational.
The Court of Appeal has concluded that an insurer who settled claims submitted to the MoJ Portal directly with the claimants, interfered with the rights of the solicitors they instructed to recover their Portal costs; and the equitable remedy would be to order the insurer to pay those costs to the solicitors concerned.
An individual who brought a fraudulent claim, described as amateurish and bound to fail, was sentenced to 6 months in prison, suspended for two years, conditional upon the payment of £5,000 towards the applicant’s costs. Raymond Fearon claimed to have been a passenger on a mini bus, when it was involved in an incident, but his claims were false and, even though he discontinued his claim, committal…