There is no doubt the uninsured loss recovery market is often murky in the extreme. Frauds, inflated claims and unhappy customers have made it one of the insurance industry's biggest headaches, and one of the hardest to tackle.
It's no surprise, therefore, that the Motoring Uninsured Loss Recoveries Association is calling for the Lord Chancellor to widen his current enquiry into claims assessors and also investigate the ULR scene. Nor that the legal expenses insurer DAS, which is a MULRA member, has reiterated the call, and even upped the ante by seeking statutory regulation of the sector.
A wider enquiry is unlikely to be granted. The Lord Chancellor's brief has well-defined parameters and is proceeding smoothly. And there may be no need to widen it anyway. The Association of British Insurers has a raft of initiatives in place, aimed at tackling ULR abuse. Better to allow this work programme to unfold and be implemented, than have it disrupted by parallel efforts elsewhere.
But DAS may still succeed in shaking up the ULR scene dramatically. It has gone much further than its trade body by accusing some brokers and intermediaries of playing a leading role in fuelling the claims climate. “Greed”, as DAS labels it, is prompting brokers to sell on their clients' accident claims to a ULR operator for £150 a shot. Even worse, some of these clients have already paid for a legal expenses insurance policy.
Rumours of these shabby practices have been circulating for some while, but it's the first time that such a high profile name as DAS has laid into the broking community this way.
The broking trade bodies will no doubt defend their members from the charges, and deplore the antics of anyone receiving kickbacks from these tricks. Until DAS names names, it is hard for them to do anything else.
That naming process may be about to begin. DAS says it will soon be presenting a dossier of the most flagrant abuses to the Lord Chancellor's Department, and that document will most likely detail which brokers were involved in passing on accident cases to ULR firms.
If this is not enough to send a shudder through some brokers, then they should consider their professional liabilities. If a broker passes on a client with a pre-paid policy to a ULR outfit, and the client does not achieve a good outcome, the client has a strong case against their broker for professional negligence. That ought to make a few people sit up and think a bit harder about the damage they are doing.
There is no doubt the uninsured loss recovery market is often murky in the extreme. Frauds, inflated claims and unhappy customers have made it one of the insurance industry's biggest headaches, and one of the hardest to tackle.
It's no surprise, therefore, that the Motoring Uninsured Loss Recoveries Association is calling for the Lord Chancellor to widen his current enquiry into claims assessors and also investigate the ULR scene. Nor that the legal expenses insurer DAS, which is a MULRA member, has reiterated the call, and even upped the ante by seeking statutory regulation of the sector.
A wider enquiry is unlikely to be granted. The Lord Chancellor's brief has well-defined parameters and is proceeding smoothly. And there may be no need to widen it anyway. The Association of British Insurers has a raft of initiatives in place, aimed at tackling ULR abuse. Better to allow this work programme to unfold and be implemented, than have it disrupted by parallel efforts elsewhere.
But DAS may still succeed in shaking up the ULR scene dramatically. It has gone much further than its trade body by accusing some brokers and intermediaries of playing a leading role in fuelling the claims climate. “Greed”, as DAS labels it, is prompting brokers to sell on their clients' accident claims to a ULR operator for £150 a shot. Even worse, some of these clients have already paid for a legal expenses insurance policy.
Rumours of these shabby practices have been circulating for some while, but it's the first time that such a high profile name as DAS has laid into the broking community this way.
The broking trade bodies will no doubt defend their members from the charges, and deplore the antics of anyone receiving kickbacks from these tricks. Until DAS names names, it is hard for them to do anything else.
That naming process may be about to begin. DAS says it will soon be presenting a dossier of the most flagrant abuses to the Lord Chancellor's Department, and that document will most likely detail which brokers were involved in passing on accident cases to ULR firms.
If this is not enough to send a shudder through some brokers, then they should consider their professional liabilities. If a broker passes on a client with a pre-paid policy to a ULR outfit, and the client does not achieve a good outcome, the client has a strong case against their broker for professional negligence. That ought to make a few people sit up and think a bit harder about the damage they are doing.
