I note with interest the comments from Trevor Webb (Letters, 12 October). In our small, claimant practice we notice the delays in insurers reading files and making decisions; either on liability, at protocol response, or on quantum after submission.
Mostly we have to issue before an offer is made. Rehabilitation is rarely considered. Silly obstacles are often put forward.
Even after issue, many panel solictors firms are unable to get to grips with the matter. Default judgments are becoming common.
Certainly, I understand that there are some factory type claimant firms out there. Most of them appear to be fed by liability insurers (and their claims farming arms) which in turn profit from the revenue stream.
Is it not the case that insurers are being bitten by the hound they bred themselves? It is kept so hungry it cannot afford to, for example, see each client face to face, or vet its experts properly.
I am miffed by the research which I had thought was rhetoric for our political masters and as convincing as a dodgy engineer in a LVI case.
I would be horrified if insurers actually believed they were the victims rather than the cause and solution.
Andrew Sharpe, Penmans