Insurers ‘pressure’ crash victims

6 June 2009

Insurers are trying to force drivers to settle claims just hours after accidents, says a road safety charity.

Brake is concerned that people are being encouraged to take a pay-out before getting legal or medical advice.

Solicitor groups have called for tighter rules governing how companies treat so-called "third parties".

But the insurance industry says such claimants should get compensation quickly without having to resort to lengthy and costly legal processes.

Pressure

When a driver is involved in an accident which is not their fault, they would expect to deal with the other person’s insurer.

But the national road safety charity, Brake, says it is concerned that insurance companies are pushing crash victims to settle quickly, before getting legal or medical advice.

Kimberley Harrison suffered severe facial injuries when another car crashed head-on with hers in March 2008.

She was surprised – and angry – to receive frequent calls from an agent of the other driver’s insurer the day after she left hospital.

"From the day I got home, the insurance company phoned me and were pressurising me not to take it any further – not to seek legal advice. I was really shocked.

"He was really forceful, like a bully – really trying to push me to close a deal," she said.

Once she instructed lawyers, Kimberley said the insurance company in question, Quinn Direct, managed to get hold of her medical reports.

"They posed as someone working for my solicitor in order to obtain my medical records. I had no idea insurance companies would behave in that way."

Whistleblower

Brake spokesperson Jane Horton said insurers should not make this kind of direct and often unsolicited contact.

"It’s as if having been made a victim once… you’re then being made a victim twice by then being approached when you’re not really equipped to deal with it," she added.

Tommy Scott is a former claims handler for Quinn Direct. He said it was his job to "doorstep" third parties, often within hours of the accident.

"My sole job was to capture those clients – to stop them getting independent legal advice, and try to settle direct in their living room," he said.

Quinn Direct has denied Tommy Scott’s claims.

It said its "pro-active" approach is "based on paying fair compensation" quickly, and that third parties "appreciate" the service.

The company added that it "completely respects a claimant’s right to appoint a solicitor".

Quinn Direct is investigating the claims about Kimberley Harrison’s medical reports.

Widespread

Personal injury lawyers say that the practice of "third party capture" is widespread across the industry, and that most big insurers have departments dedicated to it. Direct contact with the not-at-fault driver is standard practice.

A leading insurers association (the ABI) insists its members contact injured third party drivers to help them get compensation quickly.

"It is the right thing for insurers to be doing, rather than requiring claimants to drag them through the courts," said Justin Jacobs, assistant director of motor insurance at the ABI.

But the Motor Accident Solicitors’ Society and Brake are both calling for tighter regulation in this field.

The rules which govern how insurers must behave focus on insurance companies’ treatment of their policyholders; they say very little about how third party claimants should be treated.

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Northern Ireland exam board boss wins £100,000 settlement

Northern Ireland’s Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has paid a substantial settlement to its former interim chief executive who complained of sex, race and age discrimination and constructive dismissal. The sum paid to Margaret Farragher,...

Catriona Crumlish v Health Service Executive – Court of Appeal

On Oct. 15th, The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision against Caitriona Crumlish in her claim against Letterkenny University hospital. The plaintiff alleged that there was a failure to detect and diagnose breast cancer in May 2017 resulting in an alleged...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...