Legal Expenses - Why Do Insurers Refuse An Insured's Own Choice Of Solicitor

[mooreda]

I recently made a claim on my Legal Expenses Insurance and wanted to use my own solicitor. However, upon making the claim and my details being passed to a Legal Expenses Insurer called DAS - DAS refused and said that I had to use their Panel Solicitor. Is this right and Lawful?

I have read some legislation which as far as I can see say's that I am entitled to use my own solicitor. As such why does the insurance industry appear to be flouting the law?

The Insurance Companies (Legal Expenses Insurance) Regulations 1990

• Arrangements for avoiding conflicts of interests
  5.—(1) An insurance company carrying on legal expenses insurance business shall adopt at least one ofthe following arrangements.
  
  (2) The company shall ensure that no member of staff who is concerned with the management of claims under legal expenses insurance contracts, or with legal advice in respect of such claims, carries on at the same time any similar activity—
  • (a) in relation to another class of general insurance business carried on by the company, or
  • (b) in any other insurance company, having financial, commercial or administrative links with the first company, which carries on one or more other classes of general insurance business.
  (3) The company shall entrust the management of claims under legal expenses insurance contracts to an undertaking having separate legal personality, which shall be mentioned in the separate policy or section referred to in regulation 4.
  • If that undertaking has financial, commercial or administrative links with another insurance company which carries on one or more other classes of general insurance business, members of the staff of the undertaking who are concerned with the processing of claims, or with providing legal advice connected with such processing, shall not pursue the same or a similar activity in that other insurance company at the same time.
  ****** (4) The company shall, in the policy, afford the insured the right to entrust the defence of his interests, from the moment that he hasthe right to claim from the insurer under the policy, to a lawyer of his choice or, to the extent that the law of the relevant forumso permits, to any other appropriately qualified person.******

• and

• Freedom to choose lawyer

• 6.—(1) Where under a legal expenses insurance contract recourse is had to a lawyer (or other person having such qualifications as may be necessary) to defend, represent or serve the interests of the insured in any inquiry or proceedings, the insured shall be free to choose that lawyer (or other person).
  

[LemonTwist]

I've found this page on the Financial Ombudsman Service website which may be useful. It says that although The Insurance Companies (Legal Expenses Insurance) Regulations 1990 gives policyholders the right to choose a lawyer, they can only exercise this right after administrative or legal proceedings have started. There's also more about it on issue 26 - legal expenses insurance

	The Financial Ombudsman Service For the most part, don't bother. The Ombudsman is an industry arranged service which is under-resourced, takes too long, lacks clear transparency. You have no idea what evidence the FOS has received from the bank or how your complain has really been handled. The FOS is the preferred complaints route for the banking industry. The county court is to be preferred by consumers for its speed, openness, the quality of its awards and also because it will award 8% interest on top of any damages won by you. The Ombudsman should normally be used to solving little technical difficulties or customer service problems which you have expereinced with your bank.

[daviet1976]

It would be easier not to claim through your legal expenses!

If your solicitor is confident enough to "win", expenses and costs will be claimed from the other party(ies) in any case.

How did your claim turn out in the end?