How the Legal System Works

[arimat]

Wasting the time of consumers is a method seemingly being employed in the litigation process, by which time the consumer with the claim runs out of energy and capital.

 

Had a claim for an event against a utility company, a specialist charity informed me that I had one of the best cases they had seen. Hired a lawyer, spent a large amount of time writing the claim and making sure the facts were correct, it was sent to them via the correct legal channels.

 

Then the corporate passed it to a loss adjusters who 'sat' on it for 95% of the time they were allowed, sending back a response which made absolutely no sense. Simply, they lied about maintenance that the utility company performed along with some other very strange facts. Decided that you cannot fight stupidity so put the case on hold.

 

Then, many months later, a family member contacted the loss adjusters mentioning myself, even though they were told directly not to, and the response was something truly unimaginable. You could not make it up, then I started to piece together how the legal system works.

 

As a consumer, most will need to go through the process of a lawyer to write the claim and send it via the correct process, however the corporate can hire a representative that has no legal training and is not part of any professional institute. It means that you have to spend both time and money 'training' their representative to 'see sense', with them adding more irregularities that you need to unravel each time.

 

Simply, the corporate can hire a company with the intelligence of an amoeba following an approach of incremental double-binds, and there is very little you can do to unwind it. I went to both country lawyers and the best London lawyers -not one- noticed that the loss adjusters were -not- legal representatives. They did however, without fail, always ask for a retainer. This begs the question, is it part of the legal system that the consumer pays for trying to coerce sense out of other parties representatives. It is a very successful tactic if you are trying to make the claim ‘go away’.

 

The only solution which seems to neutralise this problem is to fight fire with fire, which would explain why the simpler 'no win no fee' lawyers appear to have a higher success rate. Any settlement would be much lower, however when taken in the overall context of fighting ‘folly’ is that the least worst!

Edited September 7, 2016 by arimat

[steampowered]

You are complaining about the legal process, but it doesn't seem from your post that you have actually filed a claim?

 

If you believe you have a claim against the energy company, you need to file a claim against them through the moneyclaimonline service.

 

You don't need to hire a lawyer and can do it yourself. It is not difficult. If you tell us what your claim is about, you will be able to get help on CAG.

 

It doesn't really matter what their corporate representative tells you. You file a claim; they file a defence; the court decides. Not much they can do to stop that process.

[SuperVillain]

So you sent an LBA and they came back with a response that didn't really address anything?

 

To be fair, I've acted for utilities companies and they are some of the worst record keepers I've come across, particularly when they outsource things. Sometimes when you're in a dispute you just have to do the best with what you got if that's what you're instructed to do.

 

When all is said and done if you follow the process through as steampowered said, you only have to convince a judge. The other side is in the same boat on that front.

[arimat]

You don't even have enough information to make blasé statements of advice, both comments are uninformed.

 

I really don't like stupidity masquerading as intelligence, I can filter it out but most people don't have those skills.

[steampowered]

People are happy to help you, but you need to give them enough information before you can expect to receive sensible help. You can't complain about people being uninformed if you only give them snippets of the story.

 

If you would like to receive sensible advice on how to move this situation forward and overcome any delays/procrastination, you need to tell us what stage you have reached with the legal process.

 

I understood from reading your first post that you haven't actually issued any sort of legal claim with the court, but please correct me if that is wrong.

[Ganymede]

Wasting the time of consumers is a method seemingly being employed in the litigation process, by which time the consumer with the claim runs out of energy and capital.

 

Had a claim for an event against a utility company, a specialist charity informed me that I had one of the best cases they had seen. Hired a lawyer, spent a large amount of time writing the claim and making sure the facts were correct, it was sent to them via the correct legal channels.

 

Then the corporate passed it to a loss adjusters who 'sat' on it for 95% of the time they were allowed, sending back a response which made absolutely no sense. Simply, they lied about maintenance that the utility company performed along with some other very strange facts. Decided that you cannot fight stupidity so put the case on hold.

 

Then, many months later, a family member contacted the loss adjusters mentioning myself, even though they were told directly not to, and the response was something truly unimaginable. You could not make it up, then I started to piece together how the legal system works.

 

As a consumer, most will need to go through the process of a lawyer to write the claim and send it via the correct process, however the corporate can hire a representative that has no legal training and is not part of any professional institute. It means that you have to spend both time and money 'training' their representative to 'see sense', with them adding more irregularities that you need to unravel each time.

 

Simply, the corporate can hire a company with the intelligence of an amoeba following an approach of incremental double-binds, and there is very little you can do to unwind it. I went to both country lawyers and the best London lawyers -not one- noticed that the loss adjusters were -not- legal representatives. They did however, without fail, always ask for a retainer. This begs the question, is it part of the legal system that the consumer pays for trying to coerce sense out of other parties representatives. It is a very successful tactic if you are trying to make the claim ‘go away’.

 

 

Why is this important? Until Court proceedings are issued the insurance company or loss adjuster will handle the claim. It's only once you have actually issued Court proceedings that the file is passed to a firm of solicitors to deal with.

 

 

 

 

The only solution which seems to neutralise this problem is to fight fire with fire, which would explain why the simpler 'no win no fee' lawyers appear to have a higher success rate. Any settlement would be much lower, however when taken in the overall context of fighting ‘folly’ is that the least worst!

 

Why would the settlement be lower? After the solicitor took their percentage you mean?

[SuperVillain]

You don't even have enough information to make blasé statements of advice, both comments are uninformed.

 

I really don't like stupidity masquerading as intelligence, I can filter it out but most people don't have those skills.

 

To be clear my post wasn't "advice" it was merely a response to your post, which didn't appear to ask for help with anything specific.

 

The question I asked was to get more information because, as you have said, there isn't enough information in your first post for one to suggest advice on your issue.

[legalistic]

arimat on my reading of your post the problem is with the insurance business. As always they simply don't want to pay out.