Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that. I will give them till Tuesday. Thanks for your help, very much appreciated. 
    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Legal Expenses Insurance Fraud?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6135 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

In 2006 my neighbour sued me - using legal expenses insurance - to build on a garden boundary that was my responsibility. She lost. My costs were enormous; most are unrecoverable (Fast Track case lasted two and a half days.)

In 2005 she sued me over a leaking - shared - flat shed roof. (Not sure how it was funded.) In my amended particulars of claim for that action I included the boundary dispute. This matter was settled via Tomlin Order with no mention of the boundary dispute.

The boundary dispute predated the 2006 action therefore it almost certainly predated my neighbours LEI. Therefore her claim must be dubious(?)

I contacted the Insurance Fraud Bureau. They sent out an (e-mail) alert but have not received a response. I have written to all LEI companies that I could find. They will not deal with me, citing the Data Protection Act.

I contacted the Insurance Ombudsman they said go to the FSA. The FSA said go to the Insurance Ombudsman. Eventually someone at the FSA said write in requesting an investigation. The FSA response to that was that I cannot request an investigation as a third party.

If anyone out there has any ideas on this matter I would be most grateful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most Home Insurance policies carry legal expenses cover of some sort so your neighbour may well have cover through them. Anyway it is your neighbours and their insurers problem not yours.

 

From your point of view if a court has awarded you costs and they have not been received it is far more satisfying to ask the court to recover them for you. They may instruct a bailiff, enforcement officer or you have the option to bankrupt your neighbour!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replying.

 

Sadly it is not that my costs have not been paid it is that a case pursued via the Fast Track option limits the costs that can be recovered.

 

I am aware of how LEI is obtained. It is Before the Event Insurance therefore a matter that precedes the insurance (as in this case) would not be covered.

 

Insurance fraud is everyone's problem. My neighbour's claim amounts to more than twenty thousand pounds. If as I believe, it is illegitimate then she should not benefit from her fraud.

 

Nobody has to take my word on this matter it is all set out in the two sets of court papers from the two separate claims made against me by her. The problem is getting those papers to the correct individual within the appropriate company. Contacting the Insurance Ombudsman and the FSA has proved to be a waste of time.

 

Unfortunately this matter seems to rely entirely on the Insurance Fraud Bureau sending a round robin e-mail to numerous insurance companies in the hope that the one insurance company involved picks it up. As far as I can gather the IFB e-mail is sent to named individuals at the insurance companies. What happens if that person leaves or goes sick etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally it is in the small track where costs are restricted but you will no doubt have the judgement and the costs order from the judge which will clarify all that!

 

There is a possibility that your neighbour bought an after the event policy to cover the whole action! but you would/should have received a notice of funding from your neighbours representatives if that were the case!

 

Who were your neighbours solicitors?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again for your reply.

My barrister’s costs are limited to seven hundred and fifty pounds. My solicitor’s court costs are limited to something like two hundred and fifty pounds. Those are the costs claimable when using the Fast Track (not as a consequence of a judge's order). And those are the amounts claimable in total, not per day.

I am certain as I can be that my neighbour has Before the Event Insurance not a contingent fee agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK! all you can do then is alert the Insurance Fraud Bureau hotline!

 

As you state all they do is send around an alert but most big insurers have someone who will search their portfolio's for your neighbour!

 

If anyone is interested in your info then they may contact you to take a statement but you may never know what happens

 

Good Luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.

 

I had hoped to find an insurance web site to discuss it in a similar manner. I might try and find a legal expenses insurance professional and run the information past him (more money).

 

I am going to see if I can interest the press in this matter, given that everything is documented. And particularly as I have contacted the ombudsman and the FSA both of whom appear determined to avoid any involvement.

 

I'm under the impression that the Insurance Fraud Bureau has never come across this situation before and that it is very limited in the action it can take. This is not a complaint against the IFB they have done what they can. There is no central database of insurance policies and therefore they are limited to the blunderbuss option.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Legal Expenses Insurance is not the same as other insurance.

 

It is sold on the back of a household insurance policy and the legal expenses insurance company has above all else to keep the household insurers sweet.

 

A policy holder may submit a claim to the legal expenses insurance company which is not covered due to the event being pre-inception of the policy.

 

The claim will be declined but this is not neccessarily the end of the matter.

 

The policy holder may then make a complaint to the household insurers and threaten to move their insurance elsewhere.

 

If they have enough policies and the household insurers are keen to keep them, or alternatively, the policy holder makes enough fuss, the household insurers will intervene on their behalf with the legal expenses insurance company and advise that they want the claim to be covered regardless of whether the incident is pre-inception.

 

The claim will then be covered as an ex-gratia. With regard to the fraud aspect, Legal Expenses Insurance Companies are normally regulated by the Law Society as well as the FSA. This being the case you could always try a complaint to the Legal Complaints Service who deal with complaints on behalf of the Law Society.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...