MPs attack insurers over referral fees and ABSs

Print This Post

31 July 2013


Parliament: regrettable that insurers ignored earlier recommendation

MPs have attacked insurance companies for not being more transparent over the referral fees they receive from a range of sources.

The transport select committee said it was “regrettable” that motor insurers ignored its earlier recommendation that consumers “are entitled to know more about the financial and other links between their insurer and the many companies involved with each claim”.

Issuing its report following the committee’s whiplash inquiry, the committee noted that although referral fees have now been outlawed, links still exist between insurers and solicitors, vehicle repairers, credit hire firms and other organisations from which referral fees were received – particularly through alternative business structures (ABSs).

Several of those who provided written evidence to the committee highlighted the role of ABSs in allowing insurers to continue financial arrangements – including leading insurer AXA, which said there needed to be a specific code of conduct to govern insurer/law firm joint ventures.

Error, group does not exist! Check your syntax! (ID: 14)

The committee also cited survey evidence from national law firm Slater & Gordon “which suggests that a significant proportion of whiplash claims are generated by insurers themselves”.

This IPSOS MORI survey revealed that seven out of every 10 whiplash claims result from an approach to the consumer by an insurance company or from an approach arising from the sale of their databases.

The MPs concluded: “Transparency breeds trust and confidence in the market. Unfortunately the motor insurance sector remains as opaque as ever. This needs to change.”

More broadly, the committee opposed government plans to increase the small claims limit for personal injury claims from £1,000 to £5,000.

The report is covered in full on our sister site Litigation Futures. For the main findings, click here, for the reaction here and for editor Neil Rose’s blog here.

Tags: , ,



2 Responses to “MPs attack insurers over referral fees and ABSs”

  1. The naughty insurers are exposed and take a kicking…lets see what spin Grayling puts on that !

  2. Andrew Twambley on July 31st, 2013 at 8:19 am
  3. No mention of relationship of directors of insurance companies and their recommended contractors.

    Front door kicked in slit the frame stile cost to repair [ some years ago] £60. The insurance company recommended their 24 hr repair contractor £ 360.

    Some years ago car insurance increased by 30%. The excuse being increase in theft. When I asked for theft to be excluded I was told the cost was just the same.

    Insurance of any kind is just a rip off.

  4. voice for logic on July 31st, 2013 at 10:37 pm

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Do not fear robot lawyers – fear robot clients

Pulat Yunusov

Tech is famous for its shorter and shorter hype cycles. Robot lawyers were all over the twitters only a few months ago and now people actually yell at you for even mentioning the thing. Of course, robot lawyers should not even have surfaced in the first place because no one is remotely close to building them. Lawyers should not fear for their livelihoods. But there is something that is much more important than robot lawyers. It’s robot clients. Or at least the proliferation of machines, automated transactions, and standardized processes where lawyers once controlled the terrain.

September 20th, 2016