Tuesday 14th of February 2017 11:23:05 AM
This is a near fraudulent Company. You are not allowed to use their own Solicitor only one from their panel of Solicitors. Here is my experience so far. 1. My case has been going for almost one year - to try to get EVEREST Windows and Doors honour their guarantee to me. 2. My allocated panel Solicitor was Lyons Davidson. 3. Almost from the outset it became obvious that my supposed Solicitors were representing the interests oF ARC not me, their supposed Client. I complained about this on a number of occasions. 4. It is a clear conflict of interest for a legal Firm to represent two Clients with opposing interests - the Insurance Company trying not to honour their contractual obligation to their Client and the poor Client (me) claiming against the Insurance Company with a legitimate claim that he/she has paid for. 5. Having carefully read the terms of reference of ARC Insurance, it is almost impossible to meet their requirements to bring a claim. Not only this but the Solicitors, supposed to be representing the Client and also ARC make it as difficult as possible for the Client to bring a legitimate claim - a blatant conflict of interest as already stated. 6. My claim is legitimate and had to be taken up. 7. It has been ineptly handled by a Legal Executive, not a Solicitor, for almost a year who has allowed the Respondents to run rings round him. 8. Nothing has been achieved, and, after my complaints that I wanted a competent Solicitor to represent me. I have now been told by a Solicitor that, after almost one year of the Firm's inept negotiation with the Respondent, that I should pay £900.00 to get a Surveyor's report (why was this not done at the outset? and why were they initially happy to pay for a joint Surveyor's report with the Respondent, which the Respondent refused to do?). This despite the fact that I have paid for this insurance and that this should be a normal disbursement under the insurance policy under any logical perception of the situation. No doubt this has been done in the expectation that I will drop the case. 9. What is really going on? I cannot be sure, because I have not seen the contracts between ARC and it's respective panels of Solicitors, HOWEVER 10. I suspect that there is agreement between the two of a fixed price for each case. From my own extensive business expertise, I guess that this fixed contract is priced at an unusually low rate such that it is not in the interests of the Solicitors to pursue any case where there is any risk to their costs (their is risk in all litigation), also it is in the Solicitor's interests to find that the case is invalid as they will make a small, risk free profit, in cases that are rejected. The fact that Legal Clerks on unjustifiable hourly rates handle claims exclusively gives this supposition even more credibility. 10. If this is the case, it is entirely unethical, albeit may not be fraudulent in the eyes of the law. I trust ARC will respond to this matter constructively because looking at the previous comments on this website every single comment is making the same complaint as me. An unsatisfactory response will force me to post this situation to all General Insurance Companies that use ARC for household insurance. Thank goodness for the internet that allows serious issues like this to be widely exposed.