Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.


BTE cannot replace ATE until there is some heavy regulation of the "market" and some of the massive conflict of interest it creates.

If you take motor insurance as an example it is deeply problematic that insurers are able to choose their insured's lawyers for them and potentially force their insured to use their pet firm (realistically LEI policies do not allow any other firm to act as the terms are so restrictive that no reasonable lawyer would agree to be bound by them) whether that is in their insured's best interest or not.

If you are involved in a collision with an EUI group insured driver and your policy is with an EUI company and they send you to their ABS - how is that not a conflict? How can you trust that your own insurer's pet firm is providing you the correct advice when you are suing their paymaster?

Furthermore the way they sell LEI is a scandal of PPI proportions waiting to happen. I personally have had an insurer attempt to sell me LEI on the basis that it covered me for £40k legal expenses if I was in a fault accident. The salesperson simply did not understand what LEI was or what it did - or indeed the insurers own basic obligations! Your average insurance consumer is being miss-sold BTE on a daily basis.

Your details