DAS legal expenses cover - any experiences to share?

Doc_N

I've been singularly unimpressed by DAS in their handling of a pretty large claim (£25K+).

They've been unhelpful, and unresponsive to a complaint about the standards of service provided by their nominated firm of solicitors.

I see other negative comments about them scattered around various forums. Anybody else have a view on them, good or bad?

brummiedevil

Doc_N wrote: »

I've been singularly unimpressed by DAS in their handling of a pretty large claim (£25K+).

They've been unhelpful, and unresponsive to a complaint about the standards of service provided by their nominated firm of solicitors.

I see other negative comments about them scattered around various forums. Anybody else have a view on them, good or bad?

My partner and I had an accident last year and had DAS as the people responsible for the Legal Protection.

They where useless, although in fairness to them we hit a lorry tyre tread on the motorway so because they thought that they would't make any money from us they refused to do anything.

In fact they would of made money as I was a passenger in the car and therefore a third party.

They didn't ask if we were ok even though we had been in a pretty bad crash and were lucky to walk away from it.

I spoke to a manager and then wrote in to complain. When I heard nothing regarding that I wrote and rang again.

If you are not happy with the service ring them and find out what the complaints proceedure is, put the complaint in writing and then follow that proceedure.

In the end I got an apology, RAC transferred us to Irwin Mitchell to deal with the claim, and we got full costs back.

Good Luck:)

Doc_N

brummiedevil wrote: »

My partner and I had an accident last year and had DAS as the people responsible for the Legal Protection.

They where useless, although in fairness to them we hit a lorry tyre tread on the motorway so because they thought that they would't make any money from us they refused to do anything.

In fact they would of made money as I was a passenger in the car and therefore a third party.

They didn't ask if we were ok even though we had been in a pretty bad crash and were lucky to walk away from it.

I spoke to a manager and then wrote in to complain. When I heard nothing regarding that I wrote and rang again.

If you are not happy with the service ring them and find out what the complaints proceedure is, put the complaint in writing and then follow that proceedure.

In the end I got an apology, RAC transferred us to Irwin Mitchell to deal with the claim, and we got full costs back.

Good Luck:)

Thanks -that's very interesting. It rather backs up what I've found with them - do you remember which person you were dealing with?

For what it's worth, the complaint handling so far has been little short of a joke. The next step will be a formal complaint to the Halifax, to whom the annual premium is paid, and the Financial Ombudsman Service.

The more I read online about DAS, the less I like the way they behave. £20 pa may not be a lot for legal expenses, but given that most people never make a claim it still stacks up to a lot of money, but DAS seem very reluctant to spend much of it!

AndySpamer

Echo the comments above. They are a truly shocking company.

DAS have a habit of not paying on valid claims, they even believe themselves to be above the rulings of the financial services ombudsman. How do i know this? Because they owe me almost £8,000 in legal expenses i've had to pay out despite having cover with DAS.

They initially ruled against my case despite my solicitor ranking the chances above the 51% threshold. I complained, so they said, well if a barrister ranks above 51% then we'll payout. I paid for my own barrister to get this second opinion and sure enough, the chance of success is more than the 51%. I approached DAS again for funding, and they are still refusing to fund. I complained to the FSA who gave a direction against DAS, and they STILL refuse to pay. My only option now is to issue litigation against DAS for full recovery. This is hardly something i do lightly as obviously i'm already fighting another legal battle that DAS SHOULD be funding.

Shocking company who everyone should stay well away from.

Andy

Doc_N

AndySpamer wrote: »

Echo the comments above. They are a truly shocking company.

DAS have a habit of not paying on valid claims, they even believe themselves to be above the rulings of the financial services ombudsman. How do i know this? Because they owe me almost £8,000 in legal expenses i've had to pay out despite having cover with DAS.

They initially ruled against my case despite my solicitor ranking the chances above the 51% threshold. I complained, so they said, well if a barrister ranks above 51% then we'll payout. I paid for my own barrister to get this second opinion and sure enough, the chance of success is more than the 51%. I approached DAS again for funding, and they are still refusing to fund. I complained to the FSA who gave a direction against DAS, and they STILL refuse to pay. My only option now is to issue litigation against DAS for full recovery. This is hardly something i do lightly as obviously i'm already fighting another legal battle that DAS SHOULD be funding.

Shocking company who everyone should stay well away from.

Andy

Thanks - that's also very interesting.

How are they getting round this extract from the Financial Ombudsman's website:


If a consumer accepts an ombudsman’s final decision – within the timescale set by the ombudsman – the decision is binding on both the business and the consumer.

This means that the business is required by law to do whatever the ombudsman says is necessary – to put things right for the consumer.

A decision by an ombudsman that finds in favour of the consumer – and tells the business what it must do to put things right – is sometimes called an ombudsman “award”.

brummiedevil

Doc_N wrote: »

Thanks -that's very interesting. It rather backs up what I've found with them - do you remember which person you were dealing with?

For what it's worth, the complaint handling so far has been little short of a joke. The next step will be a formal complaint to the Halifax, to whom the annual premium is paid, and the Financial Ombudsman Service.

The more I read online about DAS, the less I like the way they behave. £20 pa may not be a lot for legal expenses, but given that most people never make a claim it still stacks up to a lot of money, but DAS seem very reluctant to spend much of it!

I can't remember who I spoke to but to be honest if I ever have them as the mlp company and am unlucky enough to be involved in a non fault accident will put it in the hands of Irwin Mitchell who where fabulous.

hethmar

Shoosmiths (AA) are also worse than useless. Hopeless - case handlers changed like underwear, at one point we were apparently sueing ourselves - or so their documentation sent to the defendants claimed Letters unanswered for 6 weeks or sent to the wrong address. When you complain a team leader sends you the quickest most literate letter you will ever receive from them saying they have reviewed the case and found no cause for complaint - LOL.


One thing Ive learnt from all this is NEVER be scared of a solicitors letter.

hethmar

Doc_N wrote: »

The more I read online about DAS, the less I like the way they behave. £20 pa may not be a lot for legal expenses, but given that most people never make a claim it still stacks up to a lot of money, but DAS seem very reluctant to spend much of it!

Point is, they still bill the insurers as far as I can make out. They have to ask the insurer if they can go to court, so I assume the insurer is still paying out.

Doc_N

hethmar wrote: »

Point is, they still bill the insurers as far as I can make out. They have to ask the insurer if they can go to court, so I assume the insurer is still paying out.

I don't think it works this way.

You (the customer) pay the insurer around £20 pa for legal expenses insurance. The insurer (Halifax, say) pass on some of that £20 to DAS, who then provide you with the cover.

Your dealings are entirely with DAS, and they, in return for the £20 (or whatever part of it they get) assume full responsibility for all the expenses.

It is DAS, as I understand it, who have to approve the case going to court (based on a 51% success 'prediction' by the lawyers acting) and not the insurer. DAS, in fact, are the insurer.

StephenMarsh

Doc_N wrote: »

I don't think it works this way.

You (the customer) pay the insurer around £20 pa for legal expenses insurance. The insurer (Halifax, say) pass on some of that £20 to DAS, who then provide you with the cover.

Your dealings are entirely with DAS, and they, in return for the £20 (or whatever part of it they get) assume full responsibility for all the expenses.

It is DAS, as I understand it, who have to approve the case going to court (based on a 51% success 'prediction' by the lawyers acting) and not the insurer. DAS, in fact, are the insurer.

Actually Halifax will probably only pay the tax on the policy DAS as with most legal expences carriers wont charge for the policy they will make there money on claims referrals to Solicitors.

Some things worth noting for some of those who have posted that ive seen in there policy Info

What you are not covered for

- Any legal costs incured before we agree to pay them
- any legal action that an insured person takes which we or the appointed lawyer have not agreed to.

on another note they are regulated by the FSA so answerable to them

hethmar

I really cant think of any other industry where such incompetence could be allowed. Trouble is, joe public is frightened of the expense/worry of any sort of legal action - even that against incompetent solicitors as they all cover themselves. Its dreadful, a scandal that should be looked into.