Admiral Auxillis No Fault Claim Still Unresolved 2.5 yrs later

SallyALD

I'm interested in views and advice regarding Admiral referring to Auxillis for the handling of a non-fault insurance claim instead what I would consider the 'normal' way of an insurance company handling the matter for you themselves. 

In Nov 2022 a young family member had a no fault accident and spoke with Admiral to submit the claim.  2.5 years on this is still not resolved and this young woman is faced with having to attend court despite having complied with everything she was required to.  

I have been concerned about Auxillis' handling of the matter for some time now - and the delays with the whole process. An additional factor is that the third party was particularly unpleasant and threatening to the insured family member.  Potentially facing this man again in court is weighing heavily on my young relative. 

The insurance company was Admiral and after a subject access request we have call recordings. Having listened to the first call with Admiral I feel that the family member, who was only in her early 20's at the time, was misinformed about the 'benefits' of going down the Auxillis route.

The pitch from Admiral was very clearly scripted where she was offered Option One, go with Auxillis, a non fault credit service and leading provider of accident services.  Immediately she is told that if there is cause for complaint later she will not be able to go to the Ombudsman, but that there is a Dispute Resolution Service. Immediately, I wonder why they have to clarify that right at the start - it suggests a complaints about their service are commonplace??? 

The call handler goes on to explain that with Auxillis there is no excess to pay and the process of repair and hire car provision will all be handled by Auxillis.  Or, Option Two - you have to pay your £500 excess and if the claim against the third party is successful Admiral will aim to get your excess back for you. You may or may not get it back. 

She was then asked "Would you like to use the non-fault service?'
She wasn't asked 'Which of those options would you prefer?'  

The insured then asks if there are any implications of going down the Auxillis route, as it sounds like a very good option ie. if it is sounds too good to be true, it generally is.  The call handler laughs and  tells her there are no implications to the Auxillis option and Admiral have worked with them for quite a long time. 

2.5 years on she still has this hanging over her head.  She has had to sign a number of legal statements for Auxillis including ones that were worded in a way that would protect Auxillis if she were to make a complaint about their service.  I insisted that this wording be changed before she signed the agreements.  Recently she has had to provide 3 months of bank statements, from 2022, and information on her salary, her credit cards, which the nominated law firm now handling the legal aspects for Auxillis have shared with the third party's solicitor without redacting key private information.  A court date has been set and she's terrified. 

Really interested in people's experiences and/or advice.
Thanks 

DullGreyGuy

SallyALD said:

I'm interested in views and advice regarding Admiral referring to Auxillis for the handling of a non-fault insurance claim instead what I would consider the 'normal' way of an insurance company handling the matter for you themselves. 

In Nov 2022 a young family member had a no fault accident and spoke with Admiral to submit the claim.  2.5 years on this is still not resolved and this young woman is faced with having to attend court despite having complied with everything she was required to.  

I have been concerned about Auxillis' handling of the matter for some time now - and the delays with the whole process. An additional factor is that the third party was particularly unpleasant and threatening to the insured family member.  Potentially facing this man again in court is weighing heavily on my young relative. 

The insurance company was Admiral and after a subject access request we have call recordings. Having listened to the first call with Admiral I feel that the family member, who was only in her early 20's at the time, was misinformed about the 'benefits' of going down the Auxillis route.

The pitch from Admiral was very clearly scripted where she was offered Option One, go with Auxillis, a non fault credit service and leading provider of accident services.  Immediately she is told that if there is cause for complaint later she will not be able to go to the Ombudsman, but that there is a Dispute Resolution Service. Immediately, I wonder why they have to clarify that right at the start - it suggests a complaints about their service are commonplace??? 

The call handler goes on to explain that with Auxillis there is no excess to pay and the process of repair and hire car provision will all be handled by Auxillis.  Or, Option Two - you have to pay your £500 excess and if the claim against the third party is successful Admiral will aim to get your excess back for you. You may or may not get it back. 

She was then asked "Would you like to use the non-fault service?'
She wasn't asked 'Which of those options would you prefer?'  

The insured then asks if there are any implications of going down the Auxillis route, as it sounds like a very good option ie. if it is sounds too good to be true, it generally is.  The call handler laughs and  tells her there are no implications to the Auxillis option and Admiral have worked with them for quite a long time. 

2.5 years on she still has this hanging over her head.  She has had to sign a number of legal statements for Auxillis including ones that were worded in a way that would protect Auxillis if she were to make a complaint about their service.  I insisted that this wording be changed before she signed the agreements.  Recently she has had to provide 3 months of bank statements, from 2022, and information on her salary, her credit cards, which the nominated law firm now handling the legal aspects for Auxillis have shared with the third party's solicitor without redacting key private information.  A court date has been set and she's terrified. 

So compared to many threads on here they've had a fairly reasonable experience and were clear and upfront about their options. Many here have called numbers off of google searches not realising they are calling an accident management company and not their insurer. 

Whilst you say "only in their early 20s", they have a licence to drive a 3.5 tonne machine at high speeds that can cause vast damage, and by that age my parents were married, had 3 kids and a mortgage. They weren't an infant. 

Had the gone via Admiral they would be in the same position but also be £500 down for the excess. Being cynical there may be less complaint about having to do these things if it would result in them getting money back. 

Nothing you've said is unusual, unorthodox or of particular concern. What you have failed to say however is what Auxilis say is the problem and why the third party insurer is yet to settle. Depending on that dictates very much how any litigation would pan out. 

The reality is the vast majority of cases dont end up in court even if they are litigated. Court is expensive and a bit of a roll of the dice which insurers are ultimately adverse to taking on so discussions go on all the time. My Ex dealt with much simpler cases than I, in her time she went to court circa 15 times and not once actually made it into the court room because an agreement was struck beforehand.

daveyjp

If it has taken 2.5 years is 'no fault' as certain as one party believes it is?  I've had no fault issue agreed and dealt with in one adviser chat.

DullGreyGuy

daveyjp said:

If it has taken 2.5 years is 'no fault' as certain as one party believes it is?  I've had no fault issue agreed and dealt with in one adviser chat.

As in the chat advisor worked for the third party insurer?  Or you are unaware of everything that goes on behind the scenes after you talk to your insurer?