Brunelfranklin Fight Back To Give Consumers A True And Full Picture

Claims company believes readers have been given the wrong picture and need to be informed of the truth

To the editor
Money Marketing

Dear Sirs

I write in response to your suitably sensationalist and biased article “Claims chasers attempt to challenge time bar rules in the High Court” (Paul McMillan, 3 August).

We are a professional organisation and were instrumental in proactively bringing about the regulatory framework that now exists. We were one of the first claims companies to apply for membership to – and to be accepted by – The Claims Standards Council and we are fully regulated by the Department of Justice (The DCA as was).

We are not ambulance chasers. We are in fact cleaning up the mess made by the ‘hit and run’ financial salesmen who created these mis-selling scandals in the first place. If we didn’t represent the consumer interest, Joe Public would get short shrift from the massive financial institutions that have taken advantage of their customers for so long.

To suggest that we are making a quick and easy buck (your reference to ‘gravy train’ in a subsequent article headline was clearly intended to imply this), is grossly misleading. We have invested millions of pounds in IT infrastructure and staff training to provide an exemplary level of customer service – not something the financial institutions could often be ‘accused’ of. The headline “claims chasers” is clearly intended to plant in the minds of your readers a negative spin on our industry.

We have proven time and time again our value to consumers. We regularly get more compensation for consumers – a staggering 86% more in the case of endowments – hence our fees are more than covered by the uplift we get in compensation ; we overcome the numerous technical hurdles and inconsistencies put in the way of customers by the institutions, FOS and the FSA; we have to deal with the increasingly dirty tricks of the financial institutions, designed to short-change mis-sale victims and deny them the redress they are entitled to. All of this takes a great deal of time and resource, and we have invested heavily in technology and staff to assist us in making the claims process highly professional for clients.

Whilst there is some good content in the article which we agree with, we are hopeful that Money Marketing might write an article about ‘Regulated claims firms’ in the future, without any loaded headlines, sub-heads or slants that are open to mis-interpretation by your readers. If you want to make your headlines more sensational, I have one for you: “Pay back in sight for 2,000,000 Ripped-off consumers.” (referring to the claims companies’ legal challenge against time bars).
Is that sensational enough?

Sub head: Professional, regulated claims companies move step closer to securing consumer victory. It might not be what your readers want to see or hear, but it is much nearer to the truth than the way your magazine continues to portray our professional, regulated industry at the moment.

Anthony M Sultan
Director, Brunel Franklin & Company
(Claims Standards Council Executive Committee Member)