Beeing inocent does not count much for these two companies ,*****ing their clients is more important

Quest claims solutions :Based on my previous post and your response below - I would like to ask this: "Your investigation confirms that the available evidence supported our version of events, that extensive recovery efforts were undertaken, and that legal proceedings were instituted because there was a reasonable prospect of success. Your letter further confirms that the recovery process was not abandoned because liability could not be established, but rather because the anticipated costs of continuing litigation outweighed the amount that could potentially be recovered. In other words, the matter was not discontinued because your insured was at fault. It was discontinued because continuing the recovery process was no longer considered commercially viable. I respectfully submit that it is unfair for an innocent policyholder to bear the financial consequences of a commercial decision taken by their insurer. While I appreciate that insurers must make commercial decisions regarding litigation and recovery processes, I do not believe an innocent client should remain financially prejudiced solely because further recovery action is no longer economically attractive to the insurer. Considering this, I believe you should reconsider the outcome and refund the excess as a demonstration of fair treatment and good faith towards a client whose innocence has effectively been accepted throughout the process."

FROM Old Mutual Insure We have carefully reviewed the matter together with Quest Claims, who were responsible for managing the recovery process on your behalf. Our investigation confirmed that several recovery actions were undertaken in an effort to pursue the matter, including: The submission of the available dashcam footage and supporting evidence. Extensive engagement and negotiations with the third-party insurer. Escalation attempts to reach an amicable settlement. The institution of legal proceedings when settlement negotiations were unsuccessful. The defense of a counterclaim lodged by the third-party insurer.

We further noted that the decision to proceed with litigation was supported internally, as the available evidence supported your version of events and there remained a reasonable prospect of recovering at least a portion of the losses. Following a further review of the matter, it was determined that the anticipated costs associated with continuing defended litigation would exceed the amount that could potentially be recovered. As a result, a decision was taken to discontinue the recovery process as it was no longer considered economically viable to proceed. While we acknowledge your dissatisfaction with the outcome, we are satisfied that the matter was handled appropriately based on the information available and the circumstances surrounding the recovery process. For this reason, your complaint has not been upheld.