Special Care? Insurance companies make victims pay

The Insurance company is 'looking in to things...' - a 'full review of the file' no less...
Watch this space!

Another day, but no dollar.
The victim's lawyer finally faxed through tha last outstanding correspondence - hot on the heels of a reminder that if he didn't do as he'd agreed, then letters might have to go to the Law Society.
And guess what? It confirmed that the Insurers of the client (Care Home) had been stalling for time yet again, when in black and white it said "time almost up". So what? That seems to be the Insurer's attitude - despite the fact that they were justifying their delay on something they'd been asked for before...
And what did the lawyers do? Let the whole thing trickle out from between their fingers, a perpetual drip, leaving themselves just enough to float safely away on. But push and chase and do what they said they would do? NO!
So the orange box has been dusted down and the victim has to take the conspirators on...
Watch this space.

I will name no names - but I will speak out.
Today, the great minders of our society, minded their own business(es) - literally.
The Care Home - who minds a clientele of vulnerable and needy souls... the Insurance Company - who minds the Care Home's liability to others, but mostly to itself... and the lawyers - who mind the victims of the other two - purportedly.
The Care Home fails in its duty of care to its clients, and that puts those who care for those clients at risk also. When the risk has been proven, the Care Home lies and conceals the truth which it presents to the Insurance company, which then stalls the process of justice by refusing to answer correspondence ...
And even when it is forced into situations of new proof, the Care Home slides into another lie that blurs the edge of the first, but hints at a glimmer of the reality on the other side - whilst still remaining a lie!
The Insurance company - surely one organisation one might expect to notice the variation in its client's account of events?- not only appears to fail to notice, but acts constructively with it, to further demolish the hope of the victim. And the next time too! By the end of many months, not only has it, and its client, contradicted everything it started out saying, and supplied evidence which proves it is lying, but still denies liability.
Oh, and better still, it stalls and holds out until the victim's case is defunct - timed out - as well.
And what of the lawyers? Well, they tell the victim there is a strong case. Advisedly, more money is spent that 'can be claimed back'. Feeble attempts at chasing up the Insurance company fail to work and thus they too fail to act for many months - and then what? A year is lost and they tell the victim that time is up. That there are two sides and the victim might equally lose in court in the face of the lies presented by the Care Home and supported by the Insurance company as it is the victims word against that of the big boys. So, forget it really.
The result?
The Care home gets away with the scenario that caused the problem in the first place. The Insurance company (whose reputation has often been subject of correspondence and complaints in the media) has kept its money, and the lawyers are assured of their own finances remaining in tact... also their priorities.
When did lawyers stop standing up for justice and truth, and start fighting only for guaranteed big payments - whichever side they fight for? Right, or wrong?
Where did all the good cowboys go? What has happened to this world that genuine suffering can so often pay the price of the calculating greed and arrogance of the exploiters of the vulnerable, and the insurers of the exploiters?
Today, a victim was advised that the consequences of injury would have to be borne alone, possibly life long. That the loss of income would have to be lost for good. That the emotional cost of being unable to play rough and tumble with a tiny child would not matter.
The victim was told that although it was recognised that there was a case, and there were consequences, and that the opposition was clearly covering up, the judge might see the more powerful presentation as right, and so the victim would lose... What did the lawyer make of that? That he too would run away from the victim!!!!!!!!!!
How would any judge look past the fact that requested documents which confirm the situation are declared missing - even the actual accident report, that should be held for 5 years...? That all that would confirm the status of the incident was witheld?
The lawyers thought the judge might! What says this for justice in the UK???

Please let me know what you would you do?