No, do you?
That is subjective. The evidence produced on this thread alone suggests the courts are alot less lenient in making awards than the insurance companies themselves are at settling claims.
It would act as great deterrent to fraudsters if they knew that more likely than not, the case will go before a court.
This would reduce costs dramatically.
The evidence on this thread alone suggests differently.
I agree that it makes sense not to spend more money on futile efforts to recoup costs.
Wait a second, are you suggesting that these apparent fraudulent claims are not investigated?
How can the insurance company determine they are fraudulent so?
No offence but I have no interest in going around in circles on this. It's already been done on this thread and on others. You have your view on this and that's fair enough. It's just a repeat of the same old arguments at this stage.....