the customer protection code outlines that an insured is entitled to appoint their own regulated loss assessor to act on their behalf in the event that they have a claim under their policy. However, what should also be pointed out is that the policy does not extend to cover the cost of the loss assessors fees. Insured's should always bear in mind that in addition to the policy excess, they will have to meet the cost of the assessors fees. If the proposed loss assessor outlines that they will get enough in the settlement that will meet the cost of the repairs and cover their fees, then in reality the assessor is advising that they will get more than the policyholder is entitled to under the terms of the policy. Some may have a "so what" attitude to this, others may consider this to be downright dishonest.
In relation to oil claims, these are very complex issues and few loss assessors have the necessary qualifications or experience to deal with these. Typically, when an oil spill occurs, insurers, aware of the environmental aspects, will appoint an oil remediation expert who will assess the level of the contamination, draw up a proposal be it for in situ bio remediation or for cut and dump. In the event of building work being necessary, they will typically engage a consultant engineer to determine what building work is necessary. Once remediation has been completed, they will carry out further labatorary analysis of samples and certify that no residues above permissible levels remain. Their own enviromental scientist will then sign off and certify the work. In those instances, the use of a loss assessor is not usually warranted and indeed, in my experience, they spend much of their time trying to justify the fee they are going to charge their clients.
Whilst i do believe that loss assessors are generally not very useful in oil contamination cases, i am of the view that more and more, particularly in the current market, a good loss assessor can be of benefit to the policyholder in dealing with their claims. Insurers are tending to take particular views and interpretations on their policies which are not to the benefit of their policy holders. A good loss assessor wil recognise and successfully challenge these. I would always advise to use only a regulated loss assessor ( insurers will not deal with unregulated entities) and use people who have a professional qualification ( why pay 10% plus vat for someone with no qualifications, when you can pay the same for someone for example who is a chartered surveyor with a recognised, rather than grandfathered insurance qualifications).