Arc Legal Group Bewertungen 1 456

Helpful
Clear explanation of situation

I spoke to Morgan, he was patient and was diligent with the questions he asked. He carried out a comprehensive assessment. After a short while he called me back and gave very good advice about the matters discussed. We also discussed the application and checked the generic legal aid insurance template. In my opinion he offered an excellent service.

They actually listened to my convoluted explanation.

The advisor I spoke to was friendly and easy to talk to and made my next steps clear. She e-mailed me the link I need to submit a claim, advised me on what I would need to attach and what would happen following my submission. My one criticism of the service is that I was told I would get a call back within an hour and it was over 24 hrs but once I got the call I was very satisfied with the service.

Despite paying yesrs not had a successful claim. Lots ongoing stress related.Tom Durrel claims is very devious and nasty has severed contact since 2019. Also needs to be reported for his fabricated untruths false under mining descriptions of claim-s. Unbelievable disgrace especially to mostly vulnerable older/alone made exceedingly worse. No one listens. Not interested. Need reporting.

Following my reports regarding Arc Legal’s handling of my claim, the company has successfully moved to have my previous feedback removed from this platform. This action is consistent with a pattern of conduct that appears to prioritise reputational management over addressing fundamental regulatory failures.

The ‘Pattern of Behaviour’ and Discrimination My removed review highlighted a striking parallel between my experience and that of another reviewer, IA on Apr 4, 2026, who reported that Arc Legal was ill-equipped to communicate with clients protected by the Equality Act 2010.

The fact that multiple policyholders with disclosed mental health vulnerabilities are reporting the same wall of silence and lack of reasonable adjustments suggests a systemic failure. It is no longer plausible to view these as isolated administrative errors; they appear to be a part of a business model that relies on exhausting vulnerable claimants.

The Contradiction of ‘Anonymity’ Arc Legal continues to state publicly that they cannot ‘locate my details’.

However, they simultaneously requested the removal of my review because it linked their conduct to this wider pattern. This request confirms they have identified my file, my case manager, and the specifics of my complaint. Their public claims of ‘anonymity’ are factually incorrect and serve as a diversionary tactic to avoid public accountability.

Summary of Conduct Censoring a review does not resolve the underlying breaches:

Equality Act 2010 & FCA Consumer Duty: The insurer continues to ignore documented vulnerabilities, failing in their duty to avoid causing foreseeable harm.

Professional Expertise: The insurer has still failed to appoint a suitably qualified specialist solicitor, instead attempting to force a firm that admits a conflict of interest.

Transparency: The insurer is utilising reporting tools to obscure a factual record of these failures.

I have formally requested that Trustpilot reinstate my previous feedback. This update serves as a public record that Arc Legal appears more invested in suppressing evidence of a pattern of discrimination than in fulfilling its legal and contractual obligations.

Response to Arc Legal’s Comment:

The assertion that Arc Legal cannot identify this case is difficult to reconcile with the fact that my concerns regarding discrimination have already been investigated—and dismissed—by your Customer Relations team on several occasions.

The core of the matter is that, as a vulnerable policyholder with a disclosed mental health condition, I am being denied any form of interactive communication. This ongoing refusal has prejudiced, and continues to prejudice, my legal position.

It is increasingly foreseeable that the resulting delays and procedural obstructions will be utilised at a later date as the basis to dismiss my claim as ‘not prospective’ under the terms of the insurance policy. Observing, as it looks on the face of it, this scenario unfold—an approach that appears as systemic as it is crude—remains deeply concerning. I invite Arc Legal to move past these template responses regarding anonymity and address the substantive failures in their regulatory duty of care.

Ms Zahera is very knowledgeable and helpful. I had a very quick response.

Advice was personal yet academic, and any technical details were discussed in layman's language. A really comfortable and comforting experience. Very much appreciated and a genuine engagement with an obviously well informed legal expert.

Provide help , in writing

Excellent , speedy advice

Didn’t call back as promised. And rubbish advice and support

excellent discussed and informed me of what to do and how to undertake , clear communication

Helpful and prompt advice given. Thank you

I did get lots of useful information. Lady over the phone was very nice and polite. She did answer all my questions and concerns.

I have a quite complex but valid insurance claim and the person at the call centre was patient when I outlined the details

It was OK but I found that the person on the other end of the telephone was piling too much information too quickly for me to digest. She would talk about the steps I had to take but it was not easy to understand and to remember all at one.

Stephen was great, very helpful, explained everything in detail.