+44 (0)115 976 6219
Rachael’s specialisms include policy coverage advice and dispute resolution in relation to property damage and professional negligence claims.
Her focus includes:
resolving property damage claims, including damage to high net worth properties, business interruption, physical damage losses arising from a range of perils, crime and subrogation.
in the professional liability context, she has experience in the TMT sector, solicitors, accountants, and property professionals.
She also has expertise in drafting policy wordings and her wordings expertise provides a unique insight when advising on coverage matters. She regularly advises on the application of the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representation) Act 2012 and the Insurance Act 2015. Rachael has extensive experience successfully defending complaints made to the Financial Ombudsman Service and in mediations. Rachael regularly advises on multi-million pound and commercially sensitive matters, including those with multi-jurisdictional elements, claims made by vulnerable customers and policy disputes involving suspected fraud.
Rachael provides pragmatic, bespoke and solutions-focused advice which goes beyond the strict application of the policy.
Contact Rachaelt +44 (0)115 976 6219 Email Rachael Murphy
You may be interested in...
Parties are in hot water over hot works dispute: proceedings issued in Britannia Hotels (No.2) v Aviva Insurance Limited
The risk of encroachment is not a nuisance: Davies v Bridgend County Council
Visual intrusion is oppressive: Fearn v Tate Gallery
Proximate cause focus: Brian Leighton Garages v Allianz and Allianz v University of Exeter
Perils - May 2023
Bombs away – (another) case on proximate cause
“Being on display in a zoo” is oppressive for luxury flat owners as the Tate Modern is found to be liable in nuisance
Five “takeaways” in claims against mortgage brokers following Taylor v Legal & General Partnership Services Ltd  EWHC 2475 (Ch)
Claims arising from interest-only mortgages have been farmed in volume. Many such claims to date have sought to drive a narrative that interest-only mortgages are an inherently toxic product and brokers were negligent simply for suggesting them. Taylor is a helpful recalibration, focussing instead on what the monies raised by the mortgage product were being used for and whether the client understood the inherent risks.