Property
"Property is theft" said Proudhon originally. Whatever one's views of that statement, property certainly gives rise to insurance claims of all kinds, from theft and derogation from title, through pollution and remediation, via damage by a multiplicity of causes to deliberate destruction by the insured. A property insurance lawyer needs to be alert to what the property insured actually is, what was represented or omitted at inception, what has happened since and the circumstances of the insured and the claim - to say nothing of what the wording actually covers (which he may have advised upon in the first place).
The lawyers at Carter Perry Bailey have enormous experience in property insurance from devising "innovative new policy wordings" (Chambers Guide to the UK Legal Profession) to factual battles at trial about who did what. They know the law and the sort of problems inherent in the facts. Bill Perry has chaired and addressed conference on topics as varied as inherent vice in art works and arson by the insured and how to prove it. Matters they have advised upon include problems ranging from night club arson to delicate points of law on limitation and underwriting agency authority, in law reported cases such as Thompson -v- Callaghan, Thompson -v- Dominion Insurance for example.
They bring to this work years of experience in the property insurance market. They have acted for Lloyd's and company market insurers in writing policies and proposals, advising on claims and litigating (or arbitrating) to resist unjustified claims. They also have experience dealing with the Financial Services Ombudsman in consumer cases. Property work they have dealt with ranges from design claims in nuclear reactors through BBB work to contingency risks and high value household claims, often with a significant international element. They have, as mentioned elsewhere, considerable expertise in fine art work.
Carter Perry Bailey's lawyers have the expertise and experience; they will suit the strategy to the case - no "pre-packs" forcing the cases into a mould or a routine, or racking up the hours by using lots of staff at this firm. The result is highly cost effective work. Lateral thinking wins cases. On a lighter note, Bill Perry was once judicially commended for winning a case by " do[ing] nothing... with considerable skill" - the client appreciated the (lack of) bill for that success!