Accident claim against me from 2007

Skii · 19 May 2011 at 19:02

Hi peeps

In 2007 I was involved in a minor shunt with a car - I rear ended a Clio at a roundabout resulting in some minor damage to the back of their car and a slight scuff on the numberplate of my own car.

I was fully insured at the time (Norwich union) and informed them the same day, I had another call some time later from someone at Norwich Union to confirm the details of the incident as they were a little suprised that only one party was claiming for damage and whiplash.

I've just received a letter from their solicitors out of the blue announcing a court date in August! do I just forward this to my insurer at the time or do I need to start worrying about solicitors and legal fees ?

Sin_Chase · 19 May 2011 at 19:04

From 2007?

No doubt they got contacted by some No Win No Fee scumbag operation and have decided to pursue it now.

Hxc · 19 May 2011 at 19:04

Send it to your insurer at the time! They will deal with it. Footman james are still deliberating about my accident in 2009 where the woman I hit is claiming for being unable to walk her dogs, feed her horse, and do the vacuuming. After a 20mph max shunt... I was in a classic mini, her in a bloody big van.

InvaderGIR · 19 May 2011 at 19:04

Call up the insurer from the time and inform them, they should advise you to send the letter on to them for them to deal with it. It is their problem, not yours. You were covered and they have to deal with it.

Fr0dders · 19 May 2011 at 19:10

I got one of these letters when my insurance company refused to pay £2500 in hire car costs incurred by helphire on an £800 repair (the court summons laid out all the expenses lol)

Insurance co refused, so i got a snotty letter saying they were taking it to court. Contacted my insurer who said just forward it to us and we'll take care of it. Never heard any more about it.

Skii · 19 May 2011 at 19:16

Thanks guys - I'll give the insurers a call in the morning.

Liampope · 19 May 2011 at 19:23

It'll be one of those annoying spam text messages that says our records show you're entitled to £xxxx compensation for 'that accident' actually reaching someone to whom it makes sense resulting in some ambulance chasers being engaged. God damn hate them! Hope you get it sorted.

Liquidfox · 19 May 2011 at 20:13

Bit late isn't it? Thought 3 years was the cut off point?

Raymond Lin · 19 May 2011 at 20:21

Liquidfox said:
Bit late isn't it? Thought 3 years was the cut off point?

3 years to ISSUE, then the court process runs.

Accident - 3 year limitation starts to run
Letter of Claim
Issue Claim Form
2 weeks for acknowledgement of service
2 weeks for defence
3 months for medical report (if not served with Claim Form)
Then allocation questionnaire (from here on, this can take months and even years)
Proposed Directions for Allocation
Court will then allocate trial window

That's if it runs smoothly, if the Claimant needs to see a doctor then it may get pushed back, matter get stayed until then. If the Claimant was a minor then the time won't run until they are 21. If the Claimant is a protected party then they pretty much have all the time in the world. Some cases even gets settled before they are issued. We have loads of cases at work without a Court reference (Claimant is a minor) and they get settled, but the case still need Court Approval, because the Claimant is a minor.

Basically, I am guessing they just want you to turn up to Court to give your version of events. It appears that they can't settle the case, believe me, they would try to settle as many as possible, yours is one of hundreds on the case handler's desk.

Don't worry, it sounds like a Civil Case, and you should have legal insurance and none of this will cost you a penny.

GravyMonster · 19 May 2011 at 20:24

******* scum.

This kind of thing grinds my gears. Why there can't be set rules to say you must put a claim in within 3 months of the crash, with doctor verified proof of your injury, plus proof of loss of earnings. 'Couldn't feed my horse after being rear ended at 20'? **** off.

And you can guarantee one day one of these monkeys will moan and whinge about the high price of their insurance.

Raymond Lin · 19 May 2011 at 20:25

Oh, yes, forward the letter to your insurer, keeping a photocopy for yourself.

Raymond Lin · 19 May 2011 at 20:30

Spunkey said:
******* scum.

This kind of thing grinds my gears. Why there can't be set rules to say you must put a claim in within 3 months of the crash, with doctor verified proof of your injury, plus proof of loss of earnings. 'Couldn't feed my horse after being rear ended at 20'? **** off.

And you can guarantee one day one of these monkeys will moan and whinge about the high price of their insurance.

Because 3 months is not enough time. injuries could be a sprain to losing your leg, to broken spine, to brain injury. The Claimant could be 2 years old at the time, and you would not know how it's brain develop until they are an adult. Therefore you would not know how much brain damaged they are.

The law also cover more than just the injury, it also cover recovery, how much you have recovered from the injury. It's hard to recover from a brain injury in 3 months, or even whiplash...expert states that it can take up to 2 years to settle (i read enough of these things at work).

As for proof of lost of earnings, 3 months is also not enough. As there is sick pay kicking in from work, and there must be no betterment for the Claimant so if you get sick pay, the insurer won't pay you again for that loss of earnings, as you are getting sick pay already.

These things takes years, for a reason.

Oh...you will need referral for a specialist, whether it is a Orthopaedic surgeon, or Neurosurgeon, Psychiatrist or Rheumatologist etc, they all have a waiting list!

GravyMonster · 19 May 2011 at 20:38

Take your sense elsewhere Raymond. I'm trying to rage here.

Either way the system is far too open to abuse by chancers.

Geeman1979 · 19 May 2011 at 20:41

Make sure you let your insurance know how many people were in the vehical you hit,or they may claim for the loss of earnings of 3 doctors they may of supposidly had in the car.Ive heard about those kind of bull crap stunts bieng pulled before.

Raymond Lin · 19 May 2011 at 20:42

Spunkey said:
Take your sense elsewhere Raymond. I'm trying to rage here.

Either way the system is far too open to abuse by chancers.

That I agree, came across a few that went through the loop hole.

We tried to sue one afterwards for fraud.
A few are blatantly lying through their teeth, except it's hard to prove when it's 50/50 on a roundabouts...its cheaper to pay them off to go away than to incur the legal fees. A £5,000 claim can rack up £10,000+ legal fees.

There are people's job's purpose is to validate these claims as well.

Skii · 19 May 2011 at 20:46

thanks guys, appreciate the advice - I'll keep a copy and fire it off in the morning. Hopefully this will be the last of it.