Litigation Question
Discussion
I am after some advice as I am getting frustrated by an ongoing claim I have for an injury incurred last Spring when I was knocked off my bicycle.
The simple scenario is that last Spring, I was knocked off at a Junction by a car, and I approached a solicitor soon afterwards as I could not make any progress with her insurance company when I tried to liaise directly. Since then the case is ongoing with a well known solicitor, and has been valued in the region of £10k by them following being seen by their independent medical specialist. For what is an extremely simple scenario though, this has been taking a seriously long time to get sorted and we are approaching almost a year since the accident with still no conclusion. Other than an initial cheque from the third party insurance that came through very early on last year (when I got the solicitors involved), I have had nothing further and it seems that the third party insurance is purposefully dragging it's heels and causing delay upon delay unnecessarily.
I am led to believe that this is normal practice by insurance companies in an effort to avoid paying out until the last second and also to to try and psychologically grind down the opponent. Is this the case? Reading a few threads on line across the forums seems to suggest some people in my position have had payouts the same week as the accident????
Yesterday, I was copied into an email from the insurance company solicitor to say they had reviewed the case and "asked for instructions regarding offers". They said they should be able to get back to my solicitor "by the end of the week". This seem's to be the most significant development in months, although I fear it may be yet another false hope followed by weeks of more delay's and pointless chasing around.
My solicitors are adamant I will get a good chunk of money out of this, and have stated on a few occasions they are close to initiating court proceedings, but the amount of time to resolve this is starting to get quite frustrating. Is my case an anomaly or is this all just par for the course?
Thanks
The simple scenario is that last Spring, I was knocked off at a Junction by a car, and I approached a solicitor soon afterwards as I could not make any progress with her insurance company when I tried to liaise directly. Since then the case is ongoing with a well known solicitor, and has been valued in the region of £10k by them following being seen by their independent medical specialist. For what is an extremely simple scenario though, this has been taking a seriously long time to get sorted and we are approaching almost a year since the accident with still no conclusion. Other than an initial cheque from the third party insurance that came through very early on last year (when I got the solicitors involved), I have had nothing further and it seems that the third party insurance is purposefully dragging it's heels and causing delay upon delay unnecessarily.
I am led to believe that this is normal practice by insurance companies in an effort to avoid paying out until the last second and also to to try and psychologically grind down the opponent. Is this the case? Reading a few threads on line across the forums seems to suggest some people in my position have had payouts the same week as the accident????
Yesterday, I was copied into an email from the insurance company solicitor to say they had reviewed the case and "asked for instructions regarding offers". They said they should be able to get back to my solicitor "by the end of the week". This seem's to be the most significant development in months, although I fear it may be yet another false hope followed by weeks of more delay's and pointless chasing around.
My solicitors are adamant I will get a good chunk of money out of this, and have stated on a few occasions they are close to initiating court proceedings, but the amount of time to resolve this is starting to get quite frustrating. Is my case an anomaly or is this all just par for the course?
Thanks
This is par for the course.
Litigation is a game of poker.
Your solicitors will be demonstrating to the other party that the situation is clear, they will win, and the other party will be left with costs.
The other party will be demonstrating that they are not going to roll over, that the situation isn't 'clear cut', and if it went to court that you would get nothing, or, significantly less.
Of course, just like in poker, either side can be bluffing, as the strength of your hand is not only the legal position but whether you truly intend on pushing things all the way to a day in court.
This is just the way it goes. You might even get a round of offers of settlements which goes:
"We offer £3000"
"The lowest we'll accept is £8000."
"Nope"
And the litigation process chugs on in the meantime. It is not unusual for cases to be settled with a week before the hearing, and it is common that both parties solicitors will be negotiating settlement was they are waiting outside the courtroom.
ETA - just reread your OP and it seems that the court processes haven't started yet. You've a long way to go. The only thing I would add is that if I were the one being sued, and after a year the other party had not started proceedings, that would tell me that the other party has little or no actual desire to go to court.
Litigation is a game of poker.
Your solicitors will be demonstrating to the other party that the situation is clear, they will win, and the other party will be left with costs.
The other party will be demonstrating that they are not going to roll over, that the situation isn't 'clear cut', and if it went to court that you would get nothing, or, significantly less.
Of course, just like in poker, either side can be bluffing, as the strength of your hand is not only the legal position but whether you truly intend on pushing things all the way to a day in court.
This is just the way it goes. You might even get a round of offers of settlements which goes:
"We offer £3000"
"The lowest we'll accept is £8000."
"Nope"
And the litigation process chugs on in the meantime. It is not unusual for cases to be settled with a week before the hearing, and it is common that both parties solicitors will be negotiating settlement was they are waiting outside the courtroom.
ETA - just reread your OP and it seems that the court processes haven't started yet. You've a long way to go. The only thing I would add is that if I were the one being sued, and after a year the other party had not started proceedings, that would tell me that the other party has little or no actual desire to go to court.
Edited by JustinP1 on Wednesday 11th February 10:55
Of course, your solicitor won't be dragging this out amd trying to get it near to limitation so that they have to litigate and can then bump their fees up to whatever they want. Oh no, that would never, ever happen.
You describe this as a simple scenario yet are claiming £10,000. That seems strange as a simple claim tends to be a small one. Bear in mind that this figure is one that your solicitor in conjunction with his friendly medico has come up with, maybe the insurer values it differently. I'm not sure that you fully understand the process though. An insurer wants to settle claims,as the earlier it's settled the cheaper it is usually, both on indemnity amd operational costs. However, they don't simply throw money at a claim to "make it go away".
By use of "simple" do you really mean that liability is clear cut and resolved? If so, liability is one aspect of a claim amd quantum (the amounts payable) are a different thing.
What injuries did you suffer? It'd be good to know so that we can see whether the £10k is likely to be justified or not. To give you an idea, the JSB, which is one of the accepted guides for injury payments by both sides would only recommend that kind of payment for two broken limbs as a minimum. I've based this on the £10k figure being quoted post medical exam so am assuming therefore that this excludes special damages and is purely for general damages.
You describe this as a simple scenario yet are claiming £10,000. That seems strange as a simple claim tends to be a small one. Bear in mind that this figure is one that your solicitor in conjunction with his friendly medico has come up with, maybe the insurer values it differently. I'm not sure that you fully understand the process though. An insurer wants to settle claims,as the earlier it's settled the cheaper it is usually, both on indemnity amd operational costs. However, they don't simply throw money at a claim to "make it go away".
By use of "simple" do you really mean that liability is clear cut and resolved? If so, liability is one aspect of a claim amd quantum (the amounts payable) are a different thing.
What injuries did you suffer? It'd be good to know so that we can see whether the £10k is likely to be justified or not. To give you an idea, the JSB, which is one of the accepted guides for injury payments by both sides would only recommend that kind of payment for two broken limbs as a minimum. I've based this on the £10k figure being quoted post medical exam so am assuming therefore that this excludes special damages and is purely for general damages.
Considering the accident was less than a year ago and it's 3 years from then to limitation, I doubt anyone is trying to string it out for another 2 years. On the description it sounds like liability has been accepted and now it's just a case of agreeing the amount ('quantum'). Have some patience OP as you might not be far off now.
It can easily be strung out. They don't have to wait for limitation anyway, another six months of deadlock should avoid any accusations of premature litigation. The OP is the one pushing for this to litigate and it is a bit too early anyway.
If you exclude the first paragraph of my response, which was designed to get a reaction, then the rest is pretty balanced and that's what we should be focussing on.
This claim is not at litigation stage and we should be seeing if the claim for £10,000 for injury alone is a valid one.
If you exclude the first paragraph of my response, which was designed to get a reaction, then the rest is pretty balanced and that's what we should be focussing on.
This claim is not at litigation stage and we should be seeing if the claim for £10,000 for injury alone is a valid one.
pork911 said:
LoonR1 said:
This claim is not at litigation stage
all depends, if evidence complete etc then if simply offer no good why wait?£10,000 for a "simple scenario". What the hell happened to the OP to justify that kind of figure? Is it valid? Quantum will be the stumbling block. Whether he litigates is moot, as the insurer will Part 36 what they see as a reasonable offer anyway.
LoonR1 said:
pork911 said:
LoonR1 said:
This claim is not at litigation stage
all depends, if evidence complete etc then if simply offer no good why wait?£10,000 for a "simple scenario". What the hell happened to the OP to justify that kind of figure? Is it valid? Quantum will be the stumbling block. Whether he litigates is moot, as the insurer will Part 36 what they see as a reasonable offer anyway.
pork911 said:
LoonR1 said:
pork911 said:
LoonR1 said:
This claim is not at litigation stage
all depends, if evidence complete etc then if simply offer no good why wait?£10,000 for a "simple scenario". What the hell happened to the OP to justify that kind of figure? Is it valid? Quantum will be the stumbling block. Whether he litigates is moot, as the insurer will Part 36 what they see as a reasonable offer anyway.
LoonR1 said:
What's wrong with looking at the other parts of my initial post?
£10,000 for a "simple scenario". What the hell happened to the OP to justify that kind of figure? Is it valid? Quantum will be the stumbling block. Whether he litigates is moot, as the insurer will Part 36 what they see as a reasonable offer anyway.
I totally agree.£10,000 for a "simple scenario". What the hell happened to the OP to justify that kind of figure? Is it valid? Quantum will be the stumbling block. Whether he litigates is moot, as the insurer will Part 36 what they see as a reasonable offer anyway.
Yesterday I got not one, but two phone calls from different companies telling me about the non-fault accident I was in two and a half years ago, and how they were just double checking 'the file' to make sure that I got everything I was 'entitled to'.
I can quite see how these shysters, wording things like that could go back and tell me I was 'entitled to' £10,000.
Of course the other parties solicitors may know that if it goes to court, £1000 is likely, and £2000 is tops.
The OP's solicitors are clearly not going to admit that to the OP though. It may also be that the OP's solicitors are the type not to take things to court anyway, and just work on the basis of getting the most they can without having to file papers, or even worse go to a hearing.
The legal firm is Slater and Gordon, and their costs are paid directly by legal insurance I have elsewhere, so, they won't be taking any fee's out of my payout. The insurance are a sub company of Hastings if I remember correctly.
Simple scenario in terms of injury. Minor injuries involving short term bruising and cuts, long term injuries of deep tissue problems in my shin, same in the knee, plus scarring on both knee and shin which although minor is likely going to be for life. Lot's was made of psychological issues post accident, plus inconvenience caused to me being off work and my other half being heavily pregnant as well as a load of other things. I have had 2.5k already and my solicitor have stated in writing to me they will not accept less than a further 6k, making a minimum total of 8.5k. They have asked for more than this though, to allow room for negotiation. They seem very genuine about going to court and I get the impression that if offers don't start coming this will be happening soon. I have already been told it will delay things further if this does happen, and to expect that as a possibility.
Liability wise I have no idea of the position. I have stated it is the car driver's, based on the fact she started a manoeuvre that directed her into my path causing me to collide with her. This manoeuvre began when I was next to her, giving me no time to react at all. She was a new driver. Following hitting me she panicked and drove through a hedge and crashed into someone's garden. You get the gist. To my knowledge, this has never been questioned or challenged by anyone however I have never been told anything in regards to liability or how the insurers see it.
Ultimately I just want to know roughly what I can expect to get and when. I think the valuation is very very high and would be happy with half of that to be honest, I just want to get it done and dusted and move on. Had they offered me 3k back last spring I would have taken it.
Simple scenario in terms of injury. Minor injuries involving short term bruising and cuts, long term injuries of deep tissue problems in my shin, same in the knee, plus scarring on both knee and shin which although minor is likely going to be for life. Lot's was made of psychological issues post accident, plus inconvenience caused to me being off work and my other half being heavily pregnant as well as a load of other things. I have had 2.5k already and my solicitor have stated in writing to me they will not accept less than a further 6k, making a minimum total of 8.5k. They have asked for more than this though, to allow room for negotiation. They seem very genuine about going to court and I get the impression that if offers don't start coming this will be happening soon. I have already been told it will delay things further if this does happen, and to expect that as a possibility.
Liability wise I have no idea of the position. I have stated it is the car driver's, based on the fact she started a manoeuvre that directed her into my path causing me to collide with her. This manoeuvre began when I was next to her, giving me no time to react at all. She was a new driver. Following hitting me she panicked and drove through a hedge and crashed into someone's garden. You get the gist. To my knowledge, this has never been questioned or challenged by anyone however I have never been told anything in regards to liability or how the insurers see it.
Ultimately I just want to know roughly what I can expect to get and when. I think the valuation is very very high and would be happy with half of that to be honest, I just want to get it done and dusted and move on. Had they offered me 3k back last spring I would have taken it.
JustinP1 said:
I totally agree.
Yesterday I got not one, but two phone calls from different companies telling me about the non-fault accident I was in two and a half years ago, and how they were just double checking 'the file' to make sure that I got everything I was 'entitled to'.
I can quite see how these shysters, wording things like that could go back and tell me I was 'entitled to' £10,000.
Of course the other parties solicitors may know that if it goes to court, £1000 is likely, and £2000 is tops.
The OP's solicitors are clearly not going to admit that to the OP though. It may also be that the OP's solicitors are the type not to take things to court anyway, and just work on the basis of getting the most they can without having to file papers, or even worse go to a hearing.
this is a year in and post medicalYesterday I got not one, but two phone calls from different companies telling me about the non-fault accident I was in two and a half years ago, and how they were just double checking 'the file' to make sure that I got everything I was 'entitled to'.
I can quite see how these shysters, wording things like that could go back and tell me I was 'entitled to' £10,000.
Of course the other parties solicitors may know that if it goes to court, £1000 is likely, and £2000 is tops.
The OP's solicitors are clearly not going to admit that to the OP though. It may also be that the OP's solicitors are the type not to take things to court anyway, and just work on the basis of getting the most they can without having to file papers, or even worse go to a hearing.
if their valuation is way off the forthcoming offer will test it
You're still not getting this.
Liability is done finished, resolved all in your favour
The amount isn't agreed. The figures they're quoting for the injuries you're saying you suffered are not realistic at all. £5000 tops all in IME for those. That's your problem. You're asking for more than is likely to be awarded. S&G are not part of Hastings either.
All that's happening is by asking for a larger than realistic payment, the insurer won't settle. They won't pay another interim as the £2.5k is already pretty good and want their next payment to be in full and final, not interim. If you stick to demanding another £6k then it's just going to drag, as the insurer knows that figure is highly unlikely to be awarded. They do want to settle though and have asked for a sensible figure from your side to see if this is possible.
Liability is done finished, resolved all in your favour
The amount isn't agreed. The figures they're quoting for the injuries you're saying you suffered are not realistic at all. £5000 tops all in IME for those. That's your problem. You're asking for more than is likely to be awarded. S&G are not part of Hastings either.
All that's happening is by asking for a larger than realistic payment, the insurer won't settle. They won't pay another interim as the £2.5k is already pretty good and want their next payment to be in full and final, not interim. If you stick to demanding another £6k then it's just going to drag, as the insurer knows that figure is highly unlikely to be awarded. They do want to settle though and have asked for a sensible figure from your side to see if this is possible.
At the risk of poking the elephant in the room, there appears to be evidence on this very forum of the OP riding at an group event in early October of last year, so one would presume that the injuries sustained at the time of the accident weren't life changing.
edit: I'm obviously late in that assessment, which the OP has confirmed.
edit: I'm obviously late in that assessment, which the OP has confirmed.
Edited by Durzel on Wednesday 11th February 12:05
Greenish said:
I think the valuation is very very high and would be happy with half of that to be honest, I just want to get it done and dusted and move on.
based on anything other than what you want, now? that is of course entirely your perogative your solicitors are unlikely to massively overvalue it not least because of managing expectations
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff