Claiming Expenses for Attending Ridiculous Court Hearing

[Hairsy16]

Over a year ago, a lorry drove into the side of the car my wife was driving. Both vehicles were at a roundabout. My wife entered the roundabout the left lane to travel straight ahead and the lorry entered the roundabout in the right lane to turn right. Almost immediately, the lorry drifted fully into the left lane and hit my wife. We have forward and rear facing dashcams and the above is completely clear and irrefutable.

Our insurance looked at the video and immediately processed the claim as a no fault claim. The claim was settled within a couple of days after the car was found to be a write off. Our insurer then handed the case off to a solicitor to pursue the other insurer. They advised me that, under the terms of our insurance, I need to be helpful to the solicitor. All seemed very reasonable.

I provided the solicitor with descriptions, diagrams and a copy of the video.

The lorry's insurer initially ignored contact from 'my' solicitor. Eventually contact was made and the other insurer denied liability and accused my wife of not following correct lane discipline and causing the accident. I suspect they haven't looked at the video but maybe they just hope that it'll go away.

I've now been advised that I need to attend court over the incident. Apparently, my nearest court has been chosen but it's around 100 miles away. I don't yet have a date.

I'm really fed up with this. I can accept that mistakes on the road happen and I assume that's what this was. However, there is absolutely no way that anyone could possibly look at the video and conclude that my wife was at fault. I've sent a rear facing screenshot from when my wife pulled away from the location of impact that shows the lorry completely in her lane with bits of broken car under its bumper.

I've told my solicitor that this is ridiculous and that if they're really going to take this to court then I would like to claim expenses. They initially said I could do this and its reasonable but then, in a later email, said its quite rare for expenses to be awarded.

Is there anyone who has experience of this and could guide me on how best to claim expenses to cover my travel costs and time? I don't want to be unreasonable but this is going to be a 200 mile round trip with parking expense plus a day out of my life.

And, finally, if the answer is "you just need to get over it and accept that it's going to cost you" then feel free to say so - I won't be offended.

[SteBrown91]

Chances are you won't have to go and their insurance will settle at the 11th hour.

[alscar]

I vaguely recall a similar thread on here not that long ago.
Iirc that poster ended up not having to attend.
I would have assumed that your Insurer would be subrogating against his “ behind the scenes “ and not require your attendance but perhaps that is standard for UK Motor claims.
Either way I would assume that your direct expenses will get paid but probably not your time but would put the question as a statement to your solicitor ?

[Hairsy16]

alscar said:

probably not your time but would put the question as a statement to your solicitor ?

Unfortunately 'my' solicitor isn't being terribly forthcoming - they were appointed by the insurer. I suspect it's a firm that takes on thousands of such cases and I'm just one of many customers and they don't make enough money to provide much personal service.

Hopefully, as suggested, it won't happen in the end.

[M11rph]

In what capacity are you being requested to attend?

If as a witness then some expenses can be claimed. 25p/mile and parking charges plus a small subsistence allowance. Think Greggs' sandwich rather than lunch at The Savoy Grill. You may also claim loss of earnings £67 or £85 maximum depending upon your emloyment status.

[Hairsy16]

M11rph said:

In what capacity are you being requested to attend?

Thanks for the reply. I asked the same question of my solicitor. They said that, as the insurance policyholder, I'm the party that needs to be there. I pointed out that my wife was driving but they said that she doesn't need to be there. It doesn't make a great deal of sense to me - but, in practice, if it does go to court I have no concerns about the outcome as the evidence couldn't be clearer.

[Red9zero]

SteBrown91 said:

Chances are you won't have to go and their insurance will settle at the 11th hour.

Exactly. I had the same with a tractor driver. I assume they are trying to call someone's bluff. Does seem to be a waste of time though. Mine was during Covid so dragged on for a very long time.

[gazza285]

I was able to attend my hearing online, after someone drove into my van, is this not an option?

[OIC]

Hairsy16 said:

I have no concerns about the outcome as the evidence couldn't be clearer.

Ahhh, a court virgin, how sweet.

[Shnozz]

Hairsy16 said:

M11rph said:

In what capacity are you being requested to attend?

Thanks for the reply. I asked the same question of my solicitor. They said that, as the insurance policyholder, I'm the party that needs to be there. I pointed out that my wife was driving but they said that she doesn't need to be there. It doesn't make a great deal of sense to me - but, in practice, if it does go to court I have no concerns about the outcome as the evidence couldn't be clearer.

Nor me. And I work in that field.

I cannot see what evidence you could possibly need to give.

Have witness statements been taken yet? Your witness statement wouldn’t be able to say much at all given you weren’t present. Only your wife has any relevant evidence.

[119]

Hairsy16 said:

M11rph said:

In what capacity are you being requested to attend?

Thanks for the reply. I asked the same question of my solicitor. They said that, as the insurance policyholder, I'm the party that needs to be there. I pointed out that my wife was driving but they said that she doesn't need to be there. It doesn't make a great deal of sense to me - but, in practice, if it does go to court I have no concerns about the outcome as the evidence couldn't be clearer.

That doesnt make sense at all.

Is she a named driver, your name as the policy holder?

Thats the only reason i can think of.

[Panclan]

I was knock off my motorbike on the exit of a roundabout last year, the car exited the roundabout then turned back on to it.

I sent the video from my bike to the police, also the insurers telling them to claim off the 3rd party insurers. Within 6 weeks, the police charged the driver with driving without due care and offered a course. It took over 6 months for the 3rd party insurers to admit liability, they paid out for a replacement bike but dragged their heals over injuries/uninsured losses. A court date was set and 8 days before the hearing we settled the claim.

[Shnozz]

119 said:

That doesnt make sense at all.

Is she a named driver, your name as the policy holder?

Thats the only reason i can think of.

Even then it makes no sense. The only evidence the non present policyholder could give would be as to quantum. And even if quantum was not agreed, which would be rare in a RTA, there is no reference to any uninsured losses having been incurred.

I think the sols might have got it wrong, particularly in saying the driver doesn’t need to attend in a disputed liability case.

[Hairsy16]

119 said:

Is she a named driver, your name as the policy holder?

Thats the only reason i can think of.

It's a multi car policy for the family cars. I'm the policyholder. She's the main driver for the car in question.

In response to the earlier question, yes, my wife submitted a statement last year when the solicitor first got involved.

The whole thing makes little sense but, in practice, I guess I'll just have to ride it out and see what happens.

I suspect I'll suffer more stress trying to understand the system than I will if I just go with it.

I will of course update with an outcome ...

[loskie]

M11rph said:

In what capacity are you being requested to attend?

If as a witness then some expenses can be claimed. 25p/mile and parking charges plus a small subsistence allowance. Think Greggs' sandwich rather than lunch at The Savoy Grill. You may also claim loss of earnings £67 or £85 maximum depending upon your emloyment status.

This will be Civil rather than Criminal Court. Are you sure?

[paul_c123]

If its a civil proceeding then put simply, if one party attends and the other doesn't, the one that attends wins by default (and they won't even look at evidence/the case). Hence the requirement for the policyholder to attend.

[Shnozz]

paul_c123 said:

If its a civil proceeding then put simply, if one party attends and the other doesn't, the one that attends wins by default (and they won't even look at evidence/the case). Hence the requirement for the policyholder to attend.

The driver needs to attend.

The witness who didn’t witness anything has little reason to attend.

[Southerner]

Would it not potentially harm the OP s case if he arrives at court to defend an accident at which he wasn t present? I would have imagined that a halfway decent solicitor would find that very decent leverage towards there being a large gaping whole in the evidence if the actual driver is not present to defend or answer questions? OP, can your wife attend also?

My father was required to attend court over a motoring claim once, he described the situation as a young, very inexperienced driver pulling out of a driveway straight into the path of the coach he was driving, and the rather well-off family then throwing plenty of money at a solicitor trying their best to persuade everybody concerned that the coach should have swerved to avoid him. It went all the way to court, much to my fathers surprise, but he cheerfully advised that the young lad looked a prize prat throughout and was sent away with his tail between his legs and a bill for the coach firms costs. I suppose the moral of the story is that the suitably determined may push it all the way to court regardless, but hopefully a judge will appreciate when the evidence speaks for itself.

Edited by Southerner on Wednesday 9th July 18:13

[Hairsy16]

My wife could attend, yes. I did ask the solicitor this by phone and was told that it needed to be me as the policyholder.

However, given the views above, I'm going to email them and again suggest that my wife should be there. At least then I have their response in writing.

My greatest concern is the possibility that I lose because of a cockup by the solicitor and then have it registered as a fault claim.

[M11rph]

loskie said:

This will be Civil rather than Criminal Court. Are you sure?

Good point. In my defence I had the latest Ozzyman Reviews playing on the same screen.

For the OP, I'd be asking the solicitor to confirm what capacity and precisely what the Court proceedings are. It isn't reasonable to expect attendance without that information. It is information they must have, so hardly a big ask.

Dear Right, Wrong & Indifferent,
I would be delighted to attend Court on the dates you indicated, and in so doing also comply with the policy wording to give all reasonable assistance in recovering your client's loss.
I look forward to receiving your confirmation of the nature of the Proceedings and my capacity in them, my attendance being contingent on receiving an intelligible response.
Big Love from all the Hairsy Gang