No-win-no-fee chaser? 3 Years after an accident?
Discussion
TL:DR; 3 years ago, driving through a light controlled crossroads, car cut across in front of us (me passenger+dad driving), hit brakes and parked it. right in front of us. Dink. Insurers paid, not a great deal but meh. Today: letter in post from insurer, with notice that the other party is making a claim against dad.
Is this an "ambulance chaser" / no win no fee kinda thing who are trying it on? I have to say, this one has really thrown me today, and it takes quite a lot to do that. I guess when your elderly dad has one of these letters, its a fairly natural reaction when it seems someone is trying to bully your dad.
If this seems familiar, I posted the initial details here shortly after it happened.
Just under 3 years ago I was in the car with my dad (who was driving) on the way back from a new MOT on the car, driving down a main road into town, driving through a busy traffic-light controlled crossroads at an appropriately sedate speed on a green light, when an Audi TT decided it couldn't wait in the turning area, and drove across the front of us, panicked and parked it in front of us. Had she not braked, we may have missed her. Dad hit the brakes, but it was a T-bone, no physical injury, dented panels on both cars.
In reality, there was no way it could be anyone else but the TT driver's fault. As clean-cut as it gets without actual photo evidence. Really, it was careless or possibly reckless driving on her part. She drove into a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes.
Anyway, there was to-ing and fro-ing with dad's insurer, and he agreed to keep the car with a (in my opinion stupidly low) payout, because it was causing him considerable stress. Not least because of the wording "would you be prepared to attend court" he lost patience with it all and caved in. He was 84 at the time, but in my opinion a perfectly competent driver, and I doubt I would have done anything any differently or reacted any faster (remember, I was in the passenger seat and paying attention) but the thought of having to go to court was too much for him.
Fast forward to today, 2 years 11 months later, and dad received a letter from his insurer at the time of the accident.
3 years after the accident, prosecuting an 87 year old. Kinda angry about it right now if I'm honest. What on earth can they even be claiming? The TT driver drove across a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes in panic. Sadly the only real witness (who heard the driver verbally admit her mistake) left their details with the other driver.
Any idea how to react to this? There is a rather minimal statement form to fill in, and they should have all the statements etc from the previous contact anyway.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
My own thoughts are that she has gone to a no-win-no-fee place and they have seen it was an 87 year old who won't be able to take going to court. Presumably unaware I was there too. I guess if dad is prepared to go to court, then they are less likely to go ahead? As it is, it is the TT driver's (mid 20s, female) opinion versus that of me (50s) and my dad (80s).
Any thoughts appreciated.
Is this an "ambulance chaser" / no win no fee kinda thing who are trying it on? I have to say, this one has really thrown me today, and it takes quite a lot to do that. I guess when your elderly dad has one of these letters, its a fairly natural reaction when it seems someone is trying to bully your dad.
If this seems familiar, I posted the initial details here shortly after it happened.
Just under 3 years ago I was in the car with my dad (who was driving) on the way back from a new MOT on the car, driving down a main road into town, driving through a busy traffic-light controlled crossroads at an appropriately sedate speed on a green light, when an Audi TT decided it couldn't wait in the turning area, and drove across the front of us, panicked and parked it in front of us. Had she not braked, we may have missed her. Dad hit the brakes, but it was a T-bone, no physical injury, dented panels on both cars.
In reality, there was no way it could be anyone else but the TT driver's fault. As clean-cut as it gets without actual photo evidence. Really, it was careless or possibly reckless driving on her part. She drove into a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes.
Anyway, there was to-ing and fro-ing with dad's insurer, and he agreed to keep the car with a (in my opinion stupidly low) payout, because it was causing him considerable stress. Not least because of the wording "would you be prepared to attend court" he lost patience with it all and caved in. He was 84 at the time, but in my opinion a perfectly competent driver, and I doubt I would have done anything any differently or reacted any faster (remember, I was in the passenger seat and paying attention) but the thought of having to go to court was too much for him.
Fast forward to today, 2 years 11 months later, and dad received a letter from his insurer at the time of the accident.
insurer said:
The third party has expressed their intent to issue legal proceedings in relation to the above incident.
In order that we can form an accurate defence please could you complete and return the attracted witness questionnaire.
If you are not willing to attend court, we may have to settle the third party’s claim on best possible terms which may include settling their claim in full.
A reminder, the accident was 1 month under 3 years ago, dad is now 87. I'm not sure what he will do, but I fear with the threat of court, he will cave in. My concern is that the driver has been approached by the "have you ever had an accident" type lawyers who are trying it on, knowing that dad may well do this and hey presto, free money for them and their client. In order that we can form an accurate defence please could you complete and return the attracted witness questionnaire.
If you are not willing to attend court, we may have to settle the third party’s claim on best possible terms which may include settling their claim in full.
3 years after the accident, prosecuting an 87 year old. Kinda angry about it right now if I'm honest. What on earth can they even be claiming? The TT driver drove across a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes in panic. Sadly the only real witness (who heard the driver verbally admit her mistake) left their details with the other driver.
Any idea how to react to this? There is a rather minimal statement form to fill in, and they should have all the statements etc from the previous contact anyway.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
My own thoughts are that she has gone to a no-win-no-fee place and they have seen it was an 87 year old who won't be able to take going to court. Presumably unaware I was there too. I guess if dad is prepared to go to court, then they are less likely to go ahead? As it is, it is the TT driver's (mid 20s, female) opinion versus that of me (50s) and my dad (80s).
Any thoughts appreciated.
Your father is not being prosecuted (as you say in your OP) and there is no indication he will have to go to Court at this juncture.
The reasoning of why your fathers then insurer are wanting this documentation completed is unclear and in the grand scheme of things, largely irrelevant to yourselves. Yes, It could be a third-party claims company on the prospective hunt, but then, there could be a whole-host of other reasons why they also need it completing. It could have been missed at the time of the claim and its been picked-up on a standard internal audit for example.
It’s easy for a randomer on the internet to say this as its your elderly father and not mine, but my advice is to adopt a dispassionate and level-headed approach, help your father complete the document and then put it behind you. If the issue comes around again then you’ll have a better idea on where it’s potentially headed.
The reasoning of why your fathers then insurer are wanting this documentation completed is unclear and in the grand scheme of things, largely irrelevant to yourselves. Yes, It could be a third-party claims company on the prospective hunt, but then, there could be a whole-host of other reasons why they also need it completing. It could have been missed at the time of the claim and its been picked-up on a standard internal audit for example.
It’s easy for a randomer on the internet to say this as its your elderly father and not mine, but my advice is to adopt a dispassionate and level-headed approach, help your father complete the document and then put it behind you. If the issue comes around again then you’ll have a better idea on where it’s potentially headed.
I had similar a couple of months ago and my understanding is that it's nowhere near as sinister / money grabbing as you think.
Hopefully someone with specific insurance industry knowledge will be along shortly to give chapter and verse but my understanding is that all that has happened is that the other parties insurance company are arguing with your Father's insurance company and are trying to get out of paying the claim. It has now got to the stage where the next step is court and your Father's insurance company require an updated statement. I believe that if your Father provides this then the other insurance company will back down and settle the claim with your Father's insurance company. I don't believe you need to provide any new information, just re-confirm that the information previously submitted is accurate.
Hopefully someone with specific insurance industry knowledge will be along shortly to give chapter and verse but my understanding is that all that has happened is that the other parties insurance company are arguing with your Father's insurance company and are trying to get out of paying the claim. It has now got to the stage where the next step is court and your Father's insurance company require an updated statement. I believe that if your Father provides this then the other insurance company will back down and settle the claim with your Father's insurance company. I don't believe you need to provide any new information, just re-confirm that the information previously submitted is accurate.
Zad said:
TL:DR; 3 years ago, driving through a light controlled crossroads, car cut across in front of us (me passenger+dad driving), hit brakes and parked it. right in front of us. Dink. Insurers paid, not a great deal but meh. Today: letter in post from insurer, with notice that the other party is making a claim against dad.
Is this an "ambulance chaser" / no win no fee kinda thing who are trying it on? I have to say, this one has really thrown me today, and it takes quite a lot to do that. I guess when your elderly dad has one of these letters, its a fairly natural reaction when it seems someone is trying to bully your dad.
If this seems familiar, I posted the initial details here shortly after it happened.
Just under 3 years ago I was in the car with my dad (who was driving) on the way back from a new MOT on the car, driving down a main road into town, driving through a busy traffic-light controlled crossroads at an appropriately sedate speed on a green light, when an Audi TT decided it couldn't wait in the turning area, and drove across the front of us, panicked and parked it in front of us. Had she not braked, we may have missed her. Dad hit the brakes, but it was a T-bone, no physical injury, dented panels on both cars.
In reality, there was no way it could be anyone else but the TT driver's fault. As clean-cut as it gets without actual photo evidence. Really, it was careless or possibly reckless driving on her part. She drove into a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes.
Anyway, there was to-ing and fro-ing with dad's insurer, and he agreed to keep the car with a (in my opinion stupidly low) payout, because it was causing him considerable stress. Not least because of the wording "would you be prepared to attend court" he lost patience with it all and caved in. He was 84 at the time, but in my opinion a perfectly competent driver, and I doubt I would have done anything any differently or reacted any faster (remember, I was in the passenger seat and paying attention) but the thought of having to go to court was too much for him.
Fast forward to today, 2 years 11 months later, and dad received a letter from his insurer at the time of the accident.
3 years after the accident, prosecuting an 87 year old. Kinda angry about it right now if I'm honest. What on earth can they even be claiming? The TT driver drove across a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes in panic. Sadly the only real witness (who heard the driver verbally admit her mistake) left their details with the other driver.
Any idea how to react to this? There is a rather minimal statement form to fill in, and they should have all the statements etc from the previous contact anyway.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
My own thoughts are that she has gone to a no-win-no-fee place and they have seen it was an 87 year old who won't be able to take going to court. Presumably unaware I was there too. I guess if dad is prepared to go to court, then they are less likely to go ahead? As it is, it is the TT driver's (mid 20s, female) opinion versus that of me (50s) and my dad (80s).
Any thoughts appreciated.
You realise what TL:DR; means?Is this an "ambulance chaser" / no win no fee kinda thing who are trying it on? I have to say, this one has really thrown me today, and it takes quite a lot to do that. I guess when your elderly dad has one of these letters, its a fairly natural reaction when it seems someone is trying to bully your dad.
If this seems familiar, I posted the initial details here shortly after it happened.
Just under 3 years ago I was in the car with my dad (who was driving) on the way back from a new MOT on the car, driving down a main road into town, driving through a busy traffic-light controlled crossroads at an appropriately sedate speed on a green light, when an Audi TT decided it couldn't wait in the turning area, and drove across the front of us, panicked and parked it in front of us. Had she not braked, we may have missed her. Dad hit the brakes, but it was a T-bone, no physical injury, dented panels on both cars.
In reality, there was no way it could be anyone else but the TT driver's fault. As clean-cut as it gets without actual photo evidence. Really, it was careless or possibly reckless driving on her part. She drove into a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes.
Anyway, there was to-ing and fro-ing with dad's insurer, and he agreed to keep the car with a (in my opinion stupidly low) payout, because it was causing him considerable stress. Not least because of the wording "would you be prepared to attend court" he lost patience with it all and caved in. He was 84 at the time, but in my opinion a perfectly competent driver, and I doubt I would have done anything any differently or reacted any faster (remember, I was in the passenger seat and paying attention) but the thought of having to go to court was too much for him.
Fast forward to today, 2 years 11 months later, and dad received a letter from his insurer at the time of the accident.
insurer said:
The third party has expressed their intent to issue legal proceedings in relation to the above incident.
In order that we can form an accurate defence please could you complete and return the attracted witness questionnaire.
If you are not willing to attend court, we may have to settle the third party s claim on best possible terms which may include settling their claim in full.
A reminder, the accident was 1 month under 3 years ago, dad is now 87. I'm not sure what he will do, but I fear with the threat of court, he will cave in. My concern is that the driver has been approached by the "have you ever had an accident" type lawyers who are trying it on, knowing that dad may well do this and hey presto, free money for them and their client. In order that we can form an accurate defence please could you complete and return the attracted witness questionnaire.
If you are not willing to attend court, we may have to settle the third party s claim on best possible terms which may include settling their claim in full.
3 years after the accident, prosecuting an 87 year old. Kinda angry about it right now if I'm honest. What on earth can they even be claiming? The TT driver drove across a line of moving traffic and hit the brakes in panic. Sadly the only real witness (who heard the driver verbally admit her mistake) left their details with the other driver.
Any idea how to react to this? There is a rather minimal statement form to fill in, and they should have all the statements etc from the previous contact anyway.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.
My own thoughts are that she has gone to a no-win-no-fee place and they have seen it was an 87 year old who won't be able to take going to court. Presumably unaware I was there too. I guess if dad is prepared to go to court, then they are less likely to go ahead? As it is, it is the TT driver's (mid 20s, female) opinion versus that of me (50s) and my dad (80s).
Any thoughts appreciated.
Surely this is one insurance company v the other and not accident chasers.
The t
t in the TT has denied liability to their insurance.
Your old mans insurance don't want to accept liability either as it isn't his fault on your description.
So off it goes to court.
Your old man should really provide a statement if he's worried about court you could go too as a witness but it might be settled before court anyway if the 3rd party see you are willing to fight it.
The t
t in the TT has denied liability to their insurance.Your old mans insurance don't want to accept liability either as it isn't his fault on your description.
So off it goes to court.
Your old man should really provide a statement if he's worried about court you could go too as a witness but it might be settled before court anyway if the 3rd party see you are willing to fight it.
Interesting it happening just as it gets to 3 years from the original accident date as you cannot claim personal injury after 3 years.
If the 3 year time limit hasn't expired it is worth considering a counter-claim so the pain isn't just one way.
Seriously, just fill in the forms and send back to your insurer at the time. If you can find any original notes you had it will help keep things consistent.
If the 3 year time limit hasn't expired it is worth considering a counter-claim so the pain isn't just one way.
Seriously, just fill in the forms and send back to your insurer at the time. If you can find any original notes you had it will help keep things consistent.
SmoothCriminal said:
Surely this is one insurance company v the other and not accident chasers.
The tt in the TT has denied liability to their insurance.
Your old mans insurance don't want to accept liability either as it isn't his fault on your description.
So off it goes to court.
Your old man should really provide a statement if he's worried about court you could go too as a witness but it might be settled before court anyway if the 3rd party see you are willing to fight it.
I doubt it’s insurer v insurer. It probably is ambulance chaser v insurer.The t
t in the TT has denied liability to their insurance.Your old mans insurance don't want to accept liability either as it isn't his fault on your description.
So off it goes to court.
Your old man should really provide a statement if he's worried about court you could go too as a witness but it might be settled before court anyway if the 3rd party see you are willing to fight it.
The driver of the TT is likely to be presenting a claim for personal injury and uninsured losses through an accident management company or his legal expenses insurer. It’s more likely than not that there will be a claim for PI as the limitation period for a PI claim is three years and this is why the claim has rears its ugly head now. If it was a claim for insurers outlay and/or special damages only, the limitation period is six years and there wouldn’t be so much urgency at this stage.
Your dad shouldn’t really roll over just because he can’t be bothered going to Court. It’s a matter of principle to defend a claim such as this if the driver of the TT was indeed in the wrong. At the least, he should provide the statement that his insurers are asking for.
As others have said it's because the Statute of Limitations only allows 3 years for injury claims.
From my experience handling motor claims in the 80s and 90s even if proceedings were commenced very few ever ended up going to court. Your Dad just needs to give his insurer as much information as possible so they can hopefully defend this "last gasp" claim.
From my experience handling motor claims in the 80s and 90s even if proceedings were commenced very few ever ended up going to court. Your Dad just needs to give his insurer as much information as possible so they can hopefully defend this "last gasp" claim.
Sebring440 said:
You realise what TL:DR; means?
The TL:DR part is the summary in the first few lines that the OP posted, it's usually done like that to save you reading the whole post if it doesn't interest you.Zad said:
TL:DR; 3 years ago, driving through a light controlled crossroads, car cut across in front of us (me passenger+dad driving), hit brakes and parked it. right in front of us. Dink. Insurers paid, not a great deal but meh. Today: letter in post from insurer, with notice that the other party is making a claim against dad.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff