Somebody claiming whiplash?
Discussion
Back in 2011 I came off an island on a wet, dark drive home from work to find a group of kids in the road. I managed to stop in time, as did the car behind me but cars 3 and 4 didn't manage to stop causing a bump. Car 3 was written off due to the speed car 4 was travelling. There was no damage to my car and as the accident wasn't my fault I thought that, after reporting it to my insurer, I would hear nothing more of it (naively).
However, 3 years after the crash, I have received a letter from my insurer saying that, with reference to the above accident, they propose to settle a 3rd party claim on a 100% basis. They believe this would be the most likely outcome should this case proceed to court.
Presume somebody has claimed for whiplash or something, only 3 years down the line.
Seeing as the accident wasn't my fault I'm wondering why my insurer is involved at all, I can't phone them for further details until Monday, but would this have any affect on me? No claims record etc?
However, 3 years after the crash, I have received a letter from my insurer saying that, with reference to the above accident, they propose to settle a 3rd party claim on a 100% basis. They believe this would be the most likely outcome should this case proceed to court.
Presume somebody has claimed for whiplash or something, only 3 years down the line.
Seeing as the accident wasn't my fault I'm wondering why my insurer is involved at all, I can't phone them for further details until Monday, but would this have any affect on me? No claims record etc?
I would speak to your insurer, as this seems strange. From your limited description, it sounds as if you were at the head of the group and came to a stop without incident, as did the car behind you. Cars 3 and 4 collided (but none with you), yet you are being accused of being negligent.
This doesn't appear to make sense.
This doesn't appear to make sense.
To provide more detail, I came to a complete stop with no incident as did the car behind me. The fourth car back didn't manage to stop and hit car 3, which then hit car 2, which then hit me. By the time I was hit all the energy had gone from the crash and it was only a minor bump so no damage to the back of my car or the front of the car behind. The major damage was the cars 3 and 4.
I have heard nothing from my insurer since the day of the accident 3 years ago.
I have heard nothing from my insurer since the day of the accident 3 years ago.
One of the parties involved has responded to one of the inevitable "There's compensayshun with your name on, mate!" calls, and gone with it. The people dealing with the 'injury claim' haven't looked properly at what happened (it's not in their interests to, they're just bottom-feeders after their 30 pieces of silver) - and neither, unfortunately, have your insurers (oops! 
) hence they are proposing to (incorrectly in your and our view) accept 100% responsibility.
Your insurers' duty is to minimise their outgoings, and going to litigation now will cost more than paying out (if only they'd done their job properly when first approached
)... They're about to drop a hell of a clanger (as per your description) though 
and I'd be escalating this up through the organisation 
.
) hence they are proposing to (incorrectly in your and our view) accept 100% responsibility.Your insurers' duty is to minimise their outgoings, and going to litigation now will cost more than paying out (if only they'd done their job properly when first approached
)... They're about to drop a hell of a clanger (as per your description) though and I'd be escalating this up through the organisation .aw51 121565 said:
One of the parties involved has responded to one of the inevitable "There's compensayshun with your name on, mate!" calls, and gone with it. The people dealing with the 'injury claim' haven't looked properly at what happened (it's not in their interests to, they're just bottom-feeders after their 30 pieces of silver) - and neither, unfortunately, have your insurers (oops! ) hence they are proposing to (incorrectly in your and our view) accept 100% responsibility.
Your insurers' duty is to minimise their outgoings, and going to litigation now will cost more than paying out (if only they'd done their job properly when first approached )... They're about to drop a hell of a clanger (as per your description) though and I'd be escalating this up through the organisation .
Thanks, hopefully that is the case. Slightly worrying that insurance companies are willing to bend over so easily. Almost makes me wish I had accepted one the numerous calls I received from these 'injury lawyer 4 u' types rather than telling them to do one! ) hence they are proposing to (incorrectly in your and our view) accept 100% responsibility.Your insurers' duty is to minimise their outgoings, and going to litigation now will cost more than paying out (if only they'd done their job properly when first approached
)... They're about to drop a hell of a clanger (as per your description) though and I'd be escalating this up through the organisation .aw51 121565 said:
Your insurers' duty is to minimise their outgoings, and going to litigation now will cost more than paying out (if only they'd done their job properly when first approached )... They're about to drop a hell of a clanger (as per your description) though and I'd be escalating this up through the organisation .
You clearly have no idea how the litigation process works. )... They're about to drop a hell of a clanger (as per your description) though and I'd be escalating this up through the organisation .LoonR1 said:
This thread is BS. You were first in a line of four cars. There is no way you were at fault. End of story. No insurer would accept liability in those circumstances.
At least come up with a better story.
OK. So who in the sweepstake had "2-3 hrs" as the time when dependable LoonR1 would be along to call someone a liar?At least come up with a better story.
LoonR1 said:
This thread is BS. You were first in a line of four cars. There is no way you were at fault. End of story. No insurer would accept liability in those circumstances.
At least come up with a better story.
My thoughts exactly. I don't even know why the OP notified his insurers at the time, he wasn't involved in a collision.At least come up with a better story.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff