Bit of legal advice please?
Discussion
I thought we had a legal forum here but I can't seem to find it so sorry if this is in the wrong place.
Bit of background. My partner had a minor bump with a motorbike around a year and a half ago. The motorbike was waiting in front of her at some traffic lights. The lights went green, the motorbike went, as did my partner, then he slammed the anchors on dead in the middle of the junction and my partner bumped his back wheel, knocking his number plate off but seemingly undamaging the bike.
The guy on the bike was arsey with my partner and refused to give his insurance details or personal details. My partner gave hers and they both left the scene. He rode away on his bike.
My partner called her insurance company as soon as she got home to report the incident. They took her version of events and she expressed concern at the manner of the motorcyclist and the incident and how it felt planned etc.
After this we heard nothing from her insurance company and assumed all had either been dealt with or he never made a claim.
Today my partner received a letter from one of those "no win no fee" lawyer outfits stating that the motorcyclist is claiming repair damages of £1500 and no less than £5000 and up to £15000 injury compensation from the accident.
I don't know how this works really but I've told my partner to get onto her insurance company asap to inform them. My (uneducated) understanding will be that it is the insurance company that will be liable for any claim against her whilst she was driving surely? Is it even possible for him to make a claim in this way? Why has he not contacted her insurance company in a year and a half? Possibly he was uninsured when riding?
We're a bit stumped as where to go from this. Such a minor incident totally blown out of proportion and potentially costing my partner £16500? What do we do?
Bit of background. My partner had a minor bump with a motorbike around a year and a half ago. The motorbike was waiting in front of her at some traffic lights. The lights went green, the motorbike went, as did my partner, then he slammed the anchors on dead in the middle of the junction and my partner bumped his back wheel, knocking his number plate off but seemingly undamaging the bike.
The guy on the bike was arsey with my partner and refused to give his insurance details or personal details. My partner gave hers and they both left the scene. He rode away on his bike.
My partner called her insurance company as soon as she got home to report the incident. They took her version of events and she expressed concern at the manner of the motorcyclist and the incident and how it felt planned etc.
After this we heard nothing from her insurance company and assumed all had either been dealt with or he never made a claim.
Today my partner received a letter from one of those "no win no fee" lawyer outfits stating that the motorcyclist is claiming repair damages of £1500 and no less than £5000 and up to £15000 injury compensation from the accident.
I don't know how this works really but I've told my partner to get onto her insurance company asap to inform them. My (uneducated) understanding will be that it is the insurance company that will be liable for any claim against her whilst she was driving surely? Is it even possible for him to make a claim in this way? Why has he not contacted her insurance company in a year and a half? Possibly he was uninsured when riding?
We're a bit stumped as where to go from this. Such a minor incident totally blown out of proportion and potentially costing my partner £16500? What do we do?
MysteryLemon said:
I don't know how this works really but I've told my partner to get onto her insurance company asap to inform them. My (uneducated) understanding will be that it is the insurance company that will be liable for any claim against her whilst she was driving surely? Is it even possible for him to make a claim in this way? Why has he not contacted her insurance company in a year and a half? Possibly he was uninsured when riding?
We're a bit stumped as where to go from this. Such a minor incident totally blown out of proportion and potentially costing my partner £16500? What do we do?
Yes they will try to gather damages from your partners insurance.We're a bit stumped as where to go from this. Such a minor incident totally blown out of proportion and potentially costing my partner £16500? What do we do?
The biker has three years to claim for personal injury, so yes he can claim.
He maybe only decided to claim after a cold call asking him "if he had been in a accident" so that could be why it came out of the blue.
Your partner needs to make her insurance company who she was insured with aware of this, and they will sort the matter. Tell her to give them all the specifics of the accident. The insurance company may still pay out to settle the case cheaper.
- just noticed that you're from Stoke and i purchased a canvas from you a few years back, Small world.
Edited by Johna on Tuesday 20th January 13:04
He has three years to bring a personal injury claim and six years to bring one for property damage so yes, he can make a claim now.
Whether or not he had insurance at the time of the accident is irrelevant to your wife's own liability.
She should pass it on to her insurers - the ones she was insured with at the time of the accident if she's changed in the meantime. It does sound fishy, but her insurers will make the decision on whether to pay up or tell him to see them in court. If she does end up being found liable it will be her insurers who are out of pocket by £16K, not her personally.
Whether or not he had insurance at the time of the accident is irrelevant to your wife's own liability.
She should pass it on to her insurers - the ones she was insured with at the time of the accident if she's changed in the meantime. It does sound fishy, but her insurers will make the decision on whether to pay up or tell him to see them in court. If she does end up being found liable it will be her insurers who are out of pocket by £16K, not her personally.
FYI - just because he says he's claiming damages from £5k to £15k, that doesn't mean that's what he'll receive. He will have to disclose medical evidence to her insurers as well as documents in support of the repairs to his motorcycle. This will all be looked into by her insurers.
The £5k to £15k is simply for the purpose of providing the Court (if it ever gets that far) an indication of what it "may" be worth and hence has relevance in terms of which track (i.e. Small Claims Track or Fast Track) the Court would allocate the case to if Court proceedings were ever issued.
As said above though, just pass to her insurers and let them do everything.
The £5k to £15k is simply for the purpose of providing the Court (if it ever gets that far) an indication of what it "may" be worth and hence has relevance in terms of which track (i.e. Small Claims Track or Fast Track) the Court would allocate the case to if Court proceedings were ever issued.
As said above though, just pass to her insurers and let them do everything.
If I was doing a crash for cash scheme, I wouldn't do it on a motorcycle. A light tap on a car and some minor damage to bodywork. A tap to a motorcycle back wheel from an inattentive drive sees the bike shoved from underneath you, possibly falling on you breaking your leg, back, neck.
I'd question her version of events tbh. But nothing is ever anyone's fault is it? always someone else in the wrong.
I'd question her version of events tbh. But nothing is ever anyone's fault is it? always someone else in the wrong.
Word back from the missus and they are fully aware of what's going on.
Apparently he claimed and they offered a settlement months ago which he rejected and is now trying to claim more and taking it to court. They told my partner she shouldn't have had that letter and to forward it on to them asap and not to worry.
Nice of the insurance company to not bother keeping us up to date but at the same time, nice to see they are already on it and doing their job.
Cheers again everyone!
Apparently he claimed and they offered a settlement months ago which he rejected and is now trying to claim more and taking it to court. They told my partner she shouldn't have had that letter and to forward it on to them asap and not to worry.
Nice of the insurance company to not bother keeping us up to date but at the same time, nice to see they are already on it and doing their job.
Cheers again everyone!
klingelton said:
If I was doing a crash for cash scheme, I wouldn't do it on a motorcycle. A light tap on a car and some minor damage to bodywork. A tap to a motorcycle back wheel from an inattentive drive sees the bike shoved from underneath you, possibly falling on you breaking your leg, back, neck.
This isn't a "crash for cash" thing - the claim for injury etc would have landed on the doormat within weeks not 18 months 
.Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through (
) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout. But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh??
) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods. Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans
. I hope similar happens in this case...It was all a very odd situation when happened though..
Regardless, the missus has scanned me a few of the pages to read. Amazing what he's trying to claim for. Basically he's had a full rear end rebuild on his bike "due to the accident"... She didn't even knock him off. Simple light tap to the back. Only noticable damage was the number plate coming off, and he drove it away too.
Medical claims range from an aching elbow when lifting weights in the gym to a sore thumb. He didn't have any time off work due to the accident either. It also states he had a far more serious motorcycling accident a few years previous and has had numerous complaints about pain since that before my missus bumped his rear tyre...
Good luck to him
Regardless, the missus has scanned me a few of the pages to read. Amazing what he's trying to claim for. Basically he's had a full rear end rebuild on his bike "due to the accident"... She didn't even knock him off. Simple light tap to the back. Only noticable damage was the number plate coming off, and he drove it away too.
Medical claims range from an aching elbow when lifting weights in the gym to a sore thumb. He didn't have any time off work due to the accident either. It also states he had a far more serious motorcycling accident a few years previous and has had numerous complaints about pain since that before my missus bumped his rear tyre...
Good luck to him
I was rear ended on a brand new K1200GT a few years back at very slow speed.
At the front on the entrance to a roundabout, started to pull forward and stopped but the car behind didn't.
£3,000 worth of damage from a light tap which knocked me off the bike - which was only 6 weeks old.
Let her insurers see it through...
At the front on the entrance to a roundabout, started to pull forward and stopped but the car behind didn't.
£3,000 worth of damage from a light tap which knocked me off the bike - which was only 6 weeks old.
Let her insurers see it through...
aw51 121565 said:
klingelton said:
If I was doing a crash for cash scheme, I wouldn't do it on a motorcycle. A light tap on a car and some minor damage to bodywork. A tap to a motorcycle back wheel from an inattentive drive sees the bike shoved from underneath you, possibly falling on you breaking your leg, back, neck.
This isn't a "crash for cash" thing - the claim for injury etc would have landed on the doormat within weeks not 18 months .Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through (
) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout. But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh??
) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods. Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans
. I hope similar happens in this case...aw51 121565 said:
This isn't a "crash for cash" thing - the claim for injury etc would have landed on the doormat within weeks not 18 months .
Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through ( ) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout.
But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh?? ) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods.
Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans . I hope similar happens in this case...
no mention of why the motorcyclist apparently and unexpectedly slammed his anchors on. obviously the motorcyclists fault for braking hard for no reason. That's why I read it as a crash for cash thing. .Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through (
) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout. But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh??
) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods. Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans
. I hope similar happens in this case...klingelton said:
aw51 121565 said:
This isn't a "crash for cash" thing - the claim for injury etc would have landed on the doormat within weeks not 18 months .
Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through ( ) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout.
But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh?? ) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods.
Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans . I hope similar happens in this case...
no mention of why the motorcyclist apparently and unexpectedly slammed his anchors on. obviously the motorcyclists fault for braking hard for no reason. That's why I read it as a crash for cash thing. .Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through (
) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout. But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh??
) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods. Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans
. I hope similar happens in this case...aw51 121565 said:
This isn't a "crash for cash" thing - the claim for injury etc would have landed on the doormat within weeks not 18 months .
Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through ( ) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout.
But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh?? ) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods.
Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans . I hope similar happens in this case...
you seem very familiar with the OP's partner's accident. Or perhaps not and you are just talking s .Rather, this is someone who watches daytime TV on one of the minor channels and is rather taken at the promise in some mediocre advert for "cash for an accident that wasn't your fault". The claimant hasn't thought this through (
) and will hopefully (ideally) get short shrift and no payout. But unless someone spots the glaring errors then he will get his payout uncontested (it's cheaper to pay out than to litigate).
Have an example of things not working out for the claimant on a slightly different level. A former neighbour got 18 months for his part in a near-£100k motor insurance fraud (a fake accident to get money back on a new-ish prestige vehicle which had lunched its gearbox with a repair cost of £7k) - only when a barrister spotted that the vehicle had a drivetrain warranty in force were questions asked as to why the vehicle had been scrapped... Further enquiries revealed that no accident had happened at the location, date and time specified (those pesky local residents, eh??
) plus a few other incriminating odds and sods. Et voila, total claims totalling nigh on £100k for injury and loss of property (two vehicles) turn in to 6 people with stripy tans
. I hope similar happens in this case...
t? klingelton said:
no mention of why the motorcyclist apparently and unexpectedly slammed his anchors on. obviously the motorcyclists fault for braking hard for no reason. That's why I read it as a crash for cash thing.
Are you mad? I doubt anybody is stupid enough to deliberately get rear ended whilst riding a bike. Cash for crash involves little risk of injury and a payout of around £1500. It doesn't involve taking the kind of risks that could leave you in a wheelchair for the rest of your life. I do enjoy these threads though. PHer gets rear ended, kill the stupid b
h / bd behind and sue them for every penny whilst demanding a Veyron as a courtesy car, as its "your rightz innit". Flip it on it's head and only scamming bds get rear ended and must have slammed on their anchors for it to have happened. Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff