CCJ threatened from year old accident
Discussion
Got a letter this morning, maybe some of you will be able to help.
The missus was driving my '89 Golf GTI last June and hit a guy in an import '91 MX5. It was on a single track road and she couldn't stop in time (she locked it up) as he came round the corner. Minimal damage to my Golf, required a new wing from the scrapyard etc, but his rear 3/4 panel took a beating. Guy driving was early 20s, and I know that it was his dad's car, hundreds of miles away from home - he was using it while at Lancaster Uni.
The insurance settled it (or so I thought) on 50/50 liability in August last year, and I lost 2 years ncb. Fast forward to today, (11 months after settlement!) and we have got a court claim form from them, claiming for £1466 repairs, plus £270 excess, plus court fee!
The other thing is that it is my name used as the Defendant, whereas it was my parter who was driving (I wasn't there at all). Not only that but they've got my name wrong.
They claim the Defendant was:
* Driving too fast
* Failed to accord the presence of the Claimant's motor vehicle on the highway
* Failed to take avoiding action, steering swerving or otherwise to avoid the collision
First impressions are that he's trying it on. Surely they will have had an insurance payout? If I had got a garage to fix my car I would have done, at 50% of the total cost.
Clearly we have to contest this, and can fill in the response pack, and also file a defence and/or counterclaim (no reason to do this). Any advice greatly appreciated.
The missus was driving my '89 Golf GTI last June and hit a guy in an import '91 MX5. It was on a single track road and she couldn't stop in time (she locked it up) as he came round the corner. Minimal damage to my Golf, required a new wing from the scrapyard etc, but his rear 3/4 panel took a beating. Guy driving was early 20s, and I know that it was his dad's car, hundreds of miles away from home - he was using it while at Lancaster Uni.
The insurance settled it (or so I thought) on 50/50 liability in August last year, and I lost 2 years ncb. Fast forward to today, (11 months after settlement!) and we have got a court claim form from them, claiming for £1466 repairs, plus £270 excess, plus court fee!
The other thing is that it is my name used as the Defendant, whereas it was my parter who was driving (I wasn't there at all). Not only that but they've got my name wrong.
They claim the Defendant was:
* Driving too fast
* Failed to accord the presence of the Claimant's motor vehicle on the highway
* Failed to take avoiding action, steering swerving or otherwise to avoid the collision
First impressions are that he's trying it on. Surely they will have had an insurance payout? If I had got a garage to fix my car I would have done, at 50% of the total cost.
Clearly we have to contest this, and can fill in the response pack, and also file a defence and/or counterclaim (no reason to do this). Any advice greatly appreciated.
They are trying it on, and clearly have no experience of the court system.
In fact, I would respond that this is a litigious compliant - ie, they are wasting the courts time.
They are hoping that you will pay up without needing to go to court, as if they have thought the case through it just makes no sense.
On most car insurance policies they have a legal costs part which is what you pay for. If yours does then I would just telephone them and get them to sort it out.
The farce is that they would have to prove your negligence in court, which would be almost impossible. However as it wasnt you who was driving, then it makes it even more difficult than that!
They are trying it on as they are charging you for repairs and an excess... whilst they may have been out of pocket on the excess the insurance company would have surely paid for the repairs for there to be an excess to pay!!??
I would respond by explaining that this is a fraudulent claim, and ask the court to contact the police about the matter. You were not driving the car firstly, and then I would contact your insurance company to explain the situation and find out if their claim was paid for. I would also put this in the claim.
However, even IF it were all true, it is not for you to pay - you have car insurance for this specific reason!
Godd luck, let us know how it goes.
In fact, I would respond that this is a litigious compliant - ie, they are wasting the courts time.
They are hoping that you will pay up without needing to go to court, as if they have thought the case through it just makes no sense.
On most car insurance policies they have a legal costs part which is what you pay for. If yours does then I would just telephone them and get them to sort it out.
The farce is that they would have to prove your negligence in court, which would be almost impossible. However as it wasnt you who was driving, then it makes it even more difficult than that!
They are trying it on as they are charging you for repairs and an excess... whilst they may have been out of pocket on the excess the insurance company would have surely paid for the repairs for there to be an excess to pay!!??
I would respond by explaining that this is a fraudulent claim, and ask the court to contact the police about the matter. You were not driving the car firstly, and then I would contact your insurance company to explain the situation and find out if their claim was paid for. I would also put this in the claim.
However, even IF it were all true, it is not for you to pay - you have car insurance for this specific reason!
Godd luck, let us know how it goes.
its called subrogation - that's dragging history up studing for my acii 20 years ago
your insurer will take your place but it comes in your name just send it unanswered to them
i think (though someone else may know better) that they have either 3 or six years to bring about legal action
perhaps they've bene talking to the pub expert or his overdraft is too high and he's hoping your insurer will reduce it for him
your insurer will take your place but it comes in your name just send it unanswered to them
i think (though someone else may know better) that they have either 3 or six years to bring about legal action
perhaps they've bene talking to the pub expert or his overdraft is too high and he's hoping your insurer will reduce it for him
LayZ said:
Got a letter this morning, maybe some of you will be able to help.
The missus was driving my '89 Golf GTI last June and hit a guy in an import '91 MX5. It was on a single track road and she couldn't stop in time (she locked it up) as he came round the corner. Minimal damage to my Golf, required a new wing from the scrapyard etc, but his rear 3/4 panel took a beating. Guy driving was early 20s, and I know that it was his dad's car, hundreds of miles away from home - he was using it while at Lancaster Uni.
The insurance settled it (or so I thought) on 50/50 liability in August last year, and I lost 2 years ncb. Fast forward to today, (11 months after settlement!) and we have got a court claim form from them, claiming for £1466 repairs, plus £270 excess, plus court fee!
The missus was driving my '89 Golf GTI last June and hit a guy in an import '91 MX5. It was on a single track road and she couldn't stop in time (she locked it up) as he came round the corner. Minimal damage to my Golf, required a new wing from the scrapyard etc, but his rear 3/4 panel took a beating. Guy driving was early 20s, and I know that it was his dad's car, hundreds of miles away from home - he was using it while at Lancaster Uni.
The insurance settled it (or so I thought) on 50/50 liability in August last year, and I lost 2 years ncb. Fast forward to today, (11 months after settlement!) and we have got a court claim form from them, claiming for £1466 repairs, plus £270 excess, plus court fee!
It mean both insurance companies megotiated to close case if one word against the other in liability for this head on. Ist one reason why I would never agree to a split liablity or it they wanted to do this - point out the facts und make it ex gratia on insurer's part. But if your insurer settled this und you have written proof - then the other insurer must have agreed to a split liability as well.
It look like the other party ist not accepting the offer from their insurers of a 50% deal und loss of no claims. If Papa ist funding the boy's insurance - then he faces a whopping premium hike. We know from our own kittens (twins now learning ...
) that ist one heck of a cost to insure the youngsters. Ist not helpful to you but I try to explain why he might be taking this action - und it really would boil down to who the court believe on the day. Go back to scene und take some photos of this bend to establish his exact road position as best as your "missus" can remember. LayZ said:
The other thing is that it is my name used as the Defendant, whereas it was my parter who was driving (I wasn't there at all). Not only that but they've got my name wrong.
You are named as principal on the policy und your "missus" ist a named driver on the policy.
You need to send this form back incompleted to your insurers - along with a letter pointing out the basics of your original report to them to dispute these charges.
If you have "legal expenses" - then insurers will use a panel of solcitors. Beware - they tend to use "big Law Firms" who use their juniors to deal with these cases.
LayZ said:
They claim the Defendant was:
* Driving too fast
* Failed to accord the presence of the Claimant's motor vehicle on the highway
* Failed to take avoiding action, steering swerving or otherwise to avoid the collision
First impressions are that he's trying it on. Surely they will have had an insurance payout? If I had got a garage to fix my car I would have done, at 50% of the total cost.
Clearly we have to contest this, and can fill in the response pack, and also file a defence and/or counterclaim (no reason to do this). Any advice greatly appreciated.
Possible - ist probably because Papa face hike in insurance. (Are ways around it - can be cheaper to buy a runabout und insure it third party than place youngster on own policy. We have the three eldest kittens as named drivers on our policy now - und the eldest - we judge safe und steady enough to drive these cars. If we have doubt about his driving ability - he would not be driving a car funded by us. (
ist one way to keep them disciplined 
) As said above - go back to your initial report to insurer - take some photos of the scene und approaches to it from both sides - as will help jog the driver's memory. If you use digital camera - you can edit to mark the positions as recalled at point of impact und positions prior to the collision too. This would help fight und contest in court too.
But it does really boil down to who the judge believe on the day... so the more evidence you get to support your missus - the better.
justinp1 said:
They are trying it on, and clearly have no experience of the court system.
In fact, I would respond that this is a litigious compliant - ie, they are wasting the courts time.
They are hoping that you will pay up without needing to go to court, as if they have thought the case through it just makes no sense.
On most car insurance policies they have a legal costs part which is what you pay for. If yours does then I would just telephone them and get them to sort it out.
The farce is that they would have to prove your negligence in court, which would be almost impossible. However as it wasnt you who was driving, then it makes it even more difficult than that!
They are trying it on as they are charging you for repairs and an excess... whilst they may have been out of pocket on the excess the insurance company would have surely paid for the repairs for there to be an excess to pay!!??
I would respond by explaining that this is a fraudulent claim, and ask the court to contact the police about the matter. You were not driving the car firstly, and then I would contact your insurance company to explain the situation and find out if their claim was paid for. I would also put this in the claim.
However, even IF it were all true, it is not for you to pay - you have car insurance for this specific reason!
Godd luck, let us know how it goes.
In fact, I would respond that this is a litigious compliant - ie, they are wasting the courts time.
They are hoping that you will pay up without needing to go to court, as if they have thought the case through it just makes no sense.
On most car insurance policies they have a legal costs part which is what you pay for. If yours does then I would just telephone them and get them to sort it out.
The farce is that they would have to prove your negligence in court, which would be almost impossible. However as it wasnt you who was driving, then it makes it even more difficult than that!
They are trying it on as they are charging you for repairs and an excess... whilst they may have been out of pocket on the excess the insurance company would have surely paid for the repairs for there to be an excess to pay!!??
I would respond by explaining that this is a fraudulent claim, and ask the court to contact the police about the matter. You were not driving the car firstly, and then I would contact your insurance company to explain the situation and find out if their claim was paid for. I would also put this in the claim.
However, even IF it were all true, it is not for you to pay - you have car insurance for this specific reason!
Godd luck, let us know how it goes.
They always issue in the names of the policy holders und then the lawyers hired by the insurance companies thrash it out in the court. Basically it seem LayZ's insurers have offered a 50/50 deal to close the case. The other party ist refusing to accept a 50/50 offer so matter ist not then closed.
The other issue for LayZ ist to find out why his company did not advise him that matter ist not resolved - und I think ncb issue should have been deferred whilst this not accepted by other party too. (We have protected no claims (or did until we named the twins on the policy
Eldest ist IAM und now working for a RoSPA/RoADA to develop himself more.) I think in Civil Litigation is about "The Balance of Probabilities" und the parties concerned have to show that the accident could have occurred as they describe und there ist merit in what they say - und if they can do this - claim succeeds. Hence why I suggest a return to the scene und some photos und even maybe a video showing other cars negotiating the tricky bend und send to insurers or submit when they ask for another statement from you for the court purpose.
Of course, they may use this to defer the court action und settle without the court too.
Phone your Insurers in the morning and then send on the original documentation to them (take a copy first). Hanse Cronje is absolutely right that the Insurers have Subrogation rights under the policy. This means that they can take on any action in your name that they see fit. However, they may not wish to, it doesn't work both ways. From your description the two Insurers paid for their own Policyholder's repairs, I'm guessing that his found some way to weedle out of it, maybe the student was using the car full time and it they had been told he was a named driver type situation?
The driver has since seen the "no blame, no claim" adverts on daytime tv (being a student) and tried his luck.
Do not reply yourself until speaking to your Insurer as you may prejudice their position, one way or another, your pocket should not be lightened.
The driver has since seen the "no blame, no claim" adverts on daytime tv (being a student) and tried his luck.
Do not reply yourself until speaking to your Insurer as you may prejudice their position, one way or another, your pocket should not be lightened.
The phrase Justin is looking for is 'vexatious litigant', and it isn't that.
Call your insurance company in the morning and they'll probably ask you to send the details to them by recorded delivery. They should take care of everything from there - that's why we pay for insurance!
Don't worry about the details on the claim - they're pretty much standard and actually missing a few lines that should be in there.
There's a couple of things that could have happened:
1) the repair was never carried out for some reason;
2) the owner (and insurer) of the car never got the full story and the insurance claim never proceeded in the first place;
3) who knows ... son in his Dad's P&J?
Anyway ... don't lose a moment's sleep and send details to the insurers when they ask.
Call your insurance company in the morning and they'll probably ask you to send the details to them by recorded delivery. They should take care of everything from there - that's why we pay for insurance!
Don't worry about the details on the claim - they're pretty much standard and actually missing a few lines that should be in there.
There's a couple of things that could have happened:
1) the repair was never carried out for some reason;
2) the owner (and insurer) of the car never got the full story and the insurance claim never proceeded in the first place;
3) who knows ... son in his Dad's P&J?
Anyway ... don't lose a moment's sleep and send details to the insurers when they ask.
Some good advice here, thanks everyone.
I have photos of the scene - she was basically in a long slide, large skidmarks on the road. But you can't tell how fast he was going, she says he came round the corner fast etc etc, so hard to tell either way.
The point about him claiming excess is an interesting one I hand't considered. This means he must have had a payout to be even charged his excess. This suggests he has been paid once and is trying to get even more. Could it be they are chasing for the extra 50%? This would mean that the cost of repairs to the MX5 would be nigh on £3k, surely this is write-off money?
The other possibility I can see is that he's paid to get it fixed, and his insurance is now trying to get out of paying, possibily because his son was driving it full time as a named driver.
I definitely have a letter from Adrian Flux that thanks me for accepting the 50/50 settlement, so I would have assumed both insurance companies would have to have reached an agreement for me to even get that.
Anyway, I'll call them tomorrow and make them aware, and send them the documents after making copies. Will report back.
I have photos of the scene - she was basically in a long slide, large skidmarks on the road. But you can't tell how fast he was going, she says he came round the corner fast etc etc, so hard to tell either way.
The point about him claiming excess is an interesting one I hand't considered. This means he must have had a payout to be even charged his excess. This suggests he has been paid once and is trying to get even more. Could it be they are chasing for the extra 50%? This would mean that the cost of repairs to the MX5 would be nigh on £3k, surely this is write-off money?
The other possibility I can see is that he's paid to get it fixed, and his insurance is now trying to get out of paying, possibily because his son was driving it full time as a named driver.
I definitely have a letter from Adrian Flux that thanks me for accepting the 50/50 settlement, so I would have assumed both insurance companies would have to have reached an agreement for me to even get that.
Anyway, I'll call them tomorrow and make them aware, and send them the documents after making copies. Will report back.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff