Part 36 Offer (Claimant)
Discussion
Hi
I was involved in a multi vehicle (non-fault) RTA in Aug 2016 and the uninsured losses/personal injury claim is yet to be resolved. I have received a court date and my solicitor has suggested making a part 36 offer to the defendant and has suggested some numbers.
What's the generally accepted practise here? I am minded to tell him to up it by £x and see what happens.
I was involved in a multi vehicle (non-fault) RTA in Aug 2016 and the uninsured losses/personal injury claim is yet to be resolved. I have received a court date and my solicitor has suggested making a part 36 offer to the defendant and has suggested some numbers.
What's the generally accepted practise here? I am minded to tell him to up it by £x and see what happens.
A Part 36 offer is designed to put the other party at risk in respect of costs should they not beat your offer.
Therefore, "upping" the offer to try to get more money isn't really advisable as a good opponent won't be worried by such an offer. You need to make a sensible offer, taking into account what you think you will and will not recover.
Has your solicitor suggested a Part 36 offer to you? Have they advised you how that offer is broken down?
I work on the Defendant side in such cases - if an offer isn't reasonable and doesn't put my client at risk, I will always reject it. A sensible offer will always be taken more seriously and has the effect of focusing your opponents mind.
Therefore, "upping" the offer to try to get more money isn't really advisable as a good opponent won't be worried by such an offer. You need to make a sensible offer, taking into account what you think you will and will not recover.
Has your solicitor suggested a Part 36 offer to you? Have they advised you how that offer is broken down?
I work on the Defendant side in such cases - if an offer isn't reasonable and doesn't put my client at risk, I will always reject it. A sensible offer will always be taken more seriously and has the effect of focusing your opponents mind.
Nezquick said:
A Part 36 offer is designed to put the other party at risk in respect of costs should they not beat your offer.
Therefore, "upping" the offer to try to get more money isn't really advisable as a good opponent won't be worried by such an offer. You need to make a sensible offer, taking into account what you think you will and will not recover.
Has your solicitor suggested a Part 36 offer to you? Have they advised you how that offer is broken down?
I work on the Defendant side in such cases - if an offer isn't reasonable and doesn't put my client at risk, I will always reject it. A sensible offer will always be taken more seriously and has the effect of focusing your opponents mind.
Yes I have the breakdown of the offer suggested by the solicitor, i wasn't thinking of raising it a lot, maybe £1k, on a suggested £3kTherefore, "upping" the offer to try to get more money isn't really advisable as a good opponent won't be worried by such an offer. You need to make a sensible offer, taking into account what you think you will and will not recover.
Has your solicitor suggested a Part 36 offer to you? Have they advised you how that offer is broken down?
I work on the Defendant side in such cases - if an offer isn't reasonable and doesn't put my client at risk, I will always reject it. A sensible offer will always be taken more seriously and has the effect of focusing your opponents mind.
Raising it £1k on a suggested £3k offer is still raising it by a third which is quite a big increase.
As the other poster has said, if the Part 36 is too high, the other side will just reject it and proceed to trial.
On what basis do you think your ability to value quantum on a claim is better than your solicitors? Have you consulted recognised case law or the JSB guidelines?
As the other poster has said, if the Part 36 is too high, the other side will just reject it and proceed to trial.
On what basis do you think your ability to value quantum on a claim is better than your solicitors? Have you consulted recognised case law or the JSB guidelines?
KungFuPanda said:
Raising it £1k on a suggested £3k offer is still raising it by a third which is quite a big increase.
As the other poster has said, if the Part 36 is too high, the other side will just reject it and proceed to trial.
On what basis do you think your ability to value quantum on a claim is better than your solicitors? Have you consulted recognised case law or the JSB guidelines?
I have read the JSB guidelinesAs the other poster has said, if the Part 36 is too high, the other side will just reject it and proceed to trial.
On what basis do you think your ability to value quantum on a claim is better than your solicitors? Have you consulted recognised case law or the JSB guidelines?
There's some good advice above - a part 36 offer is designed to put the other side at risk, make them think carefully about their claim. It doesnt have to represent the full amount of your loss, indeed it is very unlikely to. It is a way of trying to force a compromise, which necessarily means you should expect to get less than the value of your claim if you win at trial.
There are other factors to take into account though - do you really want to go to trial? Think about the time and inconvenience. If you have a well justified basis for increasing the amount then of course you should discuss it with your solicitor but its worth properly discussing the amount and the discount off the value of the claim necessary for the other party to bite.
There are other factors to take into account though - do you really want to go to trial? Think about the time and inconvenience. If you have a well justified basis for increasing the amount then of course you should discuss it with your solicitor but its worth properly discussing the amount and the discount off the value of the claim necessary for the other party to bite.
M-SportMatt said:
Nezquick said:
A Part 36 offer is designed to put the other party at risk in respect of costs should they not beat your offer.
Therefore, "upping" the offer to try to get more money isn't really advisable as a good opponent won't be worried by such an offer. You need to make a sensible offer, taking into account what you think you will and will not recover.
Has your solicitor suggested a Part 36 offer to you? Have they advised you how that offer is broken down?
I work on the Defendant side in such cases - if an offer isn't reasonable and doesn't put my client at risk, I will always reject it. A sensible offer will always be taken more seriously and has the effect of focusing your opponents mind.
Yes I have the breakdown of the offer suggested by the solicitor, i wasn't thinking of raising it a lot, maybe £1k, on a suggested £3kTherefore, "upping" the offer to try to get more money isn't really advisable as a good opponent won't be worried by such an offer. You need to make a sensible offer, taking into account what you think you will and will not recover.
Has your solicitor suggested a Part 36 offer to you? Have they advised you how that offer is broken down?
I work on the Defendant side in such cases - if an offer isn't reasonable and doesn't put my client at risk, I will always reject it. A sensible offer will always be taken more seriously and has the effect of focusing your opponents mind.
It must be a relatively minor injury to be at the £3k mark.
At this point, without knowing more, I don't think adding on £1k to your offer is the right thing to do.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff