Insurance company involved in a civil case
Discussion
Long story short, but I was knocked off my bike last summer. The bike is a write off. Luckily I had an independent witness as the defendant drove off.
The defendant has refused to admit liability, even in the face of the evidence against them. This is the fun bit, one of the defendants witnesses has said they hit me and decided not to stop.
What I don't understand is that the defendant still wants to go court, I have my date coming up very shortly. My legal team have no interest in ending it early as they feel it's a no brainier. The defendant's legal team is just ignoring any requests for settlement.
So that leaves the defendants insurance company. Do they not have a team to look at outstanding cases, review them and advise to settle now and not run up the costs by going to court?
At the moment it feels like it's two legal teams running up a bill and leaving it for the insurance company to pick up the tab. Is this normal?
The defendant has refused to admit liability, even in the face of the evidence against them. This is the fun bit, one of the defendants witnesses has said they hit me and decided not to stop.
What I don't understand is that the defendant still wants to go court, I have my date coming up very shortly. My legal team have no interest in ending it early as they feel it's a no brainier. The defendant's legal team is just ignoring any requests for settlement.
So that leaves the defendants insurance company. Do they not have a team to look at outstanding cases, review them and advise to settle now and not run up the costs by going to court?
At the moment it feels like it's two legal teams running up a bill and leaving it for the insurance company to pick up the tab. Is this normal?
bad company said:
ssray said:
Possibly the age old 'trick" of hoping you won't turn up.
They may make a off on the morning
In which case there could be an offer to settle shortly before the court date.They may make a off on the morning
Does the defendant have ultimate power and can refuse to settle even though the odds will be stacked against them?
I believe the statements were taken at the end of last year. So it's not like they have only just seen them.
ThisInJapanese said:
That's my point in a way. When the witness statements were collected, and one of them admitted hitting me, why does the insurance company not step in and settle?
Does the defendant have ultimate power and can refuse to settle even though the odds will be stacked against them?
I believe the statements were taken at the end of last year. So it's not like they have only just seen them.
The defendant doesn't have ultimate power, the insurance company does, through abrogation.Does the defendant have ultimate power and can refuse to settle even though the odds will be stacked against them?
I believe the statements were taken at the end of last year. So it's not like they have only just seen them.
However in my experience as a defendant the ins co lawyer was keen to gain consensus on the course of action. In the end I disagreed with the course of action but was overruled. It's their money at stake so they call the shots
kestral said:
Both solicitors working together to build the bill up. It happens all the time with divorce cases.
Solicitors do their job to make money they could not care less about the outcome of a case. They just try and make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
It's been eye opening how much money is wasted. I have a 'chauffer driven car' to take me to court in the morning. It's one stop on the train otherwise.Solicitors do their job to make money they could not care less about the outcome of a case. They just try and make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
I’m sorry to hear about what you’ve gone through.
A very similar incident happened to a friend of mine, whilst cycling. He was hit by a car turning onto a road on the wrong side. He needed an ambulance as he'd taken quite a hit (punctured lung, several broken bones, severe head injury). The young lady initially stopped and instead of calling an ambulance (my friend was conscious, but couldn’t move) called her father who advised her to drive off
(he could hear both sides of the conversation). She left him there on the road and luckily a passer by stopped and helped and took the registration number. Eventually the police got in contact with her and did nothing, as she denied the incident ever took place. He's going through a civil claim at the moment, but it has mentally left him a different person.
For him, its not just what she did to him, leaving him with weeks/months in hospital to recover/ the lasting damage...its the deniability that resonates.
I hope you get it sorted OP.
A very similar incident happened to a friend of mine, whilst cycling. He was hit by a car turning onto a road on the wrong side. He needed an ambulance as he'd taken quite a hit (punctured lung, several broken bones, severe head injury). The young lady initially stopped and instead of calling an ambulance (my friend was conscious, but couldn’t move) called her father who advised her to drive off
(he could hear both sides of the conversation). She left him there on the road and luckily a passer by stopped and helped and took the registration number. Eventually the police got in contact with her and did nothing, as she denied the incident ever took place. He's going through a civil claim at the moment, but it has mentally left him a different person.For him, its not just what she did to him, leaving him with weeks/months in hospital to recover/ the lasting damage...its the deniability that resonates.
I hope you get it sorted OP.
BertBert said:
The defendant doesn't have ultimate power, the insurance company does, through abrogation.
However in my experience as a defendant the ins co lawyer was keen to gain consensus on the course of action. In the end I disagreed with the course of action but was overruled. It's their money at stake so they call the shots
Abrogation, or subrogation ?However in my experience as a defendant the ins co lawyer was keen to gain consensus on the course of action. In the end I disagreed with the course of action but was overruled. It's their money at stake so they call the shots
kestral said:
Both solicitors working together to build the bill up. It happens all the time with divorce cases.
Solicitors do their job to make money they could not care less about the outcome of a case. They just try and make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
My best mate's cousins sister's boyfriend worked as a teaboy and Clifford Chance and he knows it's true.Solicitors do their job to make money they could not care less about the outcome of a case. They just try and make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
So, so wrong but WTF.
And divorce cases are driven by the clients. The lawyers advise but the clients decide. And if one client is difficult, so becomes the case.
The Count said:
I m sorry to hear about what you ve gone through.
A very similar incident happened to a friend of mine, whilst cycling. He was hit by a car turning onto a road on the wrong side. He needed an ambulance as he'd taken quite a hit (punctured lung, several broken bones, severe head injury). The young lady initially stopped and instead of calling an ambulance (my friend was conscious, but couldn t move) called her father who advised her to drive off (he could hear both sides of the conversation). She left him there on the road and luckily a passer by stopped and helped and took the registration number. Eventually the police got in contact with her and did nothing, as she denied the incident ever took place. He's going through a civil claim at the moment, but it has mentally left him a different person.
For him, its not just what she did to him, leaving him with weeks/months in hospital to recover/ the lasting damage...its the deniability that resonates.
I hope you get it sorted OP.
Thanks, I wasn't injured that badly. It's more the shock in the moment, and the odd mental side-effects that stick with me when cycling. A very similar incident happened to a friend of mine, whilst cycling. He was hit by a car turning onto a road on the wrong side. He needed an ambulance as he'd taken quite a hit (punctured lung, several broken bones, severe head injury). The young lady initially stopped and instead of calling an ambulance (my friend was conscious, but couldn t move) called her father who advised her to drive off
(he could hear both sides of the conversation). She left him there on the road and luckily a passer by stopped and helped and took the registration number. Eventually the police got in contact with her and did nothing, as she denied the incident ever took place. He's going through a civil claim at the moment, but it has mentally left him a different person.For him, its not just what she did to him, leaving him with weeks/months in hospital to recover/ the lasting damage...its the deniability that resonates.
I hope you get it sorted OP.
The thing that's angered me during the process is the point of view of the defendant.
kestral said:
Both solicitors working together to build the bill up. It happens all the time with divorce cases.
Solicitors do their job to make money they could not care less about the outcome of a case. They just try and make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
If there was a prize for the daftest comment of the day that’s certainly a contender.Solicitors do their job to make money they could not care less about the outcome of a case. They just try and make sure they cannot be sued for negligence.
Absolutely ridiculous comment and totally unfounded.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff