Accident & claims - what happens when you can't agree?

[Two-Wheels]

Summary - I got walloped by a car, they admitted fault immediately. 3 years later we're finally talking figures.
I've had the other guys insurance come with their second offer and I'm thinking that they're just taking the pee-pee a bit.

Apparently my injury is put in a category where its valued between A & B. My solicitor asked for C (a bit above the max). Their insurance offered a fraction of the A-B category. We declined, obviously.
Second offer comes in - they're still not even offering near the halfway point & my solicitor is wanting to offer halfway between A-B. As I see it, they're (my solicitor & their insurance) are just so far apart that to come to an agreement will surely end up being WAY under the base figure (A) for this category.

And then there's my pay, my wages. They're disputing this also (I'm not salary so it's not so simple to calculate). I'm now going to have to sit down & form an argument with evidence to support my claim because on wages my solicitor thinks I should consider accepting their offer which really surprised me because it should be such a black & white valuation unlike injury.

So yeah, my solicitor has already mentioned the possibility of "going to a judge".

I'm just wondering what this involves? As it stands, if we agree a figure then my solicitor takes a flat fee from my winnings & then gets the rest of their fee from the guys insurance.
If it goes to a judge does court costs then start coming out of MY pocket? So say this insurance company is offering me a total of £10k. Say the judge decides £11k. Could I end up with less money in my pocket even though my winnings were greater .... just because of court costs?
And we're currently going back & forth trying to agree a figure. Is the judges decision final I assume? Once the judge gives a figure that's the total end of it all? No dissputes, no appeals?

 

[tyred]

I really don't know but am currently in a similar situation myself after almost four years. The insurance company made one offer in October, which was pathetic and would barely have covered my expenses.

I had quite a serious ankle injury but the insurance company tried to downgrade it and also claim my negligence as I wasn't wearing a helmet! I probably recovered too well and too quickly from my injury. The surgeon originally told me it could take years, but I was very fit and strong.

The insurance company are now not responding so my solicitor says it will likely end up in court.

I can't offer you any helpful advice but wish you well and hope you get a satisfactory outcome. I personally have found dealing with the aftermath of all this more stressful than the injury itself and will be very pleased to see it concluded.

 

[classic33]

There's the chance that you could go to court and end up being awarded less than is currently being offered. And as you say once it's been decided on in court, that's it.

The other side might be playing for time, and playing on your fears, as you're close to this three year limit.

There's a three year limit on taking the case to court, and possibly they know that. For more accurate information, speak with your solicitor. I'm not legally qualified, just qualified through having gone what you're going through. Including getting close to going to court. The other side decided to settle out of court, having said it would now be decided in court.

 

[Drago]

Summary - I got walloped by a car, they admitted fault immediately. 3 years later we're finally talking figures.
I've had the other guys insurance come with their second offer and I'm thinking that they're just taking the pee-pee a bit.

Apparently my injury is put in a category where its valued between A & B. My solicitor asked for C (a bit above the max). Their insurance offered a fraction of the A-B category. We declined, obviously.
Second offer comes in - they're still not even offering near the halfway point & my solicitor is wanting to offer halfway between A-B. As I see it, they're (my solicitor & their insurance) are just so far apart that to come to an agreement will surely end up being WAY under the base figure (A) for this category.

And then there's my pay, my wages. They're disputing this also (I'm not salary so it's not so simple to calculate). I'm now going to have to sit down & form an argument with evidence to support my claim because on wages my solicitor thinks I should consider accepting their offer which really surprised me because it should be such a black & white valuation unlike injury.

So yeah, my solicitor has already mentioned the possibility of "going to a judge".

I'm just wondering what this involves? As it stands, if we agree a figure then my solicitor takes a flat fee from my winnings & then gets the rest of their fee from the guys insurance.
If it goes to a judge does court costs then start coming out of MY pocket? So say this insurance company is offering me a total of £10k. Say the judge decides £11k. Could I end up with less money in my pocket even though my winnings were greater .... just because of court costs?
And we're currently going back & forth trying to agree a figure. Is the judges decision final I assume? Once the judge gives a figure that's the total end of it all? No dissputes, no appeals?

Perhaps these are questions your (presumably qualifed) solicitor should be answering for you, particularly if he's the one using the threat of court in a game of brinksmanship.

 

[Two-Wheels]

Thanks for the responses.

Regards I should ask my solicitor...
I have.
And from that I can only imagine we had completely different solicitors because mine gets back to me ... at some point. When that point is, who knows. Could be prompt, could be weeks or a month or whatever. So I figured in the meantime I would reach out here as I gambled that at least one person reading this will likely have had a similar experience.

Will I take the response as legal advice? No, that's what my solicitor is for. At the same time though, I gambled that others are probably not going to feed me intentionally bogus info & will likely be happy to talk about their own experiences & I can use that to get some kind of idea of what may lay ahead .... while I wait on my solicitors response.

@classic33 - thanks, I wasn't aware that there was a limit at all. Makes me wonder which side has dragged it out so long for such a 'clear' (instantly admitting liability) case. I guess what held it up was the length of time on SSP but even still. As luck would have it, I'm not desperate for the money. I'd just like it finalised.

I was giving a family member an update on my situation so checked the figures. Their insurance upped their injury valuation by ......... £250. They're still almost £4k short of the baseline of the 'category' that my injury falls in. My solicitor is talking about pitching £1.5k less than their opening pitch. I fully expected the other side to go low but not that low. For a level playing field my solicitor should've gone about £7k above the category ceiling with their opening pitch. I requested £2k with sound (to me) reasoning, they went £1k above.

I could be wrong but I can't see a judge offering less than these jokers. My only concern is what extra comes out of my pocket if it goes to court because as it stands I only lose a small flat fee to my solicitor. Say I win £20k I get pretty much £20k. I only lose a couple £100 for fees. I've

 

[classic33]

I just wanted to make it clear that I'm not legally qualified, and not risk you losing anything by taking what I'd put as "the law".
I learnt the hard way, like yourself.

What extra you may or may not loose should it go to court is between you and those acting on your behalf.
This post was done because of this type of post.
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/accident-advice.226114/

Always the same people answering requests for advice/help.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

AIUI they pay costs *unless* you go to court and get awarded less than you were previously offered.

But as others have said, this is advice that should come from your solicitor, not from keyboard warriors here.

 

[Two-Wheels]

Thanks for the info.

I'll sit tight & wait on their response. In the meantime I'll need to spend quite a bit of time going over many payslips to try & put forward an argument as to why I shouldn't accept their low offer for that either.

...and then hope that 'guidelines' don't rule out a number of them.

 

[Emanresu]

The other side might be playing for time, and playing on your fears, as you're close to this three year limit.

As above about talking to your solicitor. But get them to confirm about the chances of going to court as there is a time limit. AFAIK it's not court any more if it is low value. It's a 'portal' which is administered by the insurers as a means of quick resolution with fixed rules.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...sing-online-official-injury-claim-service.pdf

The bit about differences in offers appears to relate to Part 36 offers which are quite common. (My OH was involved in dealing with PI claims for her employer. Lots and lots of small value 'portal' claims.)

https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/part-36-offers-to-settle

 

[PaulSB]

Following an RTC in June 2024 I'm going through the PI process via Leigh Day, the British Cycling legal representatives. We are 8½ months, from the RTC date, and I believe will submit a claim in the next few weeks. I've read your post several times in the hope I might be able to offer some advice. I'm struggling to do so. I can offer my thoughts on my own case and the potential level of compensation. I'm retired so earnings are not a consideration. In no particular order:

• Do I want to pursue the maximum possible compensation?
• Will I accept an offer I consider reasonable? I stress in my opinion, not the solicitors
• It's the solicitor's role to achieve what I consider a reasonable and not the maximum potential payout
• Am I likely to experience long term consequences from my injuries?
• At my age, 70, would it be beneficial to settle sooner rather than later?
• Do I wish to "punish" the driver through the level of settlement?

If I have learned one thing it's that a surprising number of people and businesses earn money out of my RTC.

 

[Beebo]

The chances of going to court are very low.
What usually happens is that legal papers are issued, this sharpens everyone’s minds as the clock is ticking and money is being spent.

A settlement is agreed in 99% of cases before it gets to court, because going to court is expensive and it comes with risks attached.

Judges get very cross with cases clogging up the system which are solely financial, ie everything else is agreed except the final value.

 

[Two-Wheels]

As above about talking to your solicitor. But get them to confirm about the chances of going to court as there is a time limit. AFAIK it's not court any more if it is low value. It's a 'portal' which is administered by the insurers as a means of quick resolution with fixed rules.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...sing-online-official-injury-claim-service.pdf

The bit about differences in offers appears to relate to Part 36 offers which are quite common. (My OH was involved in dealing with PI claims for her employer. Lots and lots of small value 'portal' claims.)

https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/part-36-offers-to-settle

Having a look at your link and if I've understood correctly then low value is under £10k, not above.
Even with their comical offering for my injury I would be over £10k once you combine everything.
My original pitch was pushing £20k.

As for courts, I should be specific - my solicitor certainly mentioned "a judge". I'd have to go back over my emails to see if he used the word "court". I guess "a judge" could mean anyone & not necessarily a bloke in court.
Or woman for that matter. Can't be too careful these days

Following an RTC in June 2024 I'm going through the PI process via Leigh Day, the British Cycling legal representatives. We are 8½ months, from the RTC date, and I believe will submit a claim in the next few weeks. I've read your post several times in the hope I might be able to offer some advice. I'm struggling to do so. I can offer my thoughts on my own case and the potential level of compensation. I'm retired so earnings are not a consideration. In no particular order:

• Do I want to pursue the maximum possible compensation?
• Will I accept an offer I consider reasonable? I stress in my opinion, not the solicitors
• It's the solicitor's role to achieve what I consider reasonable and not the maximum potential payout
• Am I likely to experience long term consequences from my injuries?
• At my age, 70, would it be beneficial to settle sooner rather than later?
• Do I wish to "punish" the driver through the level of settlement?

If I have learned one thing it's that a surprising number of people and businesses earn money out of my RTC.

I'm going to send you a PM after I post this.
I appreciate your point regards your age. In my case I'd like to think I have time on my hands unless the big man upstairs has other ideas. I do still work but I don't need the payout this instant. I don't earn megamoney (am only just and so over minimum wage) but I'm careful which allows me the comfort of not having to live payslip to payslip.

And on that note, I'd like as much as possible from this.

Whenever anyone asked me I'd always answer that I want my wages paid up plus "some for the injury" - as in my mind the wages should be black & white. Even though my pay fluctuates as I'm hourly and my hours vary, it should be simple enough to get in the area and I don't feel they're doing that.
Everyone will have their own circumstances & reasons but for me I can't see why I'd want to or should settle for anything less than as much as I can get.

If they were somewhere near with their injury valuation then I may be inclined to accept but they're a million miles off and I'm not allowing myself to be severely shorted on the 2 main categories of the claim.

 

[Emanresu]

Just a couple of comments. There is a time limit of 3 years on any personal injury so you'd best check whether you are out-of-time yet.

The question on loss of wages could be separated out as a simple money claim. There you have up to 6 years in England and Wales to issue a claim through the County Court. But that claim would have to be less than £10K to keep it on the costs-limited Small Claims track.

See what your advisor thinks about splitting the issues to get round the time limits.

 

[fossyant]

Took four years to settle mine and in the end I took the offer. Had to concede 10% because I was overtaking a traffic queue when hit by a car turning right, but you can only fight these things so long before it impacts your mental health. I'd broken my spine. Those scales can be astronomical, well into six figures. I settled on nothing like that, and nine years later I'm OK. I'd had enough living in cotton wool and not doing things that may impact my claim. I was back cycling.

Your solicitor will know what's reasonable and do not expect anywhere near the higher amounts unless you've lost body parts or can't use them and are disabled.

 

[Emanresu]

Your solicitor will know what's reasonable and do not expect anywhere near the higher amounts unless you've lost body parts or can't use them and are disabled.

They are likely based on Ogden Tables. These are agreed scales of payment depending on age and type of injury. To simplify matters and to save on court/lawyers time these are agreed so everyone in the industry can narrow down to a common tariff. Where you are on the scales will be based on medical reports etc. Calculated by actuaries.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...rial-compensation-tables-for-injury-and-death

*Actuaries are people who find accountancy too exiting and racy.