What's fair compensation?

[Drago]

Their goal is to spend as little time as possible on the case.

Wrong. Their goal is to pay you as little as possible, and I think you might be stunned at the time they will invest in achieving that end.

Their staff draw a salary regardless of whether or not they're giving your personal case any attention.

 

[Marli]

Wrong. Their goal is to pay you as little as possible, and I think you might be stunned at the time they will invest in achieving that end.

Their staff draw a salary regardless of whether or not they're giving your personal case any attention.

Not sure I agree with this. However, I have heard everybody's advice. Thank you.

 

[fossyant]

Not sure I agree with this. However, I have heard everybody's advice. Thank you.

It's correct. They are there to pay you as little as possible. I had the claim handler moved about that many times it was ridiculous, and we had to start again each time (i.e. getting their side to understand). And that was for a lot more than a few bruises - life changing condition.

 

[Drago]

Not sure I agree with this. However, I have heard everybody's advice. Thank you.

The alternative is that its their goal to give you as much money as possible. That seems highly implausible.

1. The insurers pay their own solicitors on a retainer, not on a case by case basis. They pay them the same whether they jerk you about or not, whether they're working hard tomresolve cases or playing office golf.

2. The insurers are a business, intended to maximise profit opportunity for shareholders.

Using their arrangement under 1. they will do their best to maximise 2. That is the only reason they have 1. in the first place.

They're not your friend. They're not trying to help you. Every action the business takes will be with the intention of minimising their loss, and thus maximising shareholder value. They will yank your chain and send you off with minimum amount they can get away with - come back in 6 months and tell us I was wrong.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

WHich is why you need a solicitor whose fee they will end up paying - gives them an incentive to keep the process short

 

[classic33]

I'll see. I think for low value cases, where liability has already been established, a solicitor can work against you. Their goal is to spend as little time as possible on the case. Reading the T&Cs of a couple of the solicitors, they can force you to accept an amount that you perhaps do not find acceptable. Their time is valuable. Going to court is not what they want; they are limited to what costs they can recover, which is why they take 25-40% of your damages. I can see their value in cases where the amount is large/liability has not been accepted/it is complicated.

In my original post I was trying to see what compensation other people had received for what kind of injuries. I guess, at the end of the day, it's what you feel is acceptable. I find it hard to believe that the court would order to award me nothing at all (my GP records and photos are my proof), which is where I am at the moment. I'm guessing a medico legal report is required regardless of whether you are represented by a solicitor or yourself. I also wanted to see if anybody had used the MOJ portal to make a claim and how they'd found that process.

I have three years to start formal proceedings, so no rush, but I think the more knowledge I have, the better and other peoples' experiences are always helpful.

I tried to represent myself, and even with the first solicitors I tried I felt I was doing the legwork.

The police clammed up, refusing to acknowledge the fact I was fighting my own corner Getting access to some medical records was impossible. Your records will not be sufficient on their own. You'll be questioned as to your qualifications, you are viewing from a personal perspective. Which may be seen as biased. I spent six months chasing phantoms, paperwork that "didn't exist"/would never be released to me. I had a first for my GP at the time, a letter which stated I was fit enough to return to work. The site manager thought he'd managed to get rid of me, this letter would never be got, he was wrong.

The paperwork, from where I tried what you want to do is filed away. The system may have changed in that time, but the upfront costs, you will have to pay, will be available. These may not be recoverable by you, and you'll have to consider that before you pay one penny over. Each side paying their own costs. Can you afford that?

My mistake was in going to a No win, No fee solicitor's. Recommended by the law society as handling this type of claim in my area. It didn't end well, for either party and I went with one that had experience of dealing with cycling related claims.

The piece you were pointed to was put together to try and help people who might find themselves in a similar situation. I learnt the hard way, if I can stop one person from making the same mistakes, then that piece has been worthwhile.

Download the MIB forms, to see the information you'll be required to give. Then consider your situation again.

 

[Marli]

I'm confused by your response.

MIB forms are not just for people who have been hit by untraceable/uninsured drivers? This wasn't the case for me. The driver is identified and has accepted fault.

You seem to be suggesting that self-representation and no-win, no-fee are both a bad option. Paying a solicitor definitely isn't - have you seen their fees?

I don't know how long ago your accident was, but we all can have access to our medical records now, although I don't disagree that the insurance company may not be satisfied with these.

 

[Marli]

The alternative is that its their goal to give you as much money as possible. That seems highly implausible.

1. The insurers pay their own solicitors on a retainer, not on a case by case basis. They pay them the same whether they jerk you about or not, whether they're working hard tomresolve cases or playing office golf.

2. The insurers are a business, intended to maximise profit opportunity for shareholders.

Using their arrangement under 1. they will do their best to maximise 2. That is the only reason they have 1. in the first place.

They're not your friend. They're not trying to help you. Every action the business takes will be with the intention of minimising their loss, and thus maximising shareholder value. They will yank your chain and send you off with minimum amount they can get away with - come back in 6 months and tell us I was wrong.

I am not under any illusion about the goal of the insurance company. I was trying to establish what was fair compensation to claim for the injuries I sustained whilst their policy holder was driving without due care and attention, by comparing it with other people's experiences, but it's too subjective.

 

[Marli]

WHich is why you need a solicitor whose fee they will end up paying - gives them an incentive to keep the process short

True, but remember that it is not in the financial interest of the solicitor to go to court either, because they cannot claim their full costs. The claimant is the pawn in all this.

 

[icowden]

You seem to be suggesting that self-representation and no-win, no-fee are both a bad option. Paying a solicitor definitely isn't - have you seen their fees?

• Self representation: Risk of getting much lower compensation than you are entitled to.
• No_Win / No Fee - You pay an insurance premium up front to cover costs should you lose and may have to pay a success fee. You can't lose as liability has been admitted - therefore this doesn't seem like a good option.
• Regular legal representation. Your solicitor represents you. All of his (or her) costs are paid for by the insurance company. There is a small risk that if you settle for less than an amount already offered by the insurance company that you would be liable for your solicitors costs.

Find a local reputable Personal Injury Solicitor and talk to them. They should see you for free and advise you of the likely costs and whether you would be better to represent yourself or engage them. It costs you nothing to present your case and ask for initial advice as to whether they should take it.

 

[Marli]

• Self representation: Risk of getting much lower compensation than you are entitled to.
• No_Win / No Fee - You pay an insurance premium up front to cover costs should you lose and may have to pay a success fee. You can't lose as liability has been admitted - therefore this doesn't seem like a good option.
• Regular legal representation. Your solicitor represents you. All of his (or her) costs are paid for by the insurance company. There is a small risk that if you settle for less than an amount already offered by the insurance company that you would be liable for your solicitors costs.

Find a local reputable Personal Injury Solicitor and talk to them. They should see you for free and advise you of the likely costs and whether you would be better to represent yourself or engage them. It costs you nothing to present your case and ask for initial advice as to whether they should take it.

I'm not sure whether 'regular' legal representation is paid for by the insurance company of the the third-party. If that were the case the solicitors I have spoken to would not be pushing me down the no-win, no-fee (taking 25% - 40%) route. There has to be some cap on what a solicitor can claim, otherwise any claimant where the liability has already been accepted would not need the service.

 

[icowden]

There isn't a cap. A solicitor can claim any reasonable costs from the insurers if full liability is admitted.
The usual problem is determining what a solicitor thinks is "reasonable". This can lead to an argument between the solicitor and their opponent but that isn't your problem.

No Win no fee works on the basis that the Slicitor is taking on a risk, so therefore they can charge a success fee which comes out of your compensation. Better solicitors won't actually do this - they will rely on you taking out an insurance policy that covers the fees if you lose. And in your case they are not taking a risk, as there is no liability to argue.

 

[classic33]

I'm confused by your response.

MIB forms are not just for people who have been hit by untraceable/uninsured drivers? This wasn't the case for me. The driver is identified and has accepted fault.

You seem to be suggesting that self-representation and no-win, no-fee are both a bad option. Paying a solicitor definitely isn't - have you seen their fees?

I don't know how long ago your accident was, but we all can have access to our medical records now, although I don't disagree that the insurance company may not be satisfied with these.

The MIB forms give a very good indication of the information that will be expected from you. Especially if you're representing yourself, how much of those forms can you fill in?
Liability may have been admitted, but you'll need to present your case to a judge, who may have only skimmed through both arguments. Noting case law, previous similar cases.
The clearer, and more precise that information is presented, the better.

16 years ago the end of this month. Even then, in theory, I had access to my records. Place a request to see them, and wait. At the time the doctor(s) named on those records had to present otherwise it was a straight "No" to the requests.
Be aware that each NHS Trust hold their own records, and requests for access has to be made to each trust.

You have access to the police records. Your statement and that of the driver I take it?

Solicitors Costs:
£50 per letter sent.
£150 per hour spent on the case.

No Win, No Fee Costs:
£15 per phonecall.
£25 per letter copied.
£75 per letter sent.
£150 per hour spent on the case.
£200 for the written medical report.
£??? for the medical examination itself.

Given I'd most of what they asked for, and more, to hand, it seemed at the start that it couldn't cost that much. How wrong I was. They were also new to handling cases where a cyclist was the injured party. They weren't, as far as I could see, acting in their clients interests and seemed incapable of doing so.
Complaint lodged with the Law Society and the case handed over to a company that were used to dealing with this type of claim. They lodged a claim to recovering their costs, should I be successful. I countered with a similar claim for costs, using their pricing. My claim was £5,000 more than theirs. Due simply to the fact that I'd done most of the work myself, before approaching them. The only thing they had, that I didn't was the medical report.

One piece of advice I'll give is, unless you have in writing, that the driver's insurance company have actually admitted anything, don't put it up in a place that can be seen.

Your best course of action, as more than myself have said, is seek the advice of a solicitor who has experience of this type of case.

Where letters has been used, count in any e-mails sent.

 

[classic33]

@Marli, my question when I was approaching having to go to court.
Note the warning, from a solicitor used to dealing with these type of claims, with regards court action.

The driver and owner, seperate people, just refused to say any more at that point. Driver wasn't the owner and the owner refused to name the driver at the time of the incident.

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/one-for-those-who-have-been-down-this-road.6970/

 

[Marli]

There isn't a cap. A solicitor can claim any reasonable costs from the insurers if full liability is admitted.
The usual problem is determining what a solicitor thinks is "reasonable". This can lead to an argument between the solicitor and their opponent but that isn't your problem.

No Win no fee works on the basis that the Slicitor is taking on a risk, so therefore they can charge a success fee which comes out of your compensation. Better solicitors won't actually do this - they will rely on you taking out an insurance policy that covers the fees if you lose. And in your case they are not taking a risk, as there is no liability to argue.

Then you have to ask the question, why would multiple solicitors push me to the no-win, no-fee route?