Jump to content

T.C.

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by T.C.

  1. I was simply interested on the basis that you were/are making a statement of fact and it appears that you are making these comments based on your professional legal knowledge and experience. So thank you for answering
  2. Are you a solicitor or legally qualified? You work in personal injury law do you?
  3. By your own admittance you were caught in 2 different Police areas. You committed 2 seperate offences in 2 different areas so as BazzaS has stated, you have committed 2 seperate offences so what guidelines have the Police service breached? The onus and responsibility is on yoy to comply with the limits and for minor offences Police forces and prosecution departments are not going to be phoning each other asking if any of their staff have booked so and so. I once reported the same driver 3 times in the same day for excess speed. Now those 3 offences were amalgamated to convict once, but
  4. Actually it is probably the worst £28 you might spend. If it falls out of the portal, it simply reverts to multi track but even portal cases are funded under a CFA, you don't need LEI to get funding. I have covered this subject before (maybe worth looking for) but the bottom line is legal expenses insurance is a rip off. If you are involved in a crash that is not your fault, you can choose a solicitor of your choosing, and getting your case funded on a no win no fee (conditional fee agreement) means that they will fight your corner on th basis that if they don't win they don'
  5. I work in personal injury. If you are being made an offer 3 weeks after the crash, then they are trying to entice you with an offer to get you off their books and it means that your claim has been undervalued. Although you may feel that you have made a full recovery, if in 6, 9 or 12 months time you develop ongoing issues as a direct result of ths crash and you have signed a full and final settlement, you cannot then go back and demand more money unless you sue for professional negligence. You claim is being handled under the portal system on fixed costs (this is the protocol for cl
  6. OK, I stand corrected, Thanks But the OP's husband would still claim back any excess against the driver of vehicle 2 as part of his claim for uninsured losses and it does not change the situation as far as the OP is concerned in that the claim is still against the driver of vehicle 2 who in turn will be the one who makes the claim against the MIB
  7. There has always been an excess for the damage part of the claim through the MIB ever since the facility to make damage claims was introduced about 10 years or so ago. But this would apply to the 2nd driver, not the OP's husband whose claim is against driver 2 anyway.
  8. The way the system works (and this should have been explained to you, is that, your husband claims from the driver of vehicle 2 (the driver that was pushed into the rear of him) and then the driver of vehicle 2 then claims for both his damage and the damage and injury to your husband from the driver of vehicle 3 under the rules of what is called strict liability. The fact that the driver of vehicle 3 is uninsured is of no consequence to your husband as he is claiming off the vehicle that hit him, and drivers 2's insurance have not been honest in what your husband has been told. Drive
  9. Once you have reported the crash/claim to your insurers, the MIB will act as the agent for the foreign vehicle and it will be processed in exactly the same way as it it were a UK insured vehicle. Most people think that the MIB only deal with uninsured or untraced claims, but they are the appointed UK agent for overseas registered and insured vehicles, so don't worry too much, submit your claim to your insurers and let them do the rest.
  10. Firstly, before you start slagging off no win no fee law firms, be very careful about referring to Ambulance chasers, that usually applies to claims management firms, and a Conditional Fee Agreement (Proper name for no win no fee) is the best way for someone to get proper legal representation after a crash in which they have been injured (A CFA is not available for damage on;y claims). In damage only claims, a solicitor can only represent someone if the value of the claim is worth over £5,000 because under this amount law firms cannot claim back their costs and therefore the client become
  11. I see this on a daily basis with motorcycle hire after a crash. It has become increasingly common for the defendant insurers to argue about hire vehicle costs, and in many cases the courts have found in favour of the defendants. The other issue is that quite a few claims management firms also forget to pass on the invoice to the claimant solicitors so that it can be included in the schedule of special damages. In this case, the issue will revolve around whether or not you signed a personal credit agreement. What this means is when you were provided with the loan vehicle, did you si
  12. Does not work that way. If someone is injured as a result of someone elses negligence, then regardless of whether that individual was insured or did not have an MOT, it does not preclude them from making a personal injury claim, regardless of any prosecution that may occur at a later date which is a seperate issue. What the third party may do is try and claim contributory negligence on the basis that if there was no MOT then it was in a non roadworthy condition, but the third party then has to prove that the lack of MOT and therefore the condition of the bike contributed to the cause
  13. Fine, think as you wish, but for someone who is supposed to be as qualified and as experienced as you claim, then you should take a good look at yourself, because it is people like you that do more damage than those less fortunate to have gone through the training that you claim you have done, and should know better. Pot calling the kettle black springs to mind, but in any case I am not going to enter into a slagging match on a public forum with someone like you, as it is clearly you that is being childish with your lame comments and observations. Just a shame I cannot block people like
  14. I am fully aware of the requirements of the Police advanced standard, I qualified as an instructor during my service, and I have been an advanced examiner for over 30 years. But now that you have taught me to suck eggs and revealed your background, it is shameful that in one sentence you undo a lot of work done by many others in trying to educate the motoring public in Motorway driving by returning to phrases and descriptions that have never existed. You of all people should know better, and yes call it pedantic if you wish, but when it comes to driver education, there is no half measure
  15. So you are a driver that still refers to slow lane, middle lane and fast lane? There is no such thing. We have a left hand driving lane and 2 overtaking lanes, and that is all they are "Overtaking lanes"! Lane 1 (The left hand driving lane) is 99% of the time the safer option as you have the hard shoulder as your escape route, but by using the middle lane leaves you with very few options. Anyone remember the big pile up on the M4 in 1991 when 25 burnt to death? I was first on scene and watched all of them burn alive (not a pretty sight) because our fire extinguishers were no match
  16. What new laws? I repeat my earlier thread, it is not the legislation that has changed (the offences have always been there) it is simply the way it will be enforced!
  17. The clue to the first part of your post as to when it was removed? 1972 Road Traffic Act? In respect of retesting, it was seriously considered a few years ago, and I remember it clearly because I was one of a number of advanced examiners who were approached and asked if we would be interested in becoming re-test examiners as the logistics would place too much strain on the existing system as the DSA examiners would not be able to cope with the extra work load. Then someone in Government pointed out that making drivers sit a re-test every 5 or 10 years would be a guaranteed vote los
  18. The Highway Code is not law, except where the rule is supported by an act and section, traffic order or regulation. As far as lane hogging is concerned, you ate right it is covered under section 3 of the Road Traffic Act as I have already mentioned but as undertaking is concerned, as someone else has rightly pointed out, undertaking is not illegal, in fact the specific offence was removed from the 1972 Road Traffic Act and it became a requirement that to prosecute that the standard of driving fell well below that expected of a reasonably safe and competent driver. The simple act of under
  19. As I have mentioned already, details of the speedo calibration have to be included as part of the prosecution evidence and whether it was checked against a certified stop watch over the measured mile or against another calibrated speedo. The speed o is checked at 30 and 60 MPH, and should take 2 minutes at 30 and 1 minute at 60 and this has to be included and recorded in the vehicles log book.
  20. The problem you have there is that the Highway Code is not law, but simply a set of rules and guidelines (except of course where the rule is backed up by a traffic order or regulation), apart from which not all aspects of the Highway Code are factually correct or enforceable. But back to the original point is the fact that it is not the rules that have changed, it is the way these rules are enforced. Centre Lane hogging has always been an offence, in particular under a sub section of section 3 or the road traffic act, driving without reasonable consideration for other road users, and i w
  21. My apologies, you are correct. I had very little to do with Specials during my service being on a specialist department and was therefore not aware the regs had changed. So again, apologies and thank you for the correction.
  22. I mentioned nothing about lane separation, I simply mentioned that to be a dual carriageway there is no requirement for there to be a central barrier, but reading it again, then maybe I did select the wrong choice of words to describe a DC. A dual carriageway is a road which has a central reservation to separate the carriageways. This can be a barrier, a central concrete island or even a grass strip, so long as there is clear separation. 99% (not all) of dual carriageways comply with this requirement, if it is a multi lane carriageway without the central division, then of course the nat
  23. Thames Valley (which includes Bucks) Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire now pool their finances in respect of purchasing their vehicles, however, I have spoken to some former colleagues and they have no knowledge of any of these forces using Corsa's, the smallest vehicle they use is the Astra. Dark clothing is the norm for most Police, but the question is, were they identifiable as being Police officers without the need to stick a warrant card under your nose. In your initial post you said they were in plain clothes, and then you have said that they were dressed like you in dark clothes.
  24. Yes, they can still carry out stop and they can still report for offences. Do not confuse special Constables with PCSO's who have very limited authority even though they are employed full time. Special Constables do not specialise, they are there to support the regular front line guys. The only thing that has changed from my day is that they are now allowed to drive marked vehicles, but not in an emergency or pursuit situation.
×
×
  • Create New...