Jump to content


merlin100

Solicitor circumventing Insurance Co?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 388 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

 

About a year ago my daughter in Law was reversing out of a parking bay in her local Tesco car park. As she was doing so another driver came up fast behind her and there was a very minor collision (nothing more than scuff marks). They exchanged details and when she got home she informed her insurance company (Hastings). They duely recorded her account of what happened, told her not to worry about it and that they would probably ask Tesco for any CCTV evidence they may have. That was the last she heard of it until yesterday.

 

Shes now received a letter\msohtmlclip1\01  \clip_image001.gif from some solicitors (cant remember the name) saying that they represent LV (the other drivers insurance Co) and demand just over £1700 within the next 7 days or they WILL proceed with court action.

 

It would seem that the other driver has claimed on his own insurance and the insurance Co are now trying to claim it back from my daughter in Law.

 

So Im wondering where she stands with this? How can a solicitor demand money from her for a decision made behind her back and which gave her no chance of defending herself?

Is this just a solicitor trying to pull a fast one or are they entitled to do this?

 

Im waiting for a copy of the letter and will post it up when it arrives, but my son mentioned that it contains clauses from the Road Traffic Act etc.

 

Thoughts anyone?

Edited by honeybee13
Paras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your DiL should immediately send it to her own insurance company, Hastings. She should not reply to it in any way, although she could let them know that she has passed it to her insurers to deal with, giving them insurers name address and claim reference number. It's a third party claim against her and her insurers will deal with it under the Third Party Liability section of her policy. When she sends it to Hastings make sure she links it to the claim reported to them last year (quote any Hastings claim number if you have it). Did she claim for damage to her own car at the time?

 

 

Nobody has made a decision that your DiL was legally responsible for the accident, that's just the opinion of the other driver's insurer. Yes LV and any solicitor they instruct can act for them can say they hold your DiL liable for the damage to the other car. It doesn't mean they are right or that Hastings will agree with them. They will need to negotiate. We don't have enough information here to say who was responsible, but from what you describe it's likely your DiL would be found partly, if not wholly, responsible for the damage to the other car. If that's Hastings opinion too they should pay LV directly, your DiL should not have to pay it personally - that's what she has insurance for.

 

 

 

It's a bit odd that this Letter before Action (if that's what it is) is the first thing your DiL has heard from LV. Are you sure she hasn't received anything else from LV since the accident? Or changed her address from that which she gave the other driver?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly the same thing happened to my daughter a few years ago after a minor car park shunt.

 

In the absence of any CCTV or other proof one way or the other her insurers decided to let the threatened court case actually go ahead, and the judge decided that my daughter was 100% innocent and awarded costs, compensation etc to her.

 

In other words, this type of tactic is primarily to try and scare you into making a quick settlement. Any court case will be in the form of an informal hearing and regardless of the outcome it is for each insurer to handle matters on behalf of their client....that's what we pay them for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...