I Might Be Sued For Personal Injury

[Bumblebee1612]

In December 2015 I was involved in a collision.
The accident was not my fault and the other party insurers have accepted 100% liability.
As he was insured Third Party, and his vehicle was beyond economical repair, the other party is using an Accident Management Company to pursue a claim through my insurance company.

When the other party solicitor submitted the Notification of Claim form, it was stated that the claimant was using a replacement vehicle under a hire purchase agreement, and that he would continue to do so until a payment for the pre-insurance value of the claimant's vehicle had been made.
In order to stop costs from escalating, my insurance company made an interim payment "without prejudice".

My insurers now accept that I am not responsible for the collision and have informed the third party solicitor that they dispute liability, and have asked for their money back. There has not been any response made regarding this and my insurance company have now received medical evidence from the other party. My insurers have told me that this is likely to go to court, as it appears that liability is being disputed and this is now a personal injury claim.

I do not understand how I can be sued for personal injury under the circumstances.
My insurers say it is because a judge would be unlikely to apportion 100% blame for an accident and therefore the other party would be able to get some money awarded.
(Or, maybe the solicitor is trying to worry me, assuming that I would not want to go to court and therefore accepting liability so that it would not reach court)

I understand that if this does reach a court hearing, that the personal injury solicitor costs are paid for by the defendant (covered by my insurance policy). I know that it unlikely, but if a judge were to find me blameless, would these costs still have to be paid by my side?

My insurers have also informed me that the solicitor prefers to use a court local to their own offices. I was under the impression that because I will be the named defendant, I will be able to choose where the hearing takes place. The solicitor's court is more than 250 miles away from where I live.

I have legal cover on my insurance, but so far have not been appointed a solicitor by my own insurers.
Whenever I ask for a solicitor, I am told that we are still in the early stages of a claim and that there is no need to appoint a solicitor yet.
All communication with the other party solicitor is being done through my insurers.

I asked my insurers what information had been sent to the other party solicitor and was informed that they had been given copies of ALL correspondence from me regarding the accident. When I asked if I could see a copy of the other party's statement, I was told that the other party solicitor had not provided it, despite repeated requests.

Should I be making more of a fuss with my own insurance company?
Am I worrying unnecessarily?
Any advice will be gratefully received.
Thank you.

[Hypognosis]

Sounds like "vexatious litigation" to me. If you are forced to travel 250+ miles to the hearing, I don't know if you can claim travel costs back (as the other side will lose, as far as you've told us) or if you will have to counter-sue for those.

All this kerfuffle is presumably how insurance companies convince us to buy separate legal expenses cover.

Orher driver insured themselves third party only: that's their loss and this is an extremely clumsy way of making up for their own cheapskatery, imho.

[waterboatman]

You have nothing to worry about. The opposition are trying it on. Your insurance company should deal with this without you going to court. If you do, you can claim expenses from the other side.

[TWR]

To a point I've had this myself Bumble, they are trying to frighten you, let your insures handle it, if you get intimidated by the other party get your insures to contact them with a threatening letter to sue for harassment, that sorted my issue out.

[fiction-factory]

It's not your problem. Just hand any letters over to your insurance company. If your insurance company is any good it'll send them away with a flea in their ear

[murraymints]

ditto.. just leave it to them....clearly the other party's insurers are trying it on to see if yours bites....forget it..unlikely to go to court

[Bumblebee1612]

Thank you for your reassuring responses.
I will try to stop worrying about what "might" happen.

[Arrods]

Agree with others' comments. And isn't it the 'Accident Management Company' rather than the other party's insurer that's pursuing the claim?

[Bumblebee1612]

Just to clarify, it is solicitors from the Accident Management Company who are pursuing the claim.

[Bazile]

//Am I worrying unnecessarily? // - Yes

First of all given that you have insurance cover , which by the sounds of it is comprehensive , as others have said , pass all documentation you receive to your insurers for them to deal .

It is common practice for these claims companies to put a claimant in a credit hire vehicle , if they think they have a good chance in succeeding with their claim .

These credit hire rates are extortionate - your insurer made a without prejudice payment , in order to mitigate their potential losses.

it is normal practice to issue proceedings in a court near to the claimant

[Bumblebee1612]

Thank you, Bazile,
Yes, I have fully comprehensive insurance and it is my insurers who have been updating me with developments.
I think they wanted to make sure that I gave my consent for them to write to the other party's solicitor to say that I continued to dispute liability.
It is my insurers who have told me to expect court papers starting proceedings.

[Barmaid]

No, dont worry. I am unsure how the TP insurer can accept liability and then attempt to claim against you but that's a matter for the Judge. Normal rule is that loser pays winners costs.

Worst that can happen is you lose. Your insurance policy will pay all costs and damages. Best that can happen is you win - the other side pay all your costs.

As for the solicitor preferring to use a local court, that is nonsense. They will normally instruct a local barrister to represent you. I have no idea why the IC is telling you this.

I wouldnt worry. I'd let the IC get on with it and wait and see what happens. Mr BM was involved in a no fault collision 3 years ago. It was only last month the other side dropped it, so be aware you could be in for a long wait.

[Bumblebee1612]

Thanks, Barmaid.
That has put my mind at rest.
Apologies if I didn't make it clear, the other party's insurance company is not making a claim against me; the claimant is using a solicitor through the Accident Management Company.
I am prepared to wait this out, even if it does go on for 3 years.
Did Mr BM have any problem when renewing his insurance?
My husband has got a car on order and I am worried that he won't be able to have me on his insurance because of the outstanding dispute.
Thanks BB

[Bumblebee1612]

Just a quick update:
I have been appointed a solicitor, as the claimant is still pursuing the claim against me. The solicitor acting for me is going to deny liability on my behalf. He is going to ask for the hearing to take place in a court local to me and he anticipates that the hearing should take place early in 2017.

[Bumblebee1612]

The date for the final hearing is approaching, and I am putting together the evidence for my defence.
Does anyone know how I might get information about the weather conditions and temperature for a specific day and time for December 2015. The nearest city is Brighton & Hove.
Google isn't helping me with my searches.
Thank you.

[Bumblebee1612]

I managed to find the answer about the temperature and humidity on the day of the collision.

If I am able to provide sufficient evidence to be able to prove that the Claimant is lying on a number of items in his Statement of Truth, when the evidence is sent to the court before the Hearing takes place, could the claim be rejected by the courts?
I know that it is unlikely, but if this were to happen, what would be the outcome?
The other party will not be able to prove that my Statement is fictitious, as it is completely factual and I have found plenty of evidence to support my version of events completely.
In this scenario, could the Claimant continue to pursue me, or would that be the end of the matter?