You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
My blood pressure is through the roof right now. I need some advice please!
The facts: I was involved in an accident while I was on my bike. A car drove into me from behind, destroying my bike. I was not injured (although the effects of all this on my blood pressure are not insignificant!)
I am an experienced cyclist, and I have done the journey/manoeuvre in question hundreds of times (> 225 according to my Garmin).
After the driver got out to shout at me, he drove away without exchanging details (whilst I was on the phone to the police).
He was apprehended a short way down the road by the police.
He didn't report the accident to his insurer (he should have) - the first they knew of it was when I called them several days later.
The disputed bit which I, unfortunately, cannot prove:
The driver was annoyed at me for filtering in front of him ~40m before the junction. He beeped his horn at me, then drove his car at me, intentionally.
There are no witnesses on record, at the time I didn't think to canvas any help.
There is unfortunately no CCTV or dashcam evidence.
I do not have bike insurance.
Anyway, despite my evidence (the call to the police, the damage to my bike, the damage to THE FRONT OF his car, my version of events), his insurer have somehow decided to accept his version of events that I cut in front of him. This is nonsense and is a ridiculous conclusion considering the damage incurred.
I don't really know how they can do this - it's so unfair. They are basing the decision entirely on the statement of a charlatan asking me to 'prove' that I didn't cut in front of him. Obviously I cannot do this but I don't feel like I have a case to answer. I explained (over the phone) that I believe the burden of proof lies with them / the driver, but they claimed "that's not how this works". I want to go back to his insurer and explain the absurdity of all of this. But having spoken to their representative on the phone today, I think any letter will just be ignored.
Now I've got that off my chest: WWSTWD? Lawyer? Citizen's advice?
P.S. As hilarious as it would be, I'm not really in the mood for sausage/DOT fluid/Bomber-related retribution ideas.
More details for those interested:
It follows on from this thread:
https://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/someone-just-rammed-me-with-their-car-advice-please/
I was riding up to the roundabout, intending to turn (slight) right. To do this, I get into the just-left-of-middle of the 2nd of three lanes. There is no doubt that this is the 'correct' place to be. This sounds like a scary junction (and it is, I suppose), but at rush hour the traffic is always slow so I'm filtering between cars until the last 40m or so. Then I pick a 'gap' between cars and start queuing. On this occasion, the guy I was in front of was clearly irritated and attempted a ridiculous close pass to get around me, but there was no space for him to do this, so he was forced to stop behind traffic again and I made my way in front of him once more (in hindsight, I shouldn't have done this). He leans on the horn, I give him the usual shrug (intended to mean 'deal with it'. Again, maybe this wasn't sensible).
He then drives into the back of me. I presume this was intended as a 'nudge' but the ham-footed clown drove over the back of my bike, destroying the wheel and frame.
P.P.S. The damage is going to cost me ~£1000. I could claim this on my home insurance I suppose, although the excess is £500 which is a bit annoying. My home insurance have already told me that if I make a claim, they wouldn't bother to go to the car insurer chasing liability / reclaiming their losses etc. That seems absurd to me too.
I get legal cover with my home insurance if I pay the excess.
Burden of proof is on you unfortunately.
What happened with the Police?
It sounds like you aren't insured?
1. Get in touch with Cycling UK, they should be able to help even if you’re not a member.
2. Name and shame his insurer.
Drivers insurer is acting in what driver has told them
Have you checked with your home insurance? Might be some cover on there. Mine has a specific cycling bit as well as the usual
If this has been recorded on your garmin can you not use this as evidence?
Drivers insurer is acting in what driver has told them
True, I guess. Maybe I should have tried that tactic when (in a sudden snowstorm) I slid a car into the back of someone else's…
It sounds like you aren’t insured?
Have you checked with your home insurance?
Might want to read the post again…? 🙂
Bez has it - time for a full bore no win no fee lawyer and sue his and the insurers arse.
IIRC the liability is his (the other driver) that is backed off to insurance. You should be going after him with an ambulance chaser. His dealings with his insurance company are his affair.
IIRC the liability is his (the other driver) that is backed off to insurance. You should be going after him with an ambulance chaser. His dealings with his insurance company are his affair.
Yes, even a letter before action might prompt him to revisit his insurer.
If this has been recorded on your garmin can you not use this as evidence?
This is a decent point but it might rely on you having "snap to roads" switched off on the device: the triangulated GPS data may well be accurate enough (depending on signal) to make it clear when and where you manoeuvred, but if it's storing data that's been corrected to align with mapping data then this might not be reliable.
Burden of proof is on you unfortunately.
I’m not doubting this is accurate, but as someone who didn’t grow up in the UK I find this astounding. In (as far as I know) all states in the US, if someone rear-ends you the burden of proof is on them, to prove there were extenuating circumstances. Otherwise the assumption is the driver of the car that did the rear-ending was showing undue care/attention.
The two people above me have it, you shouldnt be going to the insurers of the bloke that hit you , you should be going to the bloke that hit you, if he chooses to use his insurers to pay/handle/fight your claim that's his choice.
However this may be one to chalk up to experience and move on , I suspect if its raising your blood pressure at this stage, then going legal with no insurance/legal cover working on your behalf will raise your blood pressure further.
If yoiu have home insurance they sometime shave free legal cover that may be able to help in this scenario, might be worth looking into this.
The fact that he drove off should count against him, surely?
Also, the person running into somebody from behind is generally consiser to be the one at fault, unless proven otherwise, and then they should be the ones doing the proving.
If neither of these are the case, then how do any claims ever get settled, if you can just blame the victim?
Lawyer up.
I struggled with an insurance claim against a driver who hit me on a roundabout. AXA didn't want to know until i got a "no win no fee" lawyer on the case. Then it all got sorted quite easily.
as these earn by taking a slice of the personal injury damages you're awarded, and there doesn't seem to have been any in this case, will they be interested? Best bet might be house insurance, etc - if that covers you they may fight on your behalf?You should be going after him with an ambulance chaser.
As much as I don't want to, every new post I read like this tips me slightly more towards getting a front/rear camera combo 😐
Is there a police report?
Was he prosecuted for failing to stop / report / remain?
As above, his insurers are really nothing to do with you. It's insurance the driver has to pick up the tab if he is found at fault. You don't sue his insurance company, you sue him.
The fact that he hit you from behind is a good evidential arrow in your quiver. Approaching a roundabout his speed ought to have been appropriate to the road layout and he ought to have been going at a low enough speed to have been able to stop given the multi lane road layout.
as these earn by taking a slice of the personal injury damages you’re awarded, and there doesn’t seem to have been any in this case, will they be interested?
Sadly, almost certainly not. I had this a few years ago when I got pulled out on, smashed bike but luckily no injury. Had to sort it out myself with their insurance.
1. Get in touch with Cycling UK, they should be able to help even if you’re not a member.
I think that sounds like a good place to start. Does anyone have an email contact for them? The website only links Twitter and Facebook (I don't use either).
2. Name and shame his insurer.
It's [size="30px"]Privilege[/size]
The fact that he drove off should count against him, surely?
You would think so, yes. I'd have thought his account should be considered completely unreliable. More than that - his statement to the police offered a different version of events than the statement to his insurer. He basically told the police 'SMIDSY' (to get out of the assault charge) but didn't dispute that he'd run straight into the back of me (the police have pictures of damage which basically prove this to be the case anyway). Whereas to his insurer he told a different tale of my riding into the side of him and he hasn't sent them pictures of the damage. It's maddening.
Also, the person running into somebody from behind is generally consiser to be the one at fault, unless proven otherwise, and then they should be the ones doing the proving.
If neither of these are the case, then how do any claims ever get settled, if you can just blame the victim?
Quite.
As much as I don’t want to, every new post I read like this tips me slightly more towards getting a front/rear camera combo 😐
I feel the same. If I'd had a rear camera (and it had worked etc), this guy would quite probably be in court on assault charges. The 'blame' wouldn't even be in doubt.
If anything though, I'd think legal cover right now would be very useful.
If this has been recorded on your garmin can you not use this as evidence?
A good idea - I've looked into this. The GPX track just shows a fairly straight smooth line up the road but I don't think it's sensitive enough to show that I was/wasn't moving at the time or when I filtered to the right. The speed data doesn't show the collision, either (because I was stopped, and then nudged forward only a few feet so it didn't register, I think).
as these earn by taking a slice of the personal injury damages you’re awarded, and there doesn’t seem to have been any in this case, will they be interested?
I've read this elsewhere too. Perhaps Cycling UK will take more of an interest. I'm very green with all of this stuff - I've never had cause to consult a lawyer for anything so I don't really know where to start.
Is there a police report?
Was he prosecuted for failing to stop / report / remain?
This is another major frustration in the case. Yes. He wasn't prosecuted since the police stopped him a few minutes after the accident. He has apparently subsequently claimed that he 'was going to' call the police when he got home. The statutory requirement is to report it 'as soon as possible', but there's an absolute requirement to do so within 24 hours. I'd argue that it was possible for him to have stopped. He did, in fact, stop to get out of the car and shout at me, and then apologise, saying that he would exchange details, before driving off. I've asked the police to review that decision but they've been pretty impotent so far.
Thanks for all the comments so far. More opinions / advice are of course welcome!
there's some really shit advuce on this thread.
Get yourself in touch with the lawyers CTC use and get them on the case. The mere fact that he left the scene of an accident should be enough to put him in the shit.
TBH the police should be doing him for that too
It’s Privilege
I had a policy with them once, had a bit of an argument about an absurd fee they charged me, they backed down, haven’t used them since.
He wasn’t prosecuted since the police stopped him a few minutes after the accident.
Yeah, I was thinking early in that that was unfortunate because it nullifies failure to report.
Why did they spot him? Happened to spot the damage on his car, or responding to the call from you, or…?
Why is the burden of proof on the cyclist? hes been hit. from behind while stationary.
simply ask for their details on how to take them to court. small claims.
You should be able to get a report / statement from the police of the incident as recorded by them.
Whether you can or not, good luck...
Check the garmin GPS raw data - you can view it in excel or a text editor.
I did this when hit by a driver turning right. It even showed when the bike was moved 30 minutes after the accident. You'll probably get the slowing to a stop, then the bike being nudged a few feet a short time later on the next data fix.
I've stopped road riding as the next driver that hits me, I'll just kick them to death. The amount of crap drivers spout when in an accident, even when caught, they get away with it. Apparently saying I didn't see you, then going to drive off (but couldn't) and leaving me with life changing injuries - cops weren't interested. I've been hit too many times now.
Hit from behind then it's his fault - just the driver is trying to say you cut him up. It's always the person hitting someone from behind who is at fault.
You may have to lawyer up. Leigh Day are good too.
Or Slater Gordon. I'm using them for a serious injury claim ATM. So far, so good. AIUI, their cost are awarded separate from any claim value.
I’ve read this elsewhere too. Perhaps Cycling UK will take more of an interest. I’m very green with all of this stuff – I’ve never had cause to consult a lawyer for anything so I don’t really know where to start.
I don't think CTC would be very interested for non-members beyond passing you their lawers details.
Or Slater Gordon. I’m using them for a serious injury claim ATM. So far, so good. AIUI, their cost are awarded separate from any claim value.
Their costs are based on the value of your award, so for a serious injury, well worth their time and effort. For the price of a bike and helmet, not so much.
You could, as suggested up there go for the small claims court route but you'd be suing the driver and not his insurer, he would then have to get them to get them to settle or pay himself. Probably not a bad idea as a last resort. I looked into it once, I think £35 is the maximum financial risk, google money claim online.
Basically you will need to issue court proceedings to recover your losses, he or his insurers may settle before it reaches court, but it sounds like they will just ignore you unless you instigate proceedings against them.
Principles aside you may also wish to consider whether it is worth the hassle or not if it is not clear cut and you will be paying costs.
Document everything (stick to facts)
Did you get checked for injuries?
Bike will need a shop to assess/quote for repair/replacement.
You can DIY small claims, I would consult a lawyer about realistic chance of success. (bear in mind if you hire a lawyer to act for you they get paid for their time, win or loose). Given the situation I would not feel bad about using a no win no fee ambulance chaser
, I think £35 is the maximum financial risk, google money claim online.
That may be the initial fee, but if it goes any distance at all it will be significantly more.
Be careful about instructing a No win - No Fee team.
The other party has actually done the correct thing in passing on all correspondence to his insurance company ( regardless of how accurate his side of the story may or may not be )
As a result of his side of events the insurer has decided they , and as such , him are not liable for your costs.
If a no win no fee team does take on without being informed of this fact they may well land you with a bill if they are unable to get the insurers to change their mind about liability and pay out, further to rub it in his insurer may also pursue you for their costs.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying this is right, but it is what folks pay insurance for, to deal with the aftermath of events,
In some cases it’s best to walk away, even when you are right 😢
This is another major frustration in the case. Yes. He wasn’t prosecuted since the police stopped him a few minutes after the accident. He has apparently subsequently claimed that he ‘was going to’ call the police when he got home. The statutory requirement is to report it ‘as soon as possible’, but there’s an absolute requirement to do so within 24 hours. I’d argue that it was possible for him to have stopped. He did, in fact, stop to get out of the car and shout at me, and then apologise, saying that he would exchange details, before driving off. I’ve asked the police to review that decision but they’ve been pretty impotent so far.
There are two different offences. s170(2) and s170(3) of the road traffic act. They are often prosecuted together (i.e. you broke both so get charged with both) but breaching either one is an offence, which carries significant points and insurers are very attentive to for obvious reasons. In England its likely the fines, surcharge, and prosecution costs would be about the same as buying you a new bike too - so a wise person might have been asking the insurer to sort it out in the hope that the police decided not to prosecute!
s170(2) requires the driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle involved in an accident to stop and give his details to anyone with a reasonable cause requesting them to do so.
He did stop, and you had reasonable grounds to request his details, so his only possible defence would be if you didn't actually ask for them.
s170(3) requires anyone who doesn't do the above to report the accident to the police as soon as possible (and alway in 24 hrs).
By being stopped very soon after he has a reasonable argument that he was on his way to the cop shop right at that moment.
if the police have decided he didn't break the law I suggest you get back in touch with them pointing out the requirements of s170(2). Usually cops are quite switched on to that and find it very dodgy to leave the scene of an accident. Often (as far as I can see, especially in England) they don't bother prosecuting if they believe its all going to get resolved by insurers. You may find the cops who dealt with it are willing to reconsider their NFA decision (without needing to go over their head, but if necessary you can) just by sharing the insurance statement that he denies any fault*. One thing to be aware of is that sometimes civil cases get protracted waiting for the resolution of criminal cases (the opposite can also be true that the criminal case can sometimes be resolved or even dropped of the insurers have agreed to pay). You may also want to ask them why, if the statement admits he didn't see a cyclist on the road, they have not considered prosecuting under s3 of the RTA.
*if you can't get it resolved that way there must be a way (but may need a lawyer) to get the police statement which contradicts the insurance one and the photos.
That may be the initial fee, but if it goes any distance at all it will be significantly more.
How so? it would be a small claims action (unless the bike is VERY expensive), likely it woould be more unless if was a cheap bike - but probably still <£100.
1st rule of insurance, fob them off, 25% of people will give up. That's 25% extra profit.
I would be asking the police for a voice recording of your phone call. You might be lucky and caught him saying something in the background. If not its an accurate account of events with times and will form part of your case.
How so?
Expenses, if he loses - insurers would have representation. Unless English rules are different to Scots, or things have changed?
English rules are different to Scottish. Your liability to their expenses is very limited if you lose. MSE has a good guide
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/small-claims-court/
Advice on here is pretty good: you have no contract with their insurer so do not have to deal with them, you can sue directly and if it is for a small, fixed amount, the small claims court is good if a no win no fee solicitor won’t take you on.
Having said that, if it’s winding you up that much, is it worth it?
Interesting, cheers
Moral of the story, lie on the floor and scream 😥
Hit from behind? Have you developed a sore neck by any chance? That would get the ambulance chasers interested.
Small claims court is probably the best bet and if you get the police report then you have a good case. Civil claims works on balance of probability not beyond reasonable doubt proof.
I seem to remember that you have to start by writing a letter saying you did x which caused y damage. Pay up in a days (I think 30) or I'm starting proceedings. Citizens advice tell you how to do it, but it does take months and is quite stressful.
I got a court judgement against a driver who went over my bike at a roundabout but by the time I got the judgement he had disappeared so no joy. At least he didn't claim it was fault I guess.
Expenses, if he loses – insurers would have representation. Unless English rules are different to Scots, or things have changed?
No costs awards in English small claims. Even in Scotland simple procedure claim for a typical bike (no personal injury) isn’t going to risk more than £150 in costs awarded against him IF he lost.
I’m not convinced the go after the individual not the insurer is the best advice. This is someone who changed his story to the police and the insurer... the sort of person who loses his temper at cyclists... I suspect you’d win in the long run; but his insurer is more likely to settle quickly!
Would BC or CTC or someone like that take it on if you joined?
Stories like this prompted me to join bc for the legal and insurance, sorry i know that isn't much help.
I hope that you will be able to get them to make good the damage caused
.
I’m not convinced the go after the individual not the insurer is the best advice
The claim has to be against the individual, it is then subrogated to the insurer. There is no choice.
The claim has to be against the individual, it is then subrogated to the insurer. There is no choice.
Exactly this.
First of all sympathy to the OP. Horrible situation to be in.
This is my understanding of the legal position. The person who hit you has 3rf party insurance. That doesn't mean his insurance covers you the victim. It means that he is covered if he is liable for damages after an accident. Sadly his insurers role is simply to protect him from financial loss. They will only pay out to you the victim if that is their cheapest option or they are forced to pay out by a court.
I have been through a claim with a family member. The system may seem unfair as the victim. But to succeed you need to understand what is going on
All the best
OK, so a bump for an additional question. I still don't have this ****'s address. I need this in order to start the small claims court proceedings. The police are saying they can't give it to me because of data protection! This seems wrong and I'll challenge it with them.
What other options do I have? I know his name, DOB (the police would give me that, believe it or not), insurer and car registration plate.
Does your house insurance have legal cover ?
Or approach one of the no win no fee solicitors.
Firstly aa for name and address - surely tjis counts as a rrason for the DVlA to hand it over.
Secondly - please, please check if you have legal cover on your car inaurance, house insurance etc.
A few years back i had some totally unrelated issues but someone suggested trying my house insurance legal cover.
I got full use of an excellent solicitor, helped me no end in a sticky situation.
Any legal cover you havecwitjcany policy, or even as a perk through your empkoyew could be useful.
Under utilised resource for many, many people I think.
The data protection sounds like bollocks to be honest.
When I was hit by a little shit in his car, he drove off. I had the vehicle, reg, description of the driver, knew where he worked etc. Police gave him a visit, he denied it and they didn't bother looking any further.
Couple of weeks later I got a letter explaining that they'd finished the investigation and in this letter it had his full name and address! I was fed up so just ripped it up and threw it in the bin.
Please check your home insurance for legal cover.
If not, just unleash the dogs.
https://www.thebikesolicitors.co.uk/
My home insurance has legal cover but it's a £250 excess. I was trying to avoid that, although the net gain might make it worthwhile. Small claims court is £60.
The amount of effort and stress you've related on here is worth the £250. And if you go you're own route, there will be more.
Please go to your home insurance and get a solicitor to do what they are good at....
The amount of effort and stress you’ve related on here is worth the £250.
You are absolutely correct in that. At the moment I am trying to battle a rather blinkered attitude about getting 'justice' which certainly doesn't involve me being £250 out of pocket. I know from a pragmatic perspective that is not the right attitude! At the moment I can't shake the feeling the even a "win" after instructing a lawyer (at a cost of £250) would feel like a partial defeat, and I suppose there's always the small risk of a full defeat.
Perhaps in the healthy middle ground I offer a retort to the insurer and explain that unless they pay up I'll soon be instructing a lawyer? I feel like they'll just laugh at that since most people won't follow through with that sort of threat.
Option C is to claim for the bike on the home insurance. Perhaps they'll just write off the whole bike and offer me new-for-old? Has anyone claimed for a damaged bike on home insurance?
just send the letter before action to the person involved. Be prepared to go to small claims but I have done thois twice - once to a rogue trader once to edinburgh council and a soon as they go the letter before action they paid up,.
Small claims ( certainly in Scotland) there is almost no liability for costs even if you lose - and you won't lose anyway as a hit from behind is as near to presumed liability as we have in the UK ie the person who was the behind road user has to show why its not their fault as it is presumed to be their fault.
Its not a great deal of hassle to do small claims and again - in edinburgh there is a CAB withing the court building to help you
He doesn’t know the address TJ
NO great issue to find it I would have thought - does he have the reg no? or he should be able to get it from the police
he should be able to get it from the police
blimey TJ, the whole point of this latest update was that the police won't give him the address, so he can't start a small claim! It was a maximum of 10 posts up!
Yes - and he needs to go back to the police to insist on the address - they guy drove off after the accident thus did not fufill his legal obligation to give his details.
Formal complaint to the cops over failure to prosecute would be my first step - because if they had prosecuted then the address would be available.
Once you have his address...
Small claims court is really easy. I did it with Paisly Freight after they royally ****ed up a delivery. Cost me £104 to submit a claim, which was really easy, I was claiming £400. My main objective with the claim was to cause them as much agro as I could after having them mess me about so much. If you are on solid ground, and it sounds like the OP is, this is a good way to go, that fee was all I stood to lose (They backed down and settled the day before the case was due) That was Scotland mind
As someone said above the burden of proof is much lower for a civil claim, 'balance of probabilities' and I would have thought a rear-end collision would way heavily in he OP's favour.
But you do need an address. Electoral role if you have his name? Assuming he's local.
Also, if you want to cause him agro, and I would, then pursue the failing to stop thing as far as you can, the chap above who was saying about failing to provide details was onto something there.
'
.
.
Also, OP you said you've done this junction a couple of hundred times, is it a commutte? ie, same time, same day, pretty often?
I see the same people day in day out on mine, I'm sure they wouldn't mind me stopping them to ask 'did you see anything?' Yes, I know the police should be doing this but they appear to be useless twunts
The claim has to be against the individual, it is then subrogated to the insurer. There is no choice.
Al,
I missed your response on this. Since 2002 there has been a right to pursue the insurer directly in road traffic matters.
I would expect to see the insurer named as a second respondent on the case (I’m not sure if that rules it out of simplified procedure / small claims) but the courts desire is that the case never makes it to court so naming the party that is likely to take a pragmatic decision and settle is surely logical - only telling some stubborn **** that you are taking it to court is likely to be more protracted. If you can’t actually name a second respondent copying them on the correspondence may achieve a similar result - you want it to move from the “ignore” pile to the “make it go away” pile.
That all said the OP has legal insurance - so this is easily sorted. As I understand it the £250 excess would only normally come out your pocket if you lost - otherwise it’s one of the costs they will expect to recover from the other side? I’ve never claimed on legal insurance so may be wrong. I certainly wouldn’t be going to the hassle of this to save £250.
With regard address, I’m also not convinced police can’t give it to you but DVLA will for a small fee (which you can add to your claim). TJ is in dreamland if he thinks a prosecution would have been a straightforward way to get the details - firstly cases typically take six months to reach court (longer just now as most courts not sitting for summary cases), then you need to know the case is happening and when (there is no requirement for anyone to tell the complainant unless and until they might be called to give evidence and a trial diet is fixed). Then you need to ask the court for their public record of the case. And that all assumes that the prosecutor doesn’t take the perfectly competent decision to offer a fixed penalty, which if accepted does not create a public record of the accused’s address. Or indeed, the prosecutor doesn’t decide there is not sufficient evidence or not in the public interest (their decision not yours) to proceed, before a case becomes public.
I imagine that the solicitor will be well versed in extracting the information from police, dvla, etc and so will make faster progress anyway.
good points Poly. I must remember to have more coffee before posting. Obviously not at my sharpest this morning
Have been fobbed off by an insurance company before despite having legal cover. Would definitely read the very small print to see if there's any play on words/interpretations that could help. Have you pursued the police to make it clear that you're not being fobbed off? Could your MP help? The BMA?
As regards £250 excess, well I'd be looking to recoup that via damaged shoes, damaged glasses, damaged clothing, damaged helmet, damaged gloves, damaged bike accessories etc. Accept that you'll need the stamina of an ironman athlete to reach your goal of a satisfactory conclusion.
You can get his address from the DVLA. Costs £10 IIRC.
You can add all the costs for your small claims to can you not.
Sorry not read all the replies but I can't see why you wouldn't just get the no win no fee involved straight away? No reason for this to get your blood pressure up, all you need is to call them, give your version of events and photos of the bike then let them handle it.
Sorry not read all the replies but I can’t see why you wouldn’t just get the no win no fee involved straight away? No reason for this to get your blood pressure up, all you need is to call them, give your version of events and photos of the bike then let them handle it.
I don't believe it's as easy as that. They will only take something on if it's pretty much a certainty that they would be successful. Love your optimism though!
I used to be an ambulance chaser.
I've not read everything in this thread but some comments are right. There is a presumption with a rear end shunt that the rear ender is at fault. It doesn't reverse the burden of proof however. But it tips the balance your way
I'd download a 'subject access request' letter to the police and send that off requesting the address for service again.
I'd send a letter before action/letter of claim to the driver but c/o his insurer name and address. Give him/them 28 days to respond
He or they won't respond so send a further letter giving him 7 days to respond otherwise you ll issue and ask for his full address for service and so he can be named defendant otherwise you'll issue against them directly as RTA indemnity insurer. And then ask for address for service otherwise you'll issue against them at their registered office. Then issue after the time limit
You need to show that you've done everything reasonably practicable to identify the defendant driver.
Also ask for the registered keeper from the DVLA, as you have the reg plate
Interesting poly cheers. I worked in professional negligence not this area.
Give Cycle Law Scotland DV a phone. I know you aren’t in Scotland but they would at least give you some advice.
I’d download a ‘subject access request’ letter
Subject access request only gives you a right to your own information, anyone else's should be censored out. The ICO advice prior to May 2018 was that subject access is not an appropriate alternative to discovery.
Thanks for all the advice so far.
Subject access request only gives you a right to your own information,
This is correct. I went through that process, they're supposed to deal with it within 28 days but it took 2 months and the information they gave ultimately was v sparse. They wouldn't even give me the photo they took of damage to his car. Basically the subject access request is only there to satisfy data protection regs and wasn't worth bothering with. The insurer and / or the small claims court can request the police statements / evidence, though. His insurer have not done this.
You can get his address from the DVLA. Costs £10 IIRC.
This is useful to know, thanks.
However, to add another layer of problems, I know that the driver is insured but is not the registered keeper / owner of the car. I think the DVLA can provide the registered keeper's name / address but that won't help me serve a small claims court notice?
Could your MP help?
So yes, I have written to my MP who has actually been very good so far - they've written a very strongly-worded letter to the Chief Constable demanding to know why this wasn't assessed as an assault. I don't know how far that will go but I feel like they've been in my corner when no one else involved in the process has.
Sorry not read all the replies but I can’t see why you wouldn’t just get the no win no fee involved straight away? No reason for this to get your blood pressure up, all you need is to call them,
I don't think it's possible to recoup costs from the other side in this scenario. The court processes changed a few years ago to make it harder for 'no win, no fee' outfits to operate. I believe there is a distinction between personal injury (where you can claim legal fees from the other party) and merely damage to property where it's not possible to do that - I.e. in my case legal fees would be taken out of whatever settlement I potentially would get - which isn't much more than a few hours' work for a lawyer.
I'd be very happy to be corrected on this point.
I’d send a letter before action/letter of claim to the driver but c/o his insurer name and address. Give him/them 28 days to respond
He or they won’t respond so send a further letter giving him 7 days to respond otherwise you ll issue and ask for his full address for service and so he can be named defendant otherwise you’ll issue against them directly as RTA indemnity insurer. And then ask for address for service otherwise you’ll issue against them at their registered office. Then issue after the time limit
You need to show that you’ve done everything reasonably practicable to identify the defendant driver.
This sounds like the right thing to do. Any chance you could flesh out the individual steps involved? I don't really understand a few of the terms you've used. Thanks.
If you are going to use a lawyer under your insurance then get them to do all the work.
I know that the driver is insured but is not the registered keeper / owner of the car.
Damn, that's bad news, but I'm sure whoever owns the car would be thrilled to get a letter outlining the detail of how their vehicle was being used, especially if it is his employer. 😈
They might give you his details, and it'd piss him off knowing you were still pursuing it.
If the RK is their employer can you send the court papers, clearly marked as such to him c/o his employer. Or do they have to contain his home address? Or issue the papers on the company as it was their vehicle and possibly their insurance then that you're wanting to claim against? I don't think I'd want my boss coming to me and asking why she's been given a court summons for deliberately driving into the back of a cyclist and then driving off?
Might be worth calling the Motor Insurers Bureau, they provide an untraced service for hit and runs. Don't know whether they could help in this situation but they would know the process to follow and might be able to advise.
UPDATE:
I got a two cheques this week from Esure. One for the full amount for the damage to my bike, and a second £50 'gesture of goodwill' for screwing me around. The whole process took over a year.
Esure were a total nightmare to deal with as a cyclist. Uncontactable, never replied to emails, repeatedly asking for documents / evidence I'd already supplied then (after all that) denying that a collision even took place and that they considered the case closed. Finally, they claimed another insurer should pay and gave me some details of a company that doesn't exist. I presume the driver was feeding them this false information but they parroted it to me. I presume they are used to having these sorts of conversations with other claims adjusters rather than uninsured individuals. It was only when I got hold of one of their (admittedly quite helpful) customer service people via Twitter that things changed.
I didn't use my home insurance's legal assistance expenses although if I'd done this from the start it would have been far easier. I'll pay the £250 excess next time because the stress of dealing with this has been pretty awful.
Anyway, it's a good result. I got paid and hopefully that scum has to pay extra insurance for the next few years. No criminal charges though, I'm deciding whether to go back to the police and ask them to review this.
One last thing: WWSTWD? A direct replacement for my damaged CdF frameset was priced at £499 last year (which is what I requested from Esure in March last year). I explained recently that the price has now gone up to £599 and due to their delay they should now pay me the £599. I'm not sure what the legal position on that would be? Do they have a duty to put things right for me at the time of the accident or at the time of settlement? As it happened, I bought a different frameset last year, but I feel such animosity towards Esure I want to squeeze them for the extra £100. Too petty?
If you'd bought the frame for £499 at the time and this was a reimbursement then I'd say leave it. But can you buy a replacement with the £499 that they've given you? If no, then you haven't been properly reimbursed.
Good result (even if very very slow and stressful).
Although I have never used their insurance, I am with British Cycling and am insured through them. From what I hear insurance companies will settle quicker if they are dealing with other insurers or legal bods, and make the process frustrating for Joe Public so they eventually lose interest.
I think it costs me £32 / year or something like that. Cycling UK would be similar
So I have an apology to make to eSure - it wasn't eSure at all. They've been dealing with a completely separate home insurance claim and have been really great (but that's why I had them on my brain). In fact, that claim was sorted in 9 days from reporting it to cheque in my hands so big thumbs up to eSure. And a big D'Oh from me 😀
Privilege insurance are the charlatans here. Sorry eSure!
If you’d bought the frame for £499 at the time and this was a reimbursement then I’d say leave it. But can you buy a replacement with the £499 that they’ve given you? If no, then you haven’t been properly reimbursed.
I bought a different frameset for £299 last year when I wasn't at all sure I would be getting any compensation from the tools at Privilege and needed a commuter bike. As it happens, I really like it (Sonder Camino) so I won't change it for a bit.
Chalk it up to experience, sulk about it for one evening, then wake up the next day and get on with living. Life it too short.
Jeez, not Privilege again. They tried to dick me over just for cancelling my car insurance once (like you I only got any assistance when I vented my annoyance on Twitter) and I’m fairly sure I’ve seen at least one or two threads on here which involved them dicking over other people too.
Bargepole, wouldn’t, etc.