You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I just had a call from my daughter, very upset.
She was involved in a minor road traffic incident over a year ago, and her insurance company have admitted liability. Luckily there was no visible damage to either car.
Today she received a letter from a solicitor saying they had been instructed by the other insurers to issue a CCJ against her for payment of £7k in the next seven days. Sadly due to us only seeming to receive post twice a week, this was written a week ago.
Her insurance says they are disputing the amount of the claim. She didn't buy legal cover as she was trying to save money as a new driver.
Solicitors must be on a pub lunch as they aren't picking up the phone.
Any thoughts on how to proceed, her insurance company say they are looking into it, but she remains very stressed.
Pass to her insurance. They will deal with it. Don't panic about the dates etc. That isn't a problem.
A letter from " a" solicitor? Who's solicitor?
Never mind the absence of legal cover. Leave it to the insurers. Courts take a dim view of hasty, threatening action. There are procedures involved in sueing someone. A Letter before action and a reasonable time frame. IANAL, but there are a few on here who would be able to advise correctly.
Tell her not to worry.
7k for what? Has she been asked to pay before and ignored it? If not, they can't get a CCJ for non payment.
If her insurers agree there was no damage, they won't pay up. Refer to them.
Solicitors can't issue a ccj, only a county court can, and then only after a court hearing etc, so presumably the solicitors are saying they will go to small claims court over this?
As stated above send it on to your daughters insurers and they will shut it down straight away.
I wonder if the other parties insurers have said they can do no more, so the other party has now personally instructed solicitors to try and recover more money, either way, pass on to your insurance Co, that's what they're there for, they insure your daughter against claims from 3rd parties (however those claims come in, either from an insurer, a solicitor, or personally) arising from your daughters car/driving.
Sound like they are just trying to intimidate her into paying without due diligence, I am pretty sure they can't just kick off with threats of CCJ's there should be other correspondence with bills and requests for payment etc first.
If she gave her insurance details for the insurance companies to sort it out, then that is what she should reply to the solicitor, if she has been ignoring previous letters that might be a problem.
IANAL.
£7000 is too much for small claims
Presumably its a bogus injury claim that the insurers are refusing to pay. As above they have to go to court and win with a cash settlement that she refuses to pay prior to a CCJ being issued which is another court date IIRC
Yeah just pass it straight to her insurer, that is what they are for surely?
TJ the limit for small claims is 10k. It wouldn't make it very far though as presumably the second you turned up with proof of insurance the case would be thrown out as they have agreed to indemnify OPs daughter against claims.
Today she received a letter from a solicitor saying they had been instructed by the other insurers to issue a CCJ against her for payment of £7k in the next seven days. Sadly due to us only seeming to receive post twice a week, this was written a week ago.
Is this the exact wording? If so it's more about intimidation and frightening her into paying up quickly. There is no way that a solicitor can issue a CCJ, only a court can.
However, if her insurer is refusing to pay the full amount of the claim, then yes, they can seek a county court judgement from the at-fault driver.
But I would expect a lot more correspondence on the total amount of the claim, how much the insurer is offering, and what they are disputing. As it stands, your daughter does not know if the 7K is for vehicle damage, medical etc.
My feeling from the tone of the letter and the amount (following what sounds like a minor knock with no visible damage) would be that they are trying it on, and no court action will be forthcoming, but she needs to be prepared and on the lookout for a letter from the court.
Julians is correct, but don't underestimate the ability of people to bury their head in the sand or assume the Insurer is competent and will just sort it then looked bemused when the court decides they had plenty of opportunity to solve it. So I would send something like the following by recorded delivery too.
Dear XXX,
I have today (DD-MM-YYYY) received your letter dated (DD-MM-YYYY) ref: XYXHGXGHX.
My insurers are ABCDEFGH. Your client is aware of this. I have forwarded your correspondence to my Insurer. As I am not aware of any award being made against me by the court I will oppose any attempt to raise a CCJ.
I trust you will not issue any further threat of action to me personally, without involving my Insurer.
Yours sincerely,
XXX
along with sending to the insurer (probably with a robustly worded letter)!
It wouldn’t make it very far though as presumably the second you turned up with proof of insurance the case would be thrown out as they have agreed to indemnify OPs daughter against claims.
Nope, not how it would work, it could actually end up in court (but is unlikely I would say, if the two insurance companies have agreed what should be paid already) , but the ops daughters insurers will be there to defend it because if they are not, they are on the hook to pay out whatever the court agrees should be paid.
It is critical to ensure the daughters insurers are aware of this letter though.
I reckon the 3rd party is not happy with what his insurance company has negotiated as a pay out and has now instructed some solicitor to see if they can get more money, doubt it will go much further once the daughters insurers get involved - again!
And yes, do not reply to the letter or enter into any correspondence with the other party or their agents, just get your insurance Co involved again.
So I would send something like the following by recorded delivery too.
No. You must pass on correspondence unanswered to your insurer. This is often a condition of your policy.
Send the correspondence to your insurer registered/recorded. Also ring them.
Make a note of what's happened.
Airvent ta for the correction - I forgot its different in England.
instructed by the other insurers to issue a CCJ against
Agree with the other posters. The clue is in the name....County Court Judgement.
Gets issued by a ..
Definitely hand over to the insurer.
Also check the 'solicitor' actually is one - because if they are, they're super shady. And if they aren't, well, that would be quite naughty.
Depends on the exact wording.
But if a solicitor was threatening a CCJ (something, as others already say, it is not able to issue itself - that's for a County Court to do - the CC in CCJ) then I'd be telling them (a) they need to talk to my insurer, and (b) I'd tell them that I'm immediately putting in a formal complaint to the Law Society about their threatening behaviour.
I’d have thought a CCJ would only be possible if she’d been asked to pay multiple times over a long period of time and had simply ignored all the requests. I thought it was the end result of the process not the start.
It would also require a court hearing and judgement (the clue is in the name CCJ), not only that but you would have to be found guilty and then refuse to pay...
She would have been sent a court summons from the local county court, not a 'solicitor'.
It all sounds very 'scammy' assuming the daughter has given you the full facts.
As others have said.. you can't just demand money from someone 'or else CCJ'.. that's not how it works. Demanding money is one thing, but they would have to provide evidence as to why they are out of pocket.. has the daughter had sight of repair bills, hire car costs, medical estimates, doctors reports, etc?
Not that she should.. that's what she pays her insurance company for.
She should absolutley throw this straight back to her insurers... is it even a genuine 'threat', or a scam email/text?
Yeah, even if the 'solicitor' wanted to take them to court, they would have to file a case, and the daughter would be informed by the court about this, and given opportunity to refute or pay before it even arrives at an actual court hearing.
It has scam/ambulance chaser, written all over it.
Pass it on to the insurers. No other action needed other than ‘put it behind you’.
I would be unsurprised if it was a scam. But that’s for the insurers to deal with.
£7000 is too much for small claims
Sheriff court has jurisdiction for claims up to £100k with a limit of £5k for use of the simple procedure. It’s a good system and hopefully will be implemented in E&W at some point.
This is standard in a legal case (which is what a third party insurance claim is) when it hasn't been resolved by the insurers for whatever reason. You need to issue proceedings to take it to court, this sounds like a really badly worded way to do it, obviously to upset the other party (OPs daughter).
Contact her insurers, it's what she's paying them to do.
Back in the 90s, the solicitor who spearheaded the US style litigation culture here in the UK was an absolute bastard for doing this sort of thing.
Thank you, everyone
Your input has stopped her worrying. Her insurers have confirmed they are disputing the settlement amount (due to lack of medical evidence) and have assured her they are dealing.
All the advice from here was very reassuring for her and, therefore, for me.
Thank you
Her insurers have confirmed they are disputing the settlement amount (due to lack of medical evidence) and have assured her they are dealing.
that was my bet - a bogus injury claim. What do I win?
Just OOI, would it matter in this situation if OP’s daughter had legal cover or not?
No. The standard car policy pays for what are referred to as defence costs. That means when a third party alleges something against you, the policy pays out to defend and/or settle it. Which in turn means paying out for damages, plus your own legal costs and the (reasonable) costs for the person making the claim.
There are other legal costs that can be covered in the policy, such as prosecution defence costs, but this can vary.
I can’t remember why, but I remember being convinced a year or so ago that legal cover is not worth ticking
The legal cover you pay extra for on a car policy is called ULR (Uninsured Loss Recovery). There are other bits of a ULR cover that can be useful as well - such as advice helplines on a range of areas.
The main bit of ULR is to do exactly what it says, recover uninsured losses. Things like an excess, injury, or other costs like loss of earnings.
This happens when the incident is non-fault.
You can just use an ambulance chaser to get this money back for you. But there are potentially fees and risks if they don't 'win'. A ULR cover is an insurance policy you buy up front and it will do the work for you for less risk.
UPDATE and wisdom needed!
Ten months after the original post, my daughter today received a letter from the County Court requiring payment to the solicitors. The claim is still in dispute between the two insurers, and last month, my daughter's insurance company said they were still dealing with it.
She will be on the phone with her insurers tomorrow morning but I wanted to know if anyone else had a Civil National Business Centre Claim sent to them when insurance companies have not resolved an incident from over two years ago.
Ten months after the original post, my daughter today received a letter from the County Court requiring payment to the solicitors.
That doesn't sound correct at all...if a court fines you, you have to pay the court and there are very clear instructions on how to do that, they would not instruct you to pay 'a solicitor'.
today received a letter from the County Court
Are you sure its an official court letter, and not a scam/debt collection agency?
The easiest thing to do would be to call the court clerk and ask them directly.
This hasn't been to court - in fact, there has been no communication since the threatening letter 10 months ago. The form is an N1SDT, the same as the ones on the .gov site.
The County Court Business Centre (CCBC) is a specialised part of the county court system in England and Wales designed to handle bulk processing for particular types of claims.
This hasn’t been to court
It either has, or it hasn't.
my daughter today received a letter from the County Court requiring payment to the solicitors.
So what is it? I'm suspecting a scam, still...a court would never ask you to pay solicitors.. they would simply order you to pay the fine (if guilty), plus penalties etc.
Only then, if you fail to pay the fine yould you get a CCJ against you.
The County Court Business Centre (CCBC) is a specialised part of the county court system in England and Wales designed to handle bulk processing for particular types of claims.
It is part of the county court system - you either pay up or file a counter claim.
It either has, or it hasn’t.
Seems it doesn't need to anymore
Hmmm.. I'd love to see a picture of the letter (with personal info blanked out)
A court order would have to be paid directly to the court as per the instuctions... the fact you mentioned 'the court' has apparently instucted you to pay 'a solicitor' has red flags written all over it.
More red flags than a russian military parade.
I can't offer any real advice but I was curious and so started googling. According to this wiki article all your daughter needs to do is contest it and then it'll go to a real court? My suspicion is that the claimant hasn't had any luck within the system and so has decided to try this route instead...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Court_Business_Centre
[edit]
Claim forms issued by the CCBC are served upon the defendant(s) in the same manner as other courts. However, the response pack also includes a password to allow the defendant to file their response via a website.
Where a defendant contests some, or all, of the claim, the claimant is required (if they wish to continue) to request the case be transferred out of the CCBC.
Sounds like a very shady scam attempt at extracting money from your daughter. As above County Court won’t demand you pay a solicitor. Who is this solicitor anyway - yours? Why on earth would you have to pay someone else’s? Does not add up at all. Pay nothing.
Thanks Matty - that would be most of the form- there is a template online N1SDT or moneyclaim.gov.uk
Its the small claims court via the web! You can defend yourself, but it all happens via online forms.
I'm looking into it. For them to enforce it, it would need to be transferred to a local county court. This system is more for non-payment of invoices and is not suited for disputed claims, which would still need to go to court if not resolved.
UK debt Expert say
Established to provide a more streamlined process for dealing with certain types of county court cases, the CCBC enables solicitors and claimants to make bulk claims, typically for debts like unpaid invoices or loans. Its operations hinge on the use of technology to manage cases efficiently, which in turn helps to reduce the time and costs associated with traditional court proceedings.
As you explore the services offered by the CCBC, you’ll find that this facility is particularly suited for businesses and organisations that deal with high volumes of claims.
It operates under the same legal framework as the traditional county courts, but its emphasis on electronic processing allows it to serve claimants with greater speed.
Importantly, while the centre facilitates the initial stages of the claim process electronically, any subsequent hearings related to these claims are transferred to the defendant’s local county court, should they be contested.
Thanks OceanSkipper and Sweaman,
I agree with you; it's no different from the letter she received 10 months ago. They are just hoping she will pay. It would never get to court, and if it did, that is why she has insurance. If feel a lot better now - thanks again.
I've not read every post above, but could it be more basic than even than a shady lawyer trying it on and being an out and out scam? Unsolicited post with a panic inducing short deadline, definite scammers M.O.
I might try and be on touch with the 3rd party insurance if possible to check if it is at all genuine.
I've gotten my head around it now. What I knew as the small claims court is now automated unless you contest it. Its a lot eaiser to deal with.
That looks like a genuine letter - it’s a bit too blurry to read the details but it’s either a notice of a claim and you will have a certain amount of time to contest it or it is an actual CCJ - has your daughter not been to a hearing???
Suggest you ring them directly.. Also your insurer. Possibly also a solicitor of your own…
You may also need to fill out one of the forms here if you are disputing it..
https://www.gov.uk/respond-to-court-claim-for-money/respond-to-a-claim-by-post
What I don't understand here is, assuming that there is a legitimate claim to be had, why they think she's directly liable rather than her insurer. Aside from the obvious answer of hoping she'll get scared and give them free money, of course.
The claim is still in dispute between the two insurers
After ten months? I'd be setting a fire under the arse of the insurer, saying "see you in court then, bitch" to the claimant and filing a counter-suit for harassment.
It's a notice of a claim.
Any business can fire these out—their purpose is to collect unpaid invoices or debts. It seems they are trying to shortcut the insurance company in the hope my daughter will pay. Not really the fine, upstanding legal service I naively think we have.
It is a notice of claim and is a step on the road to court. Private parking companies use them a lot. Many will be discontinued before they actually reach court. Before any CCJ is issued it will have to be adjudicated on and the person who received the claim will be able to lodge a defence. So it does seem an odd one for an insurance company to be pursuing if there is already another insurer in the mix, the judge would have to be issue a judgement in the claiments favour, and that not be the full amount they are claiming and even then a CCJ won't be issued unless the person who the claim was issued against doesn't pay the court judgement.
Either there is something here we're all missing about the particulars of the claim or the claiment has no intention of going to court and is using (abusing the process) to frighten a payment out of someone. If the lady in this case did lose in court and they haven't invalidated their own insurance in some way I'd guessed they'd be able to take their own insurer to court in the same way knowing a court had decided they were liable in which case there is little defence from the insurance for not having already paid out.
Yes, as above...Assuming she was correctly insured, this should be a matter for her car insurance company... it should never even see a court room for her.
So the (her) defence would be "claim your losses from my insurance company, this appears to be an abuse of the court process, please strike out the case on that basis"... but in more official words.
Has she spoken to her insurance company and explained that a 3rd party is trying to sue her?
Regardless of the specifics of the case, what a ****ing headache for your daughter. Sorry you’re going through this.
if it shows turn it to be a speculative request for money, does this apply?
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/fraud-dishonesty/legal-threats-solicitor/
they think she’s directly liable rather than her insurer
At law, she is liable. The collision was between two drivers, not two insurance companies. So the case is pursued in the names of the drivers.
This, again, needs to go back to the insurer asap.
By the way, if OP isn't happy about the way it's been dealt with, you can complain and potentially go to the ombudsman. But, if it's the other side that have held things up (which sounds plausible) then not much will come of it.
Not too muddy the waters here op but did you daughter have a "courtesy car" at and point, after the collision?
After ten months? I’d be setting a fire under the arse of the insurer, saying “see you in court then, bitch” to the claimant and filing a counter-suit for harassment.
definitely don’t do that. If the other party had been a cyclist and the insurance companies were taking this long over a small claim you lot would be saying - stop waiting for them just issue court proceedings!
this is the other drivers insurer/lawyer putting a rocket up your insurer for taking too long. Whilst someone 10 months ago said just pass to insurer do not respond - I would still strongly recommend that you do pass to your insurer but write to the court to inform them that you have done so and that you previously did so in response to other correspondence. She doesn’t want to end up in a bigger mess because the court think this document has been ignored (if the insurer don’t get their finger out). Courts do not like having their time wasted by parties who should have settled out of court, but they really don’t like parties who ignore official correspondence.
I agree with you; it’s no different from the letter she received 10 months ago.
it is - it’s the next step when her insurer are no further towards settling
They are just hoping she will pay. It would never get to court,
it absolutely will unless her insurer settle it or scare the claimant off; legal costs for fighting a baseless claim could easily run to £5k so it’s surprising that the insurer have not managed to settle it.
and if it did, that is why she has insurance.
correct - you are 100% sure she was insured at the time, for that vehicle and the purpose it was being used for? There is no dispute from her own insurer about their liability if there is an award made?
At law, she is liable. The collision was between two drivers, not two insurance companies. So the case is pursued in the names of the drivers.
But the insurers are paid to act on her behalf.
definitely don’t do that. If the other party had been a cyclist
If it was then the answer is still the same, I'd expect my insurer (or the MIB) to pay out / tell them to jog on rather than be pursued personally.
this is the other drivers insurer/lawyer putting a rocket up your insurer for taking too long.
No it's not, it's scaremongering. If they were "putting a rocket up her insurer" then they would be writing to the insurer rather than to her, wouldn't they.
"My insurance company is dealing with this, please take any enquiries up with them, kkthxbi." If we're playing the whataboutery game, what if she'd killed someone and the estate was coming after her for millions? Right you are then guv, let me crack open the piggy bank?
When I got hit by another driver on my way home several years ago, the other driver admitted to me, and to my insurance company that she had indicated she was turning right on the roundabout, then changed her mind and swerved in front of me, between me and the oncoming line of traffic entering the roundabout.
I’d had a hire car, my car examined but decided it wasn’t worth repairing, so I kept it and had a small payment from the insurance company. At the same time her insurance company were continually arguing the toss about it, and occasionally my insurance company would get in touch to say it still hadn’t been settled.
I gave the car away a couple of years afterwards, and never heard anything back about it. AFAIK, they’re still arguing about it!
That’s what insurance companies are supposed to do.
correct – you are 100% sure she was insured at the time, for that vehicle and the purpose it was being used for? There is no dispute from her own insurer about their liability if there is an award made?
Yes, and daughter has admitted liability. She's already paid the price by losing her no claims discount.
The other party was claiming for personal injury but has never submitted evidence to date, and in the meantime called a blame/claim firm.
The other party was claiming for personal injury but has never submitted evidence to date, and in the meantime called a blame/claim firm.
Ah, so is this a new speculative claim from an ambulance chaser after the original insurance issue has been settled? I had one of these a few years ago for a no damage parking shunt. My insurance company shut it down very quickly when I forwarded the letter.
But the insurers are paid to act on her behalf.
No it’s not, it’s scaremongering. If they were “putting a rocket up her insurer” then they would be writing to the insurer rather than to her, wouldn’t they.
if the daughter's insurance aren't settling the claim after an entire year, the next step to forcing the matter is to take them the daughter to court. There is no other way to escalate it. You can't take the insurance company to court, and if you take no-one to court the issue will remain unsolved for 6 years (from memory) at which point it times out, and there's no way of recovering the losses the other party has. Taking the daughter to court is the only way to move things forwards, and whilst its worrying for her, the insurance company will sort it. The insurance company can (and have) ignore a letter, they can't ignore a CCJ.
often these things get right to the doorway of the court before being settled - there's lots of annecdotal evidence of witnesses having to show up on the day only to be told to go home (especially for AMC car hire fees). Hopefully for the OP it won't get to that, but it might.
if the daughter’s insurance aren’t settling the claim after an entire year,
That's what I don't understand. If she's admitted liability (never do this), her insurers should pay out without further question. The fact that either they're still arguing or have closed the claim (which is it?) suggests to me that they don't believe the extent of the claim.
I'm not seeing a scenario in which the insurer refuses to pay out but the court would rule in the claimant's favour, unless I'm missing something here?
The argument looks to be about the quantum/extent of the claim - perhaps with no evidence of personal injury, the insurers are understandably refusing that part of the claim. Having said that, I have experience of insurers failing to act on court proceedings and then having to get them to get the CCJ (from unfended claim) set aside. As per Rich_S, get on to insurers and make them aware of the issued proceedings.