View Full Version : Accident claim Advice needed
theshed
05-11-10, 09:40 AM
Hi folks not been on for a while, because.......
anyway back in Feb. I had an accident whilst filtering past standing traffic, on the approach to road works, when a car without warning decided she would turn right into McDonalds.
Very briefly, the bike was written off and settlement made, it was then down to a personal injury claim and a solicitor was appointed through my insurance broker using my legal protection insurance.
The third party claimed to have two witnesses who failed to materialize, and claims I was overtaking standing traffic when it was dangerous to do so, I presented my solicitor with (the filtering letter) and also a copy of the case law to back it up,
up until date he has been unable to get any response from the third party,
he is now advising me that I should go 50/50 as he believes this is what a judge would decide and by getting in first would put me in the stronger position.
I have replied that I don’t believe I was in anyway liable for the accident and don’t feel that 50/50 is the correct way forward.
His reply is that, that is his advice and if I don’t take it funding by my legal protection insurance would be stopped and I would need to fund myself to continue.
He seems to be giving me no alternative than to Play it his way and offer a plea of 50/50
I am at a loss any informed suggestions would be welcome
It's hard to advise you without all the details but I would say that failure to get a response from the Third Party is no good reason to cave in and start making offers at this stage. I find a summons gets a response every time. :D
Speak to another solicitor - one of the biking experts. They may take you on if your case is strong enough. At least you'll have a second opinion.
Some of the legal expenses insurers are a bit tight and backpeddle from anything but the simplest of stuff.
I'd call your legal protection for your insurance mate, sounds like the solisitor is not working for you like he should be and instead is working solely for him self, prehaps he needs reminding of this especially if the claim for the damage to the bike was decided that it was their fault the same judgement should be applied here.
454697819
05-11-10, 09:58 AM
sack the solicitior and go to a bike specific one.. someone will be along here with the best name around white dolton I think?
theshed
05-11-10, 10:03 AM
when i question my solicitor as to what part makes me liable, he just replies that it is their word against mine and if I had have waited in the line of traffic the accident would not have happened, therefore it must have been dangerous to overtake,
I replied so if I hadn't have gone out then it wouldn't have happened so its my fault for going out wtf.
I'd call your legal protection for your insurance mate, sounds like the solisitor is not working for you like he should be and instead is working solely for him self, prehaps he needs reminding of this especially if the claim for the damage to the bike was decided that it was their fault the same judgement should be applied here.
I assumed that the bike damages have been paid by your own insurers. If it was paid by the Third Party insurer then, yes, they should be settling the injury aspect on the same basis.
sack the solicitior and go to a bike specific one..
Agreed, but do it the other way round - get a second opinion first before you make any rash decisions.
We don't know all the facts so it's a bit early to be questioning the integrity of the solicitor. He may well be right in this case.
when i question my solicitor as to what part makes me liable, he just replies that it is their word against mine and if I had have waited in the line of traffic the accident would not have happened, therefore it must have been dangerous to overtake,
I replied so if I hadn't have gone out then it wouldn't have happened so its my fault for going out wtf.
Thats a p*** poor explanation from a solicitor TBH. It depends what the other party is alleging. If you were barrelling down the road at 50, in the dark with your lights off then you would need to accept a large portion of the blame. However, it's pretty clear they didn't see you (presumably, or they wouldn't have pulled out) so they can't get away with saying that.
However, if I was on the side of the third party, I would be saying you shouldn't have been overtaking where there was a side road, or should have at least recognised the additional risk and have taken appropriate measures/reduced speed.
In these cases, when the car u-turns in the road in front of you it's a bit easier to lay the blame entirely on the car driver. If the biker is overtaking or undercutting at a junction it's not so straightforward.
theshed
05-11-10, 10:43 AM
that's what I like about this forum their is always someone there to help tamsv thank you for real unbiased advice, advice is something we don't always want to hear but if asked for you need to listen to
454697891 thanks for your input have rang white dolton who say they would be certainly interested in looking at the case for me but obviously cant guarantee they will advise different but say they see no reason to lie down just yet so they are sending me some paperwork to switch over to them
see what happens
Dave20046
05-11-10, 01:25 PM
**** off the solicitor, that's bull****.i'd go for 100% if it was your right of way they should have been using their eyes . bikers are entitled to filter. if they had of been driving with due care and attention the accident wouldn't have happened.
you can ask to be appointed another solicitor.
petevtwin650
05-11-10, 01:32 PM
I doubt you will get 100%. Usually vehicle insurance claims are decided on who was majorly at fault but compensation claims are dealt with on a percentage, I believe. They will argue that you should have been expecting somebody to turn across you, so some degree of blame will lie with you. Hopefully not much. 10 to 20%, but definately not the easy 50/50 your current solicitor is settling for.
Dave20046
05-11-10, 01:59 PM
aslong as you argue you were filtering responsibly and despite expecting it there was nothing you could do to avoid it then you should be okay.
as bikers we expect other road users to try and kill us,doesn't mean we can always prevent it :D
Completely agree, biker specialist solicitors are a whole different level.
When I went into the back of a Beemer, my insurance company representatives ditched my case saying I had no claim. I rang Rider Support, and basically won the claim. Got money for my written off bike, plus more on the way for back protector (lol), helmet, and at least £1300 in injuries but we're trying to milk more so working up more doctor notes.
You'll be in good hands im sure if these Dalton chaps take on your case.
Dave20046
05-11-10, 05:27 PM
Completely agree, biker specialist solicitors are a whole different level.
When I went into the back of a Beemer, my insurance company representatives ditched my case saying I had no claim. I rang Rider Support, and basically won the claim. Got money for my written off bike, plus more on the way for back protector (lol), helmet, and at least £1300 in injuries but we're trying to milk more so working up more doctor notes.
You'll be in good hands im sure if these Dalton chaps take on your case.
Do you know my premiums higher than last year? Curious stuff.
Do you know my premiums higher than last year? Curious stuff.
Are you a loyal customer? Shop around perhaps.
Dave20046
05-11-10, 05:49 PM
That is shopped around[-(
Oh. Well, you know more cars on the road and all that.
Dave20046
05-11-10, 05:57 PM
penis
Drumming_Animal
05-11-10, 07:55 PM
ive just had a case more or less the same cleared up, eventually settled 2/3 1/3 in my favour, i had a witness in my favor, happened to be a biker in a van, biased? maybe but he was on my side so yea, kindly gave me and my bike a lift home actually :)
but the third party were being a right pain in the **** and not owning up or settling, even after the tears at the scene of the accident saying she was sorry, etc. of course she prob didnt realise that she nearly actually killed me, somehow my head got wedged under the side bumper of the car facing the rear wheel, and she kept going with my head stuck there, damn scary watching a wheel turning in your direction waiting for it to go over your head and for everything to go black, thank you shark helmets for saving my bacon!!
aaaanywho, things eventually got settled, only just out of court though, my solicitors ended up advising that i take the 2/3 1/3 offer put forward after declining the 50/50 offer that was put forward, could have prob got more money, but that would have been risky for the greed of a couple of grand
my solicitors were Bromiley Holcroft and did a brilliant job, things moved slow, but im guessing everything does with these matters, maybe give them a go? sounds like youve had something very similar to me, so they may be able to help you out....
hongman
05-11-10, 08:32 PM
Completely agree, biker specialist solicitors are a whole different level.
When I went into the back of a Beemer, my insurance company representatives ditched my case saying I had no claim. I rang Rider Support, and basically won the claim. Got money for my written off bike, plus more on the way for back protector (lol), helmet, and at least £1300 in injuries but we're trying to milk more so working up more doctor notes.
You'll be in good hands im sure if these Dalton chaps take on your case.
How on earth did you win a claim for going into the back of someone?
penis
:driving:
How on earth did you win a claim for going into the back of someone?
cutting a long story short...his brake lights never came on, he admitted that his gear box jammed at the scene, and luckily an off duty police biker saw and heard all this. Coupled with the fact he got his boot repaired and refused to answer his insurers calls/home visits, his insurers ultimately had to give up the fight.
The point is though, my initial insurers wouldn't even pick this case up, yet the biker lawyers did, so in the op's case, well worthwhile and there's hope yet.
hongman
05-11-10, 09:20 PM
:o
theshed
06-11-10, 09:59 AM
as I said spoke to the people at white dalton (this is the person I spoke to) http://www.whitedalton.co.uk/about-us/team-profiles/rhiannon-davies.html
and they restored my faith, problem with the present solicitor is they i dont feel in my heart that they are actually fighting my case more that they are for themselfs and the extra effort aint worth it,
at least with the specialist i know i'm gonna get a fair deal however it ends up.
but the reel thing was at the time of the accident I just went with the solicitor that my insurance appointed me, didn't know no better. I do now thanks to this forum
Sounds very much like my off 18 months ago. It has only just been settled, two days before it was due to go to court. I was with White Dalton and moved to them after my appointed solicitor was telling me the same as yours. Very glad I did as I got a 100%.
Your details sound a little different as you were overtaking passed a junction, whereas the taxi pulled out in front of me to do a three point turn in the road. However, if you were passing slowly, with caution, were there to be seen, she didn't give warning of her intention to turn into the junction etc, the you will stand a good chance.
a.oneill45
07-11-10, 08:22 PM
Your accident is exactly as mine in 08, I was filtering passed a side road and someone pulled out. Mine went to court and I got 50/50, apparently I should have been travelling slower than 10mph! Just wish I had changed from my insurers appointed solicitor now...
Essentially, where you decide to filter, at your own risk, where you come into conflict with other road users, ie passing the mouth of a junction, say, then a court will generally find some negligence on your part. You are "creating your own lane", in the view of the insurers, and it should be evident to an awake motorcyclist of the danger of passing traffic where you might meet other vehicles.
The police roadcraft manual suggests filtering shoould be at no more than a fast walking pace faster than the traffic you are passing.
Where however, you are passing a vehicle which jsut u turns, or turns across, and the rider is not "on warning", ie there is no side road or reason to anticiapte the maoever, Davis Vs Schrogin will prevail, and you will be found not at fault.
There's a very good lesson to be learnt here which I think has been missed.
NEVER EVER overtake traffic past a right hand turning. It just isn't worth the risk.
Personally, so long as the car was indicating right, I would portion some of the blame to the rider as well.
theshed
18-11-10, 04:12 PM
one point to take into consideration is that when filtering it was after a road sign had indicated the lane ahead was closed and for traffic to move over which a large majority had yet to do, so not so much filtering as moved out as directed, and of course I was travelling at only walking pace (maybe a trot) and was fully expecting traffic to merge out but didn't expect a full right turn from a extreme left position so there was not the slightest indication this person was about to make the right turn
there was not the slightest indication this person was about to make the right turn
There was. It was the very presence of a right hand turn alone, that should have put you on caution.
theshed
19-11-10, 06:19 PM
There was. It was the very presence of a right hand turn alone, that should have put you on caution.
yes it certainly did but the presence of a right hand turn suggests the possibility that someone may turn right, I was travelling at no more than a trot on the other hand she was positioned on the far left of the road not even obeying the road sign-age to move over and was stationary, this I believe to be no indication of her intention to turn right.
and as said I'm not trying to absolve myself of any blame whatsoever I just want a fair hearing not a solicitor who's only interest is an easy quick buck
There was. It was the very presence of a right hand turn alone, that should have put you on caution.
See now that's the way I see it. But I am only saying this from bitter experience. Have also had a car pull into my path that was not indicating right or making any sort of movement to indicate a right turn was about to happen. This is why I have learnt never to overtake past a right hand turn. Waiting for the half a dozen seconds it takes to pass the right hand turn before overtaking is worth the wait.
In my case I was able to follow the path of the vehicle turning right and avoided the accident. So very lucky.
I do hope you get the result in your favour but wouldn't be surprised if it didn't. Good luck.
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.