Recommendation for Accident claim Lawyer

[Stu]

I attended a presentation last night on behalf of a Law firm, although the presenter was not a lawyer. He was a ex Policeman, retired accident investigator, ex RoSPa & IAM examiner etc. etc. so his credentials sounded impeccable. What was important to me, apart from his obvious knowledge of the law and ability to work on your behalf, but his enthusiasm to win your case and earn as much compensation as you are entitled to.
So a recommendation from me. (Hope this is not treading on our resident solicitor's toes as I've never heard Ed do any of this kind of work)
Important point raised was - never pay for legal expenses cover and never use it. Always use a no win no fee lawyer, like this guy as they will be much better qualified, will be more incentivised to work on your behalf, and you will be more in control of them.

Oh and remember the 2 lane exit roundabout case we had on here? Well he said (each case will depend on it's own merits, but) the vehicle in the left lane turning right would be wholly at fault.

so it was Tony Carter from McMillan Williams Solicitors, 56-58 Central Parade, New Addington, Croydon 01689 848311 www.mcmillan-williams.co.uk

Originally Posted by Stu

Important point raised was - never pay for legal expenses cover and never use it. Always use a no win no fee lawyer, like this guy as they will be much better qualified, will be more incentivised to work on your behalf, and you will be more in control of them.

thanks for that Stu.... nice to now considering mine has asked for some info so they can invesitgate if i have legal expenses cover... i wasnt happy when i spoke on the phone to him to start with cos i thought it was on a "no win no fee" basis with TP picking up the expenses.. the paperwork only thru the door today so i got some reading to do...

I had a car accident in january that was not my fault. I left my car insurance ensleigh to deal with it and it took 6 months to resolve. They would not even try and recover my uninsured losses.

I then had a bump a month ago which was also not my fault I decided to leave in in the hands of lawshield who are a NO WIN NO FEE company. They only take you on if they are gonna win the case. Anyway they pretty much did everything for me and even managed hire car, cash in lieu for the repairs and a hefty sum for the minor whiplash i had for a few weeks.

1000X better/faster than going through my own insurance legal cover.

Originally Posted by Stu

Hope this is not treading on our resident solicitor's toes as I've never heard Ed do any of this kind of work)

Nope it isn't treading on my toes, you're right that I don't do accident claims or personal injury work of any sort. Wouldn't know where to start....

http://www.whitedalton.co.uk/

[Stu]

Originally Posted by ian505050

...

This thread is mainly to say that even if you don't use Tony,
1) Do Not rely on your insurance compay - they are only interested in serving their own needs (minimise the payout as much as they can be bothered to do (don't even rely on them defending you from being at fault or contributory negligent))
2) Do Not pay for & never use Legal cover
3) Use a NWNF lawyer

Originally Posted by Mighty Boosh

http://www.whitedalton.co.uk/

Yeah I know most of us will have heard of the few big name motorcyclist spcialists. I have used Rider Support before & been happy. I just wonder how much of a conveyor belt approach they will take, the guy talking to me certainly impressed me.

Interesting facts from the night.

There have been documented cases in racing & in one case on the road (which Tony proved in court) that in an accident the head can shrink sufficiently for a well fitting & fastened helmet to come off in the accident.

Contributory Negligence
If you ride without a helmet and are involved in a non fault accident and suffer head injuries, you will only be 25% cont. neg.
If you ride stark naked but with a helmet and are involved in a non fault accident and suffer sever injuries all over your body, you will be 0% cont. neg.

...one reason I don't do personal injury. NWNF means I have to fund all your work in progress with no certainty of getting anything, so the risk becomes mine. No thanks

Originally Posted by Ed

...one reason I don't do personal injury. NWNF means I have to fund all your work in progress with no certainty of getting anything, so the risk becomes mine. No thanks

Good point. Which is why legal expenses can be useful. NWNF is okay as long as your solicitor is willing to take a punt on your case. For the sake of £19 a year, I'd rather have the peace of mind.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Ed

...one reason I don't do personal injury. NWNF means I have to fund all your work in progress with no certainty of getting anything, so the risk becomes mine. No thanks

not confident in your abilities Ed?

how it was explained to me, I can't really remember, but there's an insurance policy that is taken out if your case is taken on. Not sure if that pays the fees if you lose? But I know you as a claimant are not at risk. (unless you refuse their offer and go on to be awarded less)

Originally Posted by Stu

not confident in your abilities Ed?

how it was explained to me, I can't really remember, but there's an insurance policy that is taken out if your case is taken on. Not sure if that pays the fees if you lose? But I know you as a claimant are not at risk. (unless you refuse their offer and go on to be awarded less)

Oh I'm fully confident in myself. I have rarely done personal injury, and the rules keep changing, so I'm way out of date. The nightmare is what happens when your witness changes their story or goes flaky in the box, or says something that you weren't expecting, or if at a late stage the other side produce evidence that's unanswerable.

The insurance cover is after the event insurance - the normal rule is that costs follow the event, so if you lose you end up paying the other side's costs. As a claimant solicitor it'e essential that you advise your claimant client of the risks of losing, with an insistence that they take out ATE insurance to cover the costs if they lose.

Now - no insurer is in business to lose money, so they rely on the claimant's solicitor to certify that it's a good case. Many solicitors are finding themselves on the sharp end of claims from ATE insurers for being too optimistic - unjustifiably optimistic, I mean - in advising claimants on their prospects of success, and then the claimant loses, the insurer has to pay - and then solicitor gets sued.

Not worth it. Why should I take all this risk when I can get paid for what I do as I go along? Nobody else assumes all this risk - does the average accountant do NWNF accountancy? Or the average surveyor do anyhting like this? Or the average IT consultant? Er, no.

So why should I? I don't need the work, and I don't want it.