sighbeans

[heros]

dads had a look at my policy and specifically the legal cover part, does this state that it only covers legal costs if someone claims against me?

http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/4220/68670422.jpg

[Dave20046]

They won;t let you use their own appointed solicitors against them if that's what you mean. Tried it before.

noooooo if you got legal coer with your insurance that covers you so that they fight on your behalf so you dont have to do it, and as your saying it sounds its 90% her fault so they would win for you and get you money for bike and injuries and leathers / helmet if you wear leathers.

they are ment to sort it all out for you

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by chompy

and leathers / helmet if you wear leathers.

they are ment to sort it all out for you

Or even your tracky bottoms if you don't. If it was her fault then her insurance has a responsibility to recompense you for any damage caused. That's what her 3rd party cover is for and why it's required by law...

I'd contact your insurers and enquire why proceedings haven't been started for your claim against her, since you deny any fault and have outstanding damages.

Originally Posted by heros

dads had a look at my policy and specifically the legal cover part, does this state that it only covers legal costs if someone claims against me?

http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/4220/68670422.jpg

I would do two things:

1. Demand to speak to a manager because you want to start a formal complaints procedure if they still refuse to honour your legal cover. Tell them that you are considering complaining to to the financial Ombudsman but want to try to resolve it with them first. You will probably have to write a letter outlining your discontent. They will reply to your letter and if it's not good news then take it up with the Ombudsman. From the clause you posted above it looks like they really do only cover your defence. so if you have a claim against a third party you have to use your own solicitor. What would normally have happened here is that her claim against you and your claim against her would have been handled at the same time by the same solicitors and an agreement would have been reached. But as your insurer just paid her and left you hanging out to dry it's probably up to you to use your own solicitor. But fear not. You're not out yet...

2. Talk to White Dalton as fubber suggests. They are excellent. They may even work on a "Conditional Fee Agreement" (CFA) which is also sometimes known as a "no win no fee". These arrangements get a bad name becasue of all the ambulance chasers out there. But they are a good way of making a claim if you don't want to end up with a lawyers bill you can't afford if the claim goes wrong (which I don't think this one would). They can explain to you how it would work as there are many different varieties. I really think you will get something if you make a claim.

Another option would be to make a claim yourself. Get her details and write a "letter of claim". This is the first stage in the civil litigation process and does not necessarily have to be written by a lawyer. You will probably find templates online. Be warned. The stage after the latter of claim if you don't get a positive response is filing a claim with the court (probably small claims court as below £5k). This requires some knowledge and will cost around £100 to file the claim at your local County Court. There are excellent guides for private individuals to do this themsleves as the courts are keen to make the litigation process simpler for the man on the street. Have a look at http://www.justice.gov.uk/index.htm if you are keen on doing this. Specifically look here: http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/proc...ic.htm#IDADXOQ You will find everything you need to make a claim yourself.

The usual liability split in these circumstances is 80% riders fault and 20% emerging vehicles fault, as per previous case law (Jolife v Hay).

Therefore depending on how much the claim from the other driver was, your insurers may well have taken the decision to settle the entire claim on the basis of economics however I would imagine, as is pretty much always the case, this would have been done on a 'without prejudice' basis, meaning you could still pursue your claim.

Point 2 above is sound advice - however I would imagine you would struggle to find a solicitor willing to take this case on under a CFA, as the insurers behind the CFA will not like the chances.

Originally Posted by cheese

The usual liability split in these circumstances is 80% riders fault and 20% emerging vehicles fault, as per previous case law (Jolife v Hay).

Therefore depending on how much the claim from the other driver was, your insurers may well have taken the decision to settle the entire claim on the basis of economics however I would imagine, as is pretty much always the case, this would have been done on a 'without prejudice' basis, meaning you could still pursue your claim.

Point 2 above is sound advice - however I would imagine you would struggle to find a solicitor willing to take this case on under a CFA, as the insurers behind the CFA will not like the chances.

Good points. But this is a little different as this was not at a junction. She was pulling out of a driveway.

The point is. Keep on at your insurers and speak to a specialist.

[lazymanc]

Originally Posted by cheese

The usual liability split in these circumstances is 80% riders fault and 20% emerging vehicles fault, as per previous case law (Jolife v Hay).

So if you're on a 40mph stretch of road and some numpty pulls out on you at a junction, the majority of the blame would be on you?

[yorkie_chris]

Isn't there another case which superseded that with some common sense?

That's the kind of rubbish I'm spending a lot of time and effort trying to avoid at the moment from when a minibus pulled out from a traffic jam to do a 3 point turn without looking to see me overtaking.
I get the feeling some people don't like bikes?!