I have finally got follow up letter - and now POC are good to be signed and sent back (along with statement of truthfulness and some documents required for disclosure at a future point I guess). So looking at the usual timeline I am possibly looking at September time next year if it goes all the way to court? Regarding witness statements - how does it work if some of the people who worked for the defendant/s at the time of the accident no have resigned/retired?

You are right! I guess I just like to look ahead at what's around the corner so I am prepared. This is in no small part due to the reticent, ineffectual managers I have had to deal with in the past (thankfully not the case at the moment).

Having good read of bumpf that I've been sent for info from solicitors...and I'm a tad confused about part 36 offers. I appreciate one is likely a month or three away but am just trying to figure implications of them. If (for example) I made a part 36 offer for £10,000 but the two defendants rejected that, made no counter offer and it made it to court but the judge only awarded me £8,000 how are costs assigned?

Thank you very much everyone.

I think that is the case i.e not issued to the other sides. I rang today but she was in a meeting so I took her email address and emailed her. I've attempted to make sense of the process as outlined on the justice website and i think there is now 4 months for all documents between all parties to be exchanged (but i may have got that wrong).

Any thoughts peeps? My solicitors (a reputable company linked to my Union) sent me the particulars of my claim several weeks ago. I wroteback immediately saying a couple of points weren't right and clarified what they were. I followed this up with a phone call a couple of days after. I spoke to my soliciitor at this point who said she had submitted the case to the court (not the particulars or medical report but the preliminary bit) and would go over the what i had submitted and get back to me. I asked at this point if she needed any further info regarding emails I had copies of (that would need to be disclosed - i couldn't remember if I had already provided them). As I had not heard anything I rang last friday and spoke with her secretary - but i still haven't heard anything and I am a bit worried about time limits etc. Just to be clear my claim was submitted very soon after the accident but my employers and other comapny involved have been very reluctant to porovide responses/information. Additionally i had surgery so it was important to let things settle as much as they could. That's why the solicitor left it until just before the three year mark. Any thoughts on how to best approach my solicitor without appearing a pain in the bum?

Yes, the POC names both of them. At end of poc it specifies breach of duty/negligence for each defendant.

Hi, One of them doesn't have a CCA (though bizarrely the OC has provided me with one). Debts are managed through cccs so rather than stop paying until they track down cca am going to offer very low settlement first.

Thank you for your reply. I am not really sure which of the scenarios apply. Although I'm sure in personal injury terms my case is probably simple to my untrained eye the liability issues is messy.

I am hoping someone can clarify things for me. I am going to make f&f to two of my creditors. I understand that I must specify in the offer about the debt not being further pursued/sold on. BUT having nosied around cag i am not sure whether there is a legal absolute on whether the accounts can be marked settled if the full and final is only a part payment? Any ideas?

:/ I realize I'm probably trying to look three steps ahead. Both organizations involved are blaming the other one - that's why I'm trying to figure out things. As you say if they reach a compromise on figures between themselves that would be better for me - much less stressful!

Thanks for your input. I've been doing a bit of reading around the subject and from what I can gather after all the court docs / particulars of claim / statement of truthfulness and any evidence are exchanged then it is likely a section 36 or calderbank offer may happen. I am just trying to get my head round how this works with two defendants!

Well as Egg didn't reply to my request for info to support their rejection of my complaint I decided to go down the FOS route leaving me the option of court when life feels a little less manic. I was quite surprised to get an emailed acknowledgement from FOS rather than a letter. Is this normal?

I do have a solicitor - I certainly wouldn't want to be doing it alone. I have no idea what or how potential figures are reached, or whether if it reaches court whether I will need to explain just how horrendous the pain was or the impact it had upon me. My solicitors are good but I don't think they want me getting ahead of myself (which I'm not). I'm making no automatic assumption it will go in my favour but I would like some idea of what to expect :/

Hi, I'm just wondering whether anyone has any experience of court for a personal injury cases. There are two companies/organizations that the claim is against - each denying responsibility and pointing the finger at the other. The accident I had severely exacerbated an existing but well managed condition and a medico-legal expert has found that it brought forward my need for surgery. I know the particulars of the claim have to be with the two organizations within 4 months - but as they both deny liability I am assuming this will go all the way and I don't really know what to expect. Any ideas?

It does - which is a good thing in the long run. But it does seem that they can make unilateral arbitrary decisions as to when the debt is with them and when it's not. Which stinks! I'll challenge it and see what happens. So angry at the moment!

Will be sending letter first thing Monday. I understand they may buy the debt back but surely they are on a sticky wicket if on the date the letter was issued they do not own the debt?

I'm sure this isn't right. Barclaycard have found in my favour for missile ppi (yay!) - but they say the money is going to pay off the debt which has already been sold to another dca a couple of years ago but a cheque for the 8% interest thingy will come to me. I'm sure I read somewhere that this isn't legal. Anyone any ideas?

As i said i totally get your explanation. I suppose my point is that if i pay the ppi refund to the new dca i am not back in the position i would have been in had the error not happened because the amount paid out on ppi is money that should never have been taken (and should have remained my disposable income) yet i am having to use it if i want to get my balance to a level where it had not been applied in the first place. I do totally get what you are saying but something in my frazzled brain doesn't seem right.

Ims you make perfect sense - and I totally get the logic. I guess I am just approaching it a different way in as much as the ppi should never have been applied to my account. Therefore it should not be part of the equation in reducing the outstanding balance to the dca as it should never have been there in the first place. I know it may seem like I'm talking in riddles but in some perverse way it makes sense in my head even if i can't write it down very well :/

which makes perfect sense! I just feel like I'm missing something somewhere - I think I'm getting a bit hung up around the amount transferee from one creditor to another. In the example above I'm still paying out the money to put me back into a position where it would be as if i didn't have ppi. Whilst i understand it is no different than if it was with the oc I'm just struggling with it for some stupid reason

Bear with me - I've confused myself again.... Surely the ppi pay out should not have to go the reduce the debt with the dca as that means effectively i have paid ppi? Should it not be that the debt is the incorrect amount and the debt should be adjusted to reflect that ppi should not have been on it? The pay out is a return of premiums (plus interest)- so if i then pay that to the dca I've not gained at all? I know this probably isn't making much sense - does anyone get where i am coming from?

Ok, I think I get it (brain is certainly fried at the moment!) Just wanted to make sure I wasn't being penalized twice for the same thing.

What I mean is if the original creditor sold the debt on to a debt collection company with the ppi included but the original creditor has now confirmed it was mis-sold (and will pay refund directly to me)merge debt collection company are trying to collect the wrong amount.. I.e. Debt with OC is £2000 which includes ppi Debt is sold and dca shows debt as £2000 PPI refund is £1000... Dca still thinks it had £2000 to collect... Does that make sense?

I'm hoping there's a simple answer to this question... If an original creditor has sold a debt on, but you have successfully reclaimed PPI against the original creditor what does that mean for me as the debtor with respect to the debt collection agency who now owns the debt? The figure they are trying to collect is wrong but is there any lawful way of putting this to them? Hx