My TAXI nudged a fence - court papers ***Settled by ADR***

[scaniaman]

Did you ever manage to ascertain who actually ownes the fence? Was it old woman or this guy who is chasing you?

[maybelate]

Not yet but have asked them to confirm.

[maybelate]

Well got the reply shocked actually,

 

Tp is not interested in my offer of making good, has not answered if he is the owner,

not answered about meeting face to face.

 

Has stated if I or anybody representing me visits his property he will consider this to be trespassing and any repairs would be vandalism.

 

Has asked again for insurance details and reg number and if not given will be repoted to police tomorrow

 

he said that my email was pointless and I am waisting time.

 

the tp said that he wants to arrange for someone to fix all of his fence.

 

Any thoughts please?

[Kiki1]

Tell him to report you to the police, I'm sure they will love to deal with this.

[reallymadwoman]

You need to do what I suggested above. Write recorded delivery and then leave it up to him to decide what to do. The police will not be in the slightest bit interested when they see you have done your best to solve the problem, even if they bother to speak to you.

[citizenkain]

Whos TP?,whats that mean?...maybe if you did hit a fence it could knock the gatepost out of line but hes got a cheek asking for insurance details,he should be happy getting the fence sorted thats all that matters at the end really,if his gate aint closing properly and its 15metres away it must have been a very severe impact to knock it out of line?

[maybelate]

Tp means third party sorry for confusion, should have been 5/7 metres.

[maybelate]

I had another email today saying that the police have advised him to give me one more chance to supply my insurance details or they will take action.

 

I contacted the police as well and

 

they advised me to ignore the email and wait until I hear from his home insurance company,

 

they also said that if he keeps emailing they will pay him a visit for harassment.

[ericsbrother]

there you go then. The person is probably a relative of the lady you spoke to and saw an opportunity to get a job done at some else's expense.

[maybelate]

Hi, it's been a while since I posted but this is still ongoing.

 

The last thing that happened is I received a letter from the claimant's insurance attached to a quote

(issued by the claimants friend) for a high value to repair the fence. I

 

wrote. to the insurance company to explain the situation but they haven't acknowledged my letter, they've just given me 14 days to pay.

 

The claimant hasn't had the fence repaired and the quote is much too high in value for the small amount of damage that I caused.

 

While I am prepared to pay a fair amount to have the fence repaired

 

I am not prepared to be ripped off by this person.

 

Can anyone suggest what I should do next please?

[reallymadwoman]

I would write back to the insurance company saying you have ample evidence of the damage caused by your vehicle, which is all you are liable for and the only damage you are willing to pay for. Also say the estimate submitted is excessive in the circumstances and in the absence of an invoice for work carried out by a reputable company with no connection to the claimant you are not prepared to make any offer of payment. I would enclose copies of the emails/letters you exchanged with the other party as proof that you have disputed the extent of the damage from the outset.

 

Now that an insurance company is dealing with it, remember that to do any moore than write to you asking for repayment is going to cost them and unless it's an extremely expensive fence, it simply isn't worthwhile. They will also want to know if their policyholder is inflating his claim as if he'd done it once he'll likely do it again and they won't want to insure him any more.

 

If you need help drafting a letter, please ask.

[maybelate]

Thank you for your reply reallymadwoman, it's a great help and very much appreciated, I will write the letter today

[green_and_mean]

Have you actually admitted liability in writing?

[SuperVillain]

I would do as reallymadwoman said, however I'd approach from a slightly different angle.

 

I'd simply request proof from the insurers as to the damage being claimed for in the form of photographs in support of their estimate, and include the history of the correspondence as stated above to show your dispute and previous offers to rectify the damage.

[maybelate]

Hi, after being quiet for a while

 

today I received a letter from Lyons davidson solicitors who are representing lv insurance.

 

The letter is quite strongly worded saying that

"you drove your vehicle into our insureds property which has caused substantial damage to their property,

it is clear that the incident was the result of negligent driving".

 

They also state in the letter that the claimant may have suffered other losses as a result of the Incident

and if I pay the amount it might prevent the claimant from pursuing these against me.

 

It is a threatening letter and they have increased the amount that they are trying to claim from me by £80.

 

Any suggestions of what I should do about this now please?

[reallymadwoman]

I would reply fairly simply enclosing copies of all previous correspondence and making it very clear

that you have photographs of the minimal damage done by your vehicle

which is all that you are prepared to pay for,

subject to a legitimate invoice from a reputable company with no connection to the claimant.

 

It is entirely up to the other party to prove their claim, unless the claim has been inflated beyond all recognition

it will be small claims and they won't be able to recover solicitors costs beyond £80 (probably the extra they've added already)

and so it's most likely going to cost more than the claim is worth to pursue it further against someone who is clearly going to defend to the hilt.

[dx100uk]

willy waving

 

dx

[SuperVillain]

As suggested above, the difference being LD are actually going to respond to what you send over. I'd do it sooner rather than later as they will probably issue proceedings fairly sharpish if you don't respond.

[maybelate]

Thank you for all the help with this, I will get the letter done and sent as they've given me 21 days to reply.

[lookinforinfo]

Lyons Davidson have form -

 

http://www.solicitorsfromhell.net/index.php?option=com_sobi2&sobi2Task=sobi2Details&sobi2Id=222&Itemid=

 

I agree that their letter to you was over the top.

 

I would therefore write to them complaining about the tone of the letter and the implied threat.

 

Ask if they are working on a No Win No Fee basis and advise them that you are sending a copy of your letter to Lyons Davidson

to the Solicitors Ombudsman

-and please do send the SO a copy of their letter as well as your own explaining

that you admit hitting the fence but only damaged two panels of a fence that was rotten from end to end

plus was held together by string in places

 

the letter from the Solicitor was extremely frightening and out of proportion for the slight damage you caused.

 

Add that you have offered to pay for the replacement panels last year

but the owner of the fence wants you to renew the whole fence.

 

Might be worthwhile going back to the Police and see what they think of their letter

and if they intend to take any action.

 

That would obviously help you and might shut Lyons D. up.

[Ganymede]

Lyons Davidson have form -

 

http://www.solicitorsfromhell.net/index.php?option=com_sobi2&sobi2Task=sobi2Details&sobi2Id=222&Itemid=

 

I agree that their letter to you was over the top.

 

I would therefore write to them complaining about the tone of the letter and the implied threat.

 

Ask if they are working on a No Win No Fee basis and advise them that you are sending a copy of your letter to Lyons Davidson

to the Solicitors Ombudsman

-and please do send the SO a copy of their letter as well as your own explaining

that you admit hitting the fence but only damaged two panels of a fence that was rotten from end to end

plus was held together by string in places

 

the letter from the Solicitor was extremely frightening and out of proportion for the slight damage you caused.

 

Add that you have offered to pay for the replacement panels last year

but the owner of the fence wants you to renew the whole fence.

 

Might be worthwhile going back to the Police and see what they think of their letter

and if they intend to take any action.

 

That would obviously help you and might shut Lyons D. up.

 

 

Don't be so soft there is absolutely nothing wrong with that letter and it is not "over the top" or "threatening."

 

We operate an adversarial legal system and that letter simply sets out the issues and they Police will just laugh at it.

 

Also the other party to a claim cannot complain to the Legal Ombudsman, only their own client can, so it would be a total waste of time.

[SuperVillain]

Again agree with Ganymede's point above. Take solace in the fact LD will not ignore you like their insurer client. I deal with LD on a daily basis and they are not by any means the worst lot of bulk claimant work solicitors.

 

Like I said a structured response to LD setting out the reasons for your dispute is all that is needed. Set them a time scale to respond and make clear in your letter that you consider any proceedings issued without dealing with your points to be premature and unreasonable and you will therefore bring your letters to the attention of the Court when the matter of costs is decided.

[lookinforinfo]

Don't be so soft there is absolutely nothing wrong with that letter and it is not "over the top" or "threatening."

 

We operate an adversarial legal system and that letter simply sets out the issues and they Police will just laugh at it.

 

Also the other party to a claim cannot complain to the Legal Ombudsman, only their own client can, so it would be a total waste of time.

 

I am sorry Ganymede but the letter is over the top. He did not do "substantial damage to the fence" indeed it is quite likely that he did not even do substantial damage to the two panels he actually hit. The OP has already offered to pay for what he did and quite rightly he is not liable for the rest of the fence since it was in a very poor state.

In addition to threaten that there may be more costs especially without specifying them, is intended to frighten the OP into paying which is another way of saying the letter was threatening.

[mch1991]

Personally, I wouldn't get yourself all worried about this, unfortunately we live in a litigious society in which people will try to get all they can.

 

The solicitors are trying to intimidate you, by making assumptions that you created a huge amount of damage and to mention that you were driving in a negligent manner, they hope you'll roll over and pay them.

 

The good thing is, you have proof that you have been more than reasonable to sort this out, not to mention pictures of any alleged damage that you caused, this will go a long way should they decide to litigate.

 

Accidents happen, but you shouldn't be put into a position by were you're having to pay for unesscairy work and subsidise for a whole new fence. You could of been one of those people who just drove off, which many people would do in this day and age to avoid being put in this situation.

 

The police won't be interested, it's nothing but a waste of their time to deal with such a minor incident, you made a mistake, offered to pay for the damaged caused, and have acted in good faith.

 

Simply write back stating that you will only pay for the damage caused by your actions, also mention that you have evidence of the damage caused, and that you put their client on strict proof of claim, and will vigorously defend any court action.

 

Don't be intimidated.

[SuperVillain]

I am sorry Ganymede but the letter is over the top. He did not do "substantial damage to the fence" indeed it is quite likely that he did not even do substantial damage to the two panels he actually hit. The OP has already offered to pay for what he did and quite rightly he is not liable for the rest of the fence since it was in a very poor state.

In addition to threaten that there may be more costs especially without specifying them, is intended to frighten the OP into paying which is another way of saying the letter was threatening.

 

For the record I totally disagree with this... particularly the last sentence. In the CPR's practice direction for pre-action conduct it suggests that an LBA should "inform the defendant that ignoring the letter before claim may lead to the claimant starting proceedings and may increase the defendant's liability for costs."

 

It's a legitimate warning.

 

Ultimately it is LD's professional obligation to act in the best interest of their Client. If their Client is saying there has been substantial damage then they take them at their word at this initial stage.

 

I do the same every day. If a Client tells me to send an LBA to recover £X I will send an LBA requesting payment of £X with a threat of Court proceedings and additional costs etc. I take them at their word.