Motor Insurance Bureau v Tumble

[tumble]

You know if it goes in my favour I believe the ramifications could be advantageous to the insurance industry and the public who get absolutely rinsed by these greedy sharks. If the financial rewards were not so attractive it could be stamped out or reduced considerably. During my investigations it would appear that car hire is replacing whip lash as the option to creme the egg. I spoke to an Audi repairer who told me of a neighbour who had a wing mirror clipped . He was in a hire car for nearly two weeks !! It is common knowledge amongst dealerships apparently , they pass the details over and jump right on it .

[unclebulgaria67]

If I were putting in a defence, I would forget about liability for the accident. I would say something like

 

1) When I drove my car on the day of the accident I believed I had Insurance cover, after receiving notice of automatic renewal from my Insurers. Unfortunately the Insurers failed to process the automatic renewal of the policy.

 

2) MIB promised by phone that they would undertake the following action. A,,,,,,,,,. B............ C........ . Mr A Bloggs from MIB has since admitted that they failed to take the actions promised.

 

3) I do not believe that MIB fully investigated the claim from the third party to mitigate the costs they would be seeking from me. There has not been any assessent as to whether the car hire for 11 days was needed for minor panel repairs and also the hire car costs per day have not been assessed as to whether they were reasonable market prices. Having checked with X company and Y company it would seem that the hire charge would be around £xx per day. ( check with say AVIS and Hertz as to what they would charge for an Audi per day)

 

Concentrate on what MIB failed to do which was to mitigate the value of the claim they would be seeking from you. I fear that if you start arguing about liability that you may then fail with the mitigation side. If there is any hearing, it won't last long and I don't think a Judge will want to hear about liability.

[tumble]

Thankyou that's really useful .

[tumble]

working on putting somewhere in the defence reference to contributory negligence. I have photographs of the position of the car. Just another area MIB failed to respond on.

[unclebulgaria67]

working on putting somewhere in the defence reference to contributory negligence. I have photographs of the position of the car. Just another area MIB failed to respond on.

 

You still have a bee in your bonnet about liability. This will not go down well with a Judge. What you are saying will be looked at with amusement. e.g I would not have crashed into the car, had it not been parked where it was.

 

You need to start viewing this, as if this event involved someone else and you were hearing their story. If they told you that they reversed into a parked car and somehow this parked car was partly responsible for an accident, what would you think about this ?

 

If you want to mention it ( against advice) then you could say that MIB promised to look into contributory negligence of the third party who had parked in a hazardous fashion, dangeous to other road users and the MIB failed to honour their promise.

[tumble]

You still have a bee in your bonnet about liability. This will not go down well with a Judge. What you are saying will be looked at with amusement. e.g I would not have crashed into the car, had it not been parked where it was.

 

You need to start viewing this, as if this event involved someone else and you were hearing their story. If they told you that they reversed into a parked car and somehow this parked car was partly responsible for an accident, what would you think about this ?

 

If you want to mention it ( against advice) then you could say that MIB promised to look into contributory negligence of the third party who had parked in a hazardous fashion, dangeous to other road users and the MIB failed to honour their promise.

 

That is exactly what I'm saying in my defence . Not saying I'm not liable just stating that this was an aspect to be looked into that wasn't . I was denied any form of defence . Ignored

more to the point .

[Mwynci]

That is exactly what I'm saying in my defence . Not saying I'm not liable just stating that this was an aspect to be looked into that wasn't . I was denied any form of defence . Ignored

more to the point .

 

You were left holding the smoking gun, to look into the matter of liability on such a clear cut case is not feasable, the mib have duty of care to all who pay into the fund, not argue the pointless. Your insurer would do exactly the same, and be right in doing so. Similarly the same applies to the costs, why spend £x arguing £y to end up paying the same amount. You have to realise none of this is new, the credit hire game has been played for a long time, and accident exchange have the devil on their side.

Your point to put forward is that had the mib allowed you to pay this yourself, you would have only paid £x amount. To do that you need evidence and where possible to say why 11 days was not a reasonable hire period, and why it is blatantly obvious and should never have been payed in the first place. In the absence of this you need to appeal to the courts good nature, get the cost reduced.

You never know though.....

[tumble]

I have recievied notice that my amended defence has been accepted and proposed allocation to the small claims track. Is this something i need to respond to? or is it just for the claimant.

 

Important notice

If you do not comply with this notice the court will make such order as appears to be appropriate. This could include striking out the claim or entering judgement.

 

TAKE NOTICE THAT

 

1. This is now a defended claim

A copy of the defence has already been sent to you by the defendent

2. It appears that the case is suitable for allocation to the small claims track

If you believe that this track is not the appropriate track for the claim you must complete box C1 on the small claims directions questionaire ( form N180) and explain why.

3. You must by 17 November 2014 complete the small claims directions questionnaire (form N180) and file it with the court office

 

and serve on all other parties.

[unclebulgaria67]

So you now need to complete the N180 questiionnaire and also send a copy to the claimant.

 

Small claims cases are for those related to £5k or less and will only take an hour or so to hear. Probably a sign that the court have looked at what you have said and don't think you have a case, but you might be able to get the amount reduced, if you can point to MIB not looking at the third parties costs properly.

[tumble]

Well it feels like my old friend Martin was looking down on me again. Case withdrawn , no costs.

Rip Martin

[tumble]

Well it feels like my old friend Martin was looking down on me again. Case withdrawn , no costs.

Rip Martin

[unclebulgaria67]

Well it feels like my old friend Martin was looking down on me again. Case withdrawn , no costs.

Rip Martin

 

Well done. The MIB obviously realised that in view of their failures it would be unfair to proceed.

[unclebulgaria67]

Tumble PM'd me saying MIB have confirmed withdrawal.

 

Anything further to add ?

[tumble]

Tumble PM'd me saying MIB have confirmed withdrawal.

 

Anything further to add ?

 

Apologies I haven't been on site for a while and didn't realise this had already been updated . I am working on another case , just trying to navigate my way around - looking for an old case of mine that I need for reference . I will pm