Whiplash - Court proceedings involving a minor

[Kaykay]

I need some understanding and advice on this scenario.

 

Case in brief

 

Car A hit Car B from the back when Car B suddenly stopped apparently in response to Car C.

 

Car B was to state later that his car shunted forward to hit Car C.

 

However during the incidence both Car A and Car B were sandwiched together upon observation.

 

But drivers of Car B and Car C were witnesses to each other in their claims for Whiplash.

 

The Driver to Car C did not show any dent on day of incidence

but stated at the premises of the incidence that the impact to Car B led him to have a shock which affected his neck

and as a result he would be seeking compensation for Whiplash as he would visit the hospital.

 

Car C had a little child of about 5 years seated in the front passenger seat

 

After the impact and before the Police came to the scene the little child was transferred to the back seat.

 

There is a court proceedings against Driver of Car A

in which it appeared that the insurance firms of Driver A and Driver C agreed to settlement on the little child.

 

However, instead of the court proceedings to have been served on the Insurance firm to Car A

it was served to the Driver of Car A who never knew about the settlement.

 

The Issue

 

Firstly,

Driver of Car A was never informed until the proceedings were served upon her as the defendant.

She feels that the claim was false and extremely concerned as to the stigma of such false claim in a court record under her name

rather than under the Insurance Company's name.

 

Secondly

Car C which had no physical dent, produced a medical expert report that there was moderate impact to Car C

and affected the little girl thus the claim of whiplash.

 

The engineering report of Car C demonstrated a slight mark/dent which was never noticed on day of incidence.

[Note that there was no single scratch to the front of Car B which was purportedly shunt forward to hit Car C at the back].

 

Question

 

Even if there is such a slight scratch or dent

(which the driver of Car A denied ever seeing such and Car C never said such on the day)

can such slight scratch or dent be upgraded to moderate impact as was reported in the medical expert report?

 

What are the probable advice in this circumstance for Driver of Car A who is feeling extremely unhappy

that the claim was a false claim and the stigma as to the court proceedings with knowledge that a court record stays forever?

[dx100uk]

did you take or anyone any photos - a must in every crash or incident.

have you checked for any CCTV footage from streets or houses or businesses

[Kaykay]

did you take or anyone any photos - a must in every crash or incident.

have you checked for any CCTV footage from streets or houses or businesses

There were pictures taken by the parties but Car A driver took a few pictures before the phone battery went dead. The area of the incidence has no business and no CCTV camera.

 

She is more interested on how to contest the court proceedings in view of the stigma that her name would be in a court record for what she believes to be a false claim which her insurance appeared to have accepted liability to Car C insurance.

[reallymadwoman]

As an ex senior claims handler, I would guess that the proceedings have been issued because there is some dispute as to the extent of the injury to the child and/or as the claim involves a minor, the court may need to approve the settlement.

 

There will be no stigma attached to the driver, such things are merely part of the process and the claim will be settled long before it actually gets to a hearing. Proceedings have to be issued against the driver even when (as is probably the case) the claim is being dealt with between the insurers. The claim is unlikely to be of any great value and therefore it simply isn't worthwhile for the insurers to contest it as that would just end up costing more in the long run. It's wrong of course that people can get away with this, if it isn't a genuine claim, but that's the way the system works unfortunately.

 

About the only thing she can do is write to the insurers dealing with it pointing out the extremely minor nature of the incident, but it won't make a blind bit of difference in the long run.

[unclebulgaria67]

There were pictures taken by the parties but Car A driver took a few pictures before the phone battery went dead. The area of the incidence has no business and no CCTV camera.

 

She is more interested on how to contest the court proceedings in view of the stigma that her name would be in a court record for what she believes to be a false claim which her insurance appeared to have accepted liability to Car C insurance.

 

Driver of car A lets their Insurance company handle the claim and they don't get involved, unless instructed by their Insurance company or their legal dept.

 

This is up to the Insurance companies to argue about, so let them. Just make sure the Insurers are dealing with it, with full regard to the court timescales.

 

The court claim will be taken over by the Insurers, so it could not be a CCJ recorded against the policyholder, unless the Insurers fail to act.

 

Because part of the claim relates to a minor, courts do get involved these days. A relative of mine had PI claims to several children and it did go to court. There was no deal done between the Insurers outside of court.

[Kaykay]

Thank you for your responses.

 

She was served the court proceedings.

 

She told me she is extremely worried that a false record about her if not contested would be kept for ever in her name. She said in future no one would realise that it was a false claim in the event she inadvertently in the rare event she had a real fault. She said she is using the way the judicial system works in the UK to predict the future in the sense that lawyers would go back to find out what happened in the past in the form of any mitigation. This is the reason she said that since the claim was false it was improper for it to be settled without her knowledge and more so for the expert medical report to state moderate impact when there was no such impact.

[reallymadwoman]

It is extremely unlikely that there will be any permanent record of the court proceedings other than the basic fact that a claim was made. The only proceedings that get any sort of permanent records are usually ones from the higher courts involving complicated points of law or huge amounts of money. No one could in the future go back and find out what happened in this particular claim.

It will of course stay on her insurance record, but then there was already a 'fault' claim and the fact that the courts are involved won't make that in some way worse, just more expensive.

[JoeyJoeC]

This is why I have a dash cam.

[Ganymede]

This is why I have a dash cam.

Wouldn't really help as there is no disputing she hit the first car and there was minor damage to the second car.

 

As has already been stated, issuing the Court claim against the individual is part of the process for claims involving a minor. There is nothing she can do to dispute or prevent this claim settling.

 

There will be no record kept of this claim and it won't increase her premium any more as she already has fault accident recorded. Just ignore it and move on with her life (unless her insurers legal team request otherwise).

[Kaykay]

I have been advised that this is the evidence upon which the medical report declared to be a moderate accident and therefore the compensation of the Whiplash. Again note that according to the engineering report there was no single scratch of any kind to the front of Car B that purportedly shunted forward to cause the said evidence reported.

[letsmakeamark]

No what has happenned is that the injured parties have examined by a doctor and a report propared. the report has then been ok'd by the claimant and the legal people acting on their behalf have made a offer to settle. However the third party insurance has not respoded in the set time so the summons has been issued against the relevant drivers. Nothing to worry about. Pass the summons onto your insurance company who will deal with it.

[Kaykay]

Have you seen the evidence? Would that be considered moderate impact in insurance term or in medical expert term? Is this not a false claim that would be passed on to motorists in their renewals? The pleadings in the court proceedings I have seen stated moderate impact.

[letsmakeamark]

That is what insurance is for. If there is fraud then that will be sorted in court. However you may be prejudicing any claim or defence if the other party get hold of what you are posting here.

[Kaykay]

Wouldn't really help as there is no disputing she hit the first car and there was minor damage to the second car.

 

As has already been stated, issuing the Court claim against the individual is part of the process for claims involving a minor. There is nothing she can do to dispute or prevent this claim settling.

 

There will be no record kept of this claim and it won't increase her premium any more as she already has fault accident recorded. Just ignore it and move on with her life (unless her insurers legal team request otherwise).

She disputed the involvement of the second car (Car C).

 

You were correct that there was nothing she can do to dispute or prevent the claim settling as she made me to know this afternoon. She attended the Court after she had validly contested the claim in her Acknowledgement of Service.

 

She said that the Claimant was represented by a Barrister and she represented herself. She said she spoke to the court for directions for a full trial because it was a false claim. The Barrister submitted to the court that she should be disregarded as the issue does not involved her but her insurance firm. She said she responded back to the court that the Insurance firm were not physically present at the scene and that it was wrong for Car C to make a claim when they were not involved. That a trial will establish the facts that Car C was never involved.

 

She said that the judge commented that in his twenty years he has never seen a Defendant that was affected personally contested a claim. That he would disregard her objection to the claim and approve the settlement.

 

She said she requested for permission to appeal and the judge did not grant her permission but at the same time the judge refused to state whether he refused her permission to appeal.

 

She told me that she is really disturbed that a car that was never involved in an accident despite her objection and evidence to the court she was disregarded. She told me that she will be appealing the decision.

 

This is really interesting for me that a court would approve money when there was objection from the principal defendant that the settlement must not be allowed because it was a false claim.

 

If as she put it to me is correct then I feel that the decision of the court appeared to be abetting crime or fraud. I would welcome other viewpoints on this.

[Conniff]

She disputed the involvement of the second car (Car C).

 

 

If car c wasn't involved, why did she suddenly hit the brakes!

[Kaykay]

If car c wasn't involved, why did she suddenly hit the brakes!

 

She was the driver of Car A. Car A hit Car B when Car B suddenly stopped. She disputed Car C claim of Whiplash as she stated that Car B never shunted to hit Car C. She said that Car C claimed a moderate impact whereas she said there was no single scratch on the front of Car B that purportedly gave the moderate impact on Car C. So she insisted to me that there was no involvement of Car C in the sense of being impacted and that the claim of Car C was utterly false.

[Conniff]

Ok, I understand now, she is claiming no impact with car c not that car didn't brake and force her to brake.

 

 

So how can they be witness to each other ?

 

 

But drivers of Car B and Car C were witnesses to each other in their claims for Whiplash.

Edited January 12, 2015 by Conniff

[Kaykay]

Ok, I understand now, she is claiming no impact with car c not that car didn't brake and force her to brake.

Yes. Car C was the car in the very front and directly in front of Car B. Car B which is directly in front of Car A is positioned in between Car C and Car A.

 

The excerpts of the medical expert report she sent to me last December:

"[Minor's name] vehicle suffered a rear impact by a car. She was jolted forwards before recoiling back into the seat. The injured party's representative estimated the impact of the colliding vehicle as moderate.

 

Pain and stiffness to the neck referred into both shoulders with associated headaches. This injury/symptom presented itself immediately. The severity of this injury/symptom was described as severe."

[Conniff]

Described as 'severe' by who ?

[Kaykay]

Described as 'severe' by who ?

The child's representative.

 

The medical expert stated the following under a section entitled Methodology:

The report is produced for Court purposes and prepared on the basis of information provided by the client, my examination, any relevant documentation at the time of the examination (including any special instructions) and my own professional medical opinion.

[Conniff]

I wonder how much his share is of this lot.

[Kaykay]

If what Driver A said happened exactly and her determination to appeal, I was wondering if there is any statutory right for her to do so and if so what are the likely permutations?

[reallymadwoman]

If she insists on appealing, I would guess the most likely outcome for her will be a huge costs bill. Costs for appeals are expensive and the insurance company won't pay them.

[Ganymede]

I wonder how much his share is of this lot.

The medical expert is independent of any party and addresses their report to the Court.

 

The expert's fee is not linked to how much compensation is awarded. They are paid whether the Claimant wins or loses.

[Ganymede]

She disputed the involvement of the second car (Car C).

 

You were correct that there was nothing she can do to dispute or prevent the claim settling as she made me to know this afternoon. She attended the Court after she had validly contested the claim in her Acknowledgement of Service.

 

She said that the Claimant was represented by a Barrister and she represented herself. She said she spoke to the court for directions for a full trial because it was a false claim. The Barrister submitted to the court that she should be disregarded as the issue does not involved her but her insurance firm. She said she responded back to the court that the Insurance firm were not physically present at the scene and that it was wrong for Car C to make a claim when they were not involved. That a trial will establish the facts that Car C was never involved.

 

She said that the judge commented that in his twenty years he has never seen a Defendant that was affected personally contested a claim. That he would disregard her objection to the claim and approve the settlement.

 

She said she requested for permission to appeal and the judge did not grant her permission but at the same time the judge refused to state whether he refused her permission to appeal.

 

She told me that she is really disturbed that a car that was never involved in an accident despite her objection and evidence to the court she was disregarded. She told me that she will be appealing the decision.

 

This is really interesting for me that a court would approve money when there was objection from the principal defendant that the settlement must not be allowed because it was a false claim.

 

If as she put it to me is correct then I feel that the decision of the court appeared to be abetting crime or fraud. I would welcome other viewpoints on this.

 

I'd tell your friend to drop it and move on with her life and not waste any more time or money.

 

You can only appear if the Judge has erred in law. This was a finding of fact which you can't appeal.

 

Let's have a look a the evidence here, there's an engineers report confirming an impact, a medical report confirming an injury and witness statements from two other people confirming there was a second impact.

 

Even if she could appeal it's complicated and it'll cost thousands of pounds. Her insurance won't cover her for the appeal considering they've already admitted liability and settled the child's claim.