Driver denied having an accident

[Slimm]

You are under no obligation to use your own insurance. If you don't want to then you can just get the repairs done yourself, taking due care (suggest 3 quotes to be on safe side) and keeping all receipts. Send them (copies) to the TPI (Third party insurers) with a brief but specific explanation from your wife, along with the images. Give them a couple of warnings then litigate if you haven't had a useful response in say, 2 months at the most.

 

 

Have you checked the driver is definitely the insured party?

[Slimm]

I seriously doubt the police will be able or willing to assist, they will not typically attend accidents unless the road is blocked or someone need an ambulance.

 

 

A small claim is one of the options on the table, the others being giving up or going with one of the insurers. You'll issue against the other driver and then his insurers will either settle before the trial or arrange for him to be represented.

 

 

Before that though you want to be sure to give his insurers the chance to deal. They'll be reluctant at first no doubt and every firm is different, but if he simply ignores them, which sounds likely here, they'll eventually consider settling based on your version of events, especially if the damage is clear - you said you had a photo of his car, if it shows damage that's likely to be the point that most insurers lose faith in their clients version of events.

 

At a rough guess, send an initial letter with your story, details of what you're claiming and ask for a response within 14 days. Chase 14 days later, then send a legal threat 14 days after that - if they still don't co-operate 14 days after the legal threat then you'll need to consider your options. Send copies of photo's/receipts, keep the originals and keep a copy of every letter you send.

Edited March 2, 2015 by Slimm
Typo

[Slimm]

No reason to keep everything in writing, his insurers aren't bond villains. If they want to co-operate (and get a feel for the claimant) then great.

 

 

Naturally from the beginning they'll be more inclined to believe their own client, but a detailed, genuine account and the photographs are likely to sway them. That having been said there are a couple of firms who will just ignore anything short of a summons in the hopes it just goes away without them spending any time or money on it.

 

 

The TP is unlikely to admit he lied (although it does happen) but it is quite likely he'll just cease communicating with his insurers, they'll get fed up and settle the claim.

[Slimm]

Sounds like they're taking you seriously which is good. At a guess they'll give him a fortnight or so to explain the discrepancies before they get fed up and consider sending someone to take his statement face to face, or examine his car.

 

 

If you can spare the time it's well worth making sure you keep on top of them, call every 48hrs or so and ask what progress has been made since the last time you rang. Often the squeaky wheel does indeed get the grease.

 

 

Like Bazooka says, now would be a good time to get 2 or 3 quotes.

[Slimm]

Insurance is based on risk. Say your repairs cost £1000, they'd rather pay that than £1000 repairs + £250 court costs. Of course, they'll not do that until they're fed up with their client and satisfied that he's a liar, as opposed to merely being on holiday in Malta.

 

 

Letters pretty reasonable, you can't sue without having incurred a loss so as Bazooka says get at least quotes first. I'd avoid the use of the phrase 'proving without doubt' as there can almost always be a slight degree of doubt. Civil cases are 'on the balance of probability'. I would end that paragraph with something like 'I am confident a court will find your clients denial of involvement to be lacking in credibility.'

 

 

I'd drop the bit about them concluding their investigations and admitting liability, that's not really a realistic timescale. I'd add the '14 day' limit into expecting a positive response and invite them to deal with your claim on a 'strictly without prejudice to liability' basis. This means they still pay, but gives them some wiggle room if, for example, your son puts in a claim for personal injury in 9 years time.

 

 

If you haven't already done so offer them the chance to send an engineer to inspect your vehicle. Naturally this will be at their own expense and at an agreed place/time.

[Slimm]

I complete disagree, an admission of liability means you accept responsibility for an an accident. On the other hand dealing WP aka 'without prejudice' aka 'strictly without prejudice to liability' means you are willing to deal with the immediate consequences of an accident, but without taking ownership of any future risks. It's a extremely common insurer position when faced with a client who may be innocent but is not co-operating.

 

 

For example if a vehicle is damaged and credit hire is building up daily an insurers will sometimes pay for repairs 'without prejudice' just to stop the hire building up, even if they think in the long run they can get a 50:50 liability split.

[Slimm]

In insurance claims dealing WP just means 'We're going to deal with this (repairs in this case), but no promises about anything else in the future'. Whereas an open admission of liability means 'Yep, we accept total responsibility for anything that can be traced to the accident now and in the future'. It's common for situations where a client doesn't or cannot respond for some reason, or where fighting a minor claim will cost more than it's likely to save.

 

 

In relation to distress that's not really something you'll be compensated for I'm afraid. Scottish Law allows a claim for inconvenience but the awards are pretty trivial. In England & Wales a claim needs to be for something more substantive than just feeling bad after an accident - for example if a car was coming head on and you were in genuine fear of your life then suffered PTSD, that would qualify. Frankly it sounds like most of the distress had little to do with the accident and more to do with the other driver being unpleasant. You did however state your wife was in physical pain, that and any loss of income suffered can be claimed for - either directly from the insurers or via solicitors if you really feel the need.