Aha mr couch but you make a lot of sense and seem to know what you are talking about, all in all very good advice.I needed you when i made a claim against my house insurance, i phoned them to say my garage roof was leaking and to get someone round to estimate the damage ( thats what i pay insurance for ) so i did mention that i tried to fix where the water was coming in, by spraying with liquid foam, anyway they said it was wear and tear and refused my claim, i had to accept it, but wont renew my cover with that company.
On another instance, i was on international duty, and when i returned my home had been broken into, the police had secured the property and left a note for me to contact them for a crime number. my whole kitchen had been stolen and the central heating system and other valuables total was over 10 grand. The insurance company as per usual tried to duck out of paying, asked for my passport so they could check how long i had been out of the country, and declined the claim as it was over 30 days…
truckyboy:
Aha mr couch but you make a lot of sense and seem to know what you are talking about, all in all very good advice.I needed you when i made a claim against my house insurance, i phoned them to say my garage roof was leaking and to get someone round to estimate the damage ( thats what i pay insurance for ) so i did mention that i tried to fix where the water was coming in, by spraying with liquid foam, anyway they said it was wear and tear and refused my claim, i had to accept it, but wont renew my cover with that company.
On another instance, i was on international duty, and when i returned my home had been broken into, the police had secured the property and left a note for me to contact them for a crime number. my whole kitchen had been stolen and the central heating system and other valuables total was over 10 grand. The insurance company as per usual tried to duck out of paying, asked for my passport so they could check how long i had been out of the country, and declined the claim as it was over 30 days…
I assume the first claim involved a flat roof, claims are frequently refused as flat roofs have a finite life eg typically circa ten or 25 years. Customers tend not to maintain them and then put a claim in when a leak is detected when in reality this is the roof just failing through old age. Insurers are very strict on claims involving flat roofs.
If you had accidental damage cover the subsequent damage the water did may have been covered assuming the Insurer did not have specific exclusions relating to water damage connected to a flat roof.
With regard to the second claim you may found this link provides a root to making a claim in particular paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publicat … ies-34.htm
The second one was many years ago, and i swallowed it, even though i found out who had stolen the kitchen etc. My garage has a corrugated roof and although it is flat, it still had leaks down one side ( cured now ) but i am going to get it re roofed with ply over the top, and then covered with Ashphalt and heated at the seams, thanks for you advice mr crouch.
Winseer:
He’s been charged with “leaving the scene of an accident” though, and some other counts that the police won’t go into, other than that they are “traffic offence related” - whatever that means.
Until he has been to court you can’t progress any further.
If he’s found guilty of leaving the scene then you will be able to follow the advice given to you here in this thread.
If he’s not found guilty, i.e it was not him who left the scene of the accident then you will be looking at an MIB claim.
Lots of special stuff to read through here. Special thanks to Thecouch’s input 
I have not attended an ID parade, so do not know if the registered keeper of the vehicle was the one driving it, indeed the owner could have been the even-more-■■■■■■ passenger who’s got his mate to drive - without insurance would that be?
Their car was more damaged than mine, but as far as I know has NOT been written off unlike mine, since it has a value of 5 figures apparently…
I know where this guy lives from the police, but don’t feel it appropriate to make contact with them.
After the original collision, the driver offered me money to “let it go” and not involve the police…
Alas, I’d already called the police so temptation to possibly do an illegal thing was averted you might say…
On realising that I wasn’t going to play except “by the book”, he suprised me by managing to start his mangled car, and drove off…
When the police turned up, the entire front number plate was on the road - so there was no mistaking the formal identity of the vehicle that hit me.
The other party insurer isn’t so much “refusing to deal with my claim” - they are just placing what I see as unreasonable obstacles in my path…
(1) Expecting me to sign some kind of indemnity form, which from what’s on it, leaves me totally at their mercy, should they then decide to refute everything.
(2) Asking for my “agency’s accounts going back months”, so they can work out “how much has been lost out of pocket” officially. This doesn’t seem reasonable, as the money I’ve lost is what I’ve drawn down as holiday over the two weeks loss of earnings I’ll be paying for. I consider request for anything outside the two week period to be totally irrelevant, hard to get, upsetting to others to get, and bang out of order to even ask me for. 
MY insurer reckons they are correct to ask me for all this “proof”. So much for “bang to rights open and shut case”! 
The amount of effort required to get all this means I might as well get it for a court proceeding, and use it in full.
My insurer says that “I will get my full no claims re-instated once this is all signed off”. Some have told me that this is ■■■■■■■■, and my premiums will stay high for some time to come, even if they are knocked down a bit from the max they seem to be at now (tripled from last year’s premium) If this advice is correct, it would mean my own insurer is lying to me, and I’ll need to add to my claim from the other side the difference over the time it takes to re-gain full no claims multiplied by the amount per year difference in premiums. Already my insurer has said "Because insurance premiums are “up this year”, that “isn’t going to happen”. 
Nothing short of a full re-instatement of a maxed no claims bonus premium will do. Who do I claim this from then?
What do I claim and how do I “prove” all my wasted time, effort, energy, and stress in all this? Would a medical stating “elevated blood pressure” and other deterioations in health signed by my GP do, or do they want me to report to ATOS or some other quack who’ll declare me “nothing doing here” even if I’m missing body parts?
Why have they not made me any kind of quick (albeit low) cash offer with this expectation that I’m going to be keen to quickly sign it all off? Is their money on me being born yesterday - or the early hours of this morning FFS!
I’ll indeed give MIB a call over what seems to be skirting around the law to try and get me off their back. My own insurer is keen for me to sign off as quick as, because me not doing so pushes back THEIR claim for their own expenses already paid out - namely the market value of my vehicle, which I have already received at least.
There should be no requirement to legally pursue the other driver direct, because chances are, he hasn’t a pot to ■■■■ in to cover his own legal bill - and neither do I come to that.
I’ll sue the ones with the money that can afford to pay up. It’s just getting them to see reason, and live up to their legal obligations that’s my problem here I think.
Asking me for difficult to get “Proof” like third party accounts (I work for my agency - I don’t own it!) seems like just another attempt to push me off the pot…
My own insurers have refused to take my out of pocket expenses claim further until I send them the requested accounts. I’ll hand them over to the court officials - if I eventually jump through the hoops of getting it all!
What result do I want?
(1) An offer of cash in full and final settlement as soon as possible. If I have to make them pay, it’ll be in court. There’s no in-between… Once I get a court date, I am beyond being “paid off” for any amount less than the total cost of what they save by not going to court. This means mid 5 figures I reckon. Once in court, they can flaff about as much as they like, since every day wasted from then on pushes THEIR costs up - providing I can get “no win no fee” representation. 
Golden rule when dealing with insurance companies and if you are not at fault is. Tell them you want to be financially in the same position you were ten seconds before the crash. Nothing more nothing less. If they can find a car exactly the same condition for less money then good for them. If this can’t be achieved then it’s court. It has worked three times for me
midlifetrucker:
If they can find a car exactly the same condition for less money then good for them. If this can’t be achieved then it’s court.
Exactly, but sometimes it feels like pushing water uphill. I’m still trying to get liability sorted on this nearly two years down the line: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=89777
Current position is the other insurer’s UK handling agent is offering 50/50, claiming opposite version of events which is complete ■■■■■■■■. Now if any insurer can find a replacement to the year/spec/condition/mileage (never mind locally as per ABI guidelines) I’d be astounded.
Trouble is, you are never put exactly back in the position you were pre-accident. 
I have been every time. You have to be dogged. I have had final offers every time and just said that’s fine see you in court. If any judge can see it from your point of view then I will eat hay with donkeys. They all settled.
In my case though all cases where 100% their fault
idiot i am, wrong thread…shoulda posted in the other insurance thread.
as other drivers are saying,three words,seek legal advice
Winseer:
Lots of special stuff to read through here. Special thanks to Thecouch’s inputI have not attended an ID parade, so do not know if the registered keeper of the vehicle was the one driving it, indeed the owner could have been the even-more-■■■■■■ passenger who’s got his mate to drive - without insurance would that be?
Their car was more damaged than mine, but as far as I know has NOT been written off unlike mine, since it has a value of 5 figures apparently…
I know where this guy lives from the police, but don’t feel it appropriate to make contact with them.
After the original collision, the driver offered me money to “let it go” and not involve the police…
Alas, I’d already called the police so temptation to possibly do an illegal thing was averted you might say…
On realising that I wasn’t going to play except “by the book”, he suprised me by managing to start his mangled car, and drove off…
When the police turned up, the entire front number plate was on the road - so there was no mistaking the formal identity of the vehicle that hit me.The other party insurer isn’t so much “refusing to deal with my claim” - they are just placing what I see as unreasonable obstacles in my path…
(1) Expecting me to sign some kind of indemnity form, which from what’s on it, leaves me totally at their mercy, should they then decide to refute everything.
(2) Asking for my “agency’s accounts going back months”, so they can work out “how much has been lost out of pocket” officially. This doesn’t seem reasonable, as the money I’ve lost is what I’ve drawn down as holiday over the two weeks loss of earnings I’ll be paying for. I consider request for anything outside the two week period to be totally irrelevant, hard to get, upsetting to others to get, and bang out of order to even ask me for.
MY insurer reckons they are correct to ask me for all this “proof”. So much for “bang to rights open and shut case”!
The amount of effort required to get all this means I might as well get it for a court proceeding, and use it in full.My insurer says that “I will get my full no claims re-instated once this is all signed off”. Some have told me that this is ■■■■■■■■, and my premiums will stay high for some time to come, even if they are knocked down a bit from the max they seem to be at now (tripled from last year’s premium) If this advice is correct, it would mean my own insurer is lying to me, and I’ll need to add to my claim from the other side the difference over the time it takes to re-gain full no claims multiplied by the amount per year difference in premiums. Already my insurer has said "Because insurance premiums are “up this year”, that “isn’t going to happen”.
Nothing short of a full re-instatement of a maxed no claims bonus premium will do. Who do I claim this from then?
What do I claim and how do I “prove” all my wasted time, effort, energy, and stress in all this? Would a medical stating “elevated blood pressure” and other deterioations in health signed by my GP do, or do they want me to report to ATOS or some other quack who’ll declare me “nothing doing here” even if I’m missing body parts?
Why have they not made me any kind of quick (albeit low) cash offer with this expectation that I’m going to be keen to quickly sign it all off? Is their money on me being born yesterday - or the early hours of this morning FFS!
I’ll indeed give MIB a call over what seems to be skirting around the law to try and get me off their back. My own insurer is keen for me to sign off as quick as, because me not doing so pushes back THEIR claim for their own expenses already paid out - namely the market value of my vehicle, which I have already received at least.
There should be no requirement to legally pursue the other driver direct, because chances are, he hasn’t a pot to ■■■■ in to cover his own legal bill - and neither do I come to that.
I’ll sue the ones with the money that can afford to pay up. It’s just getting them to see reason, and live up to their legal obligations that’s my problem here I think.
Asking me for difficult to get “Proof” like third party accounts (I work for my agency - I don’t own it!) seems like just another attempt to push me off the pot…
My own insurers have refused to take my out of pocket expenses claim further until I send them the requested accounts. I’ll hand them over to the court officials - if I eventually jump through the hoops of getting it all!What result do I want?
(1) An offer of cash in full and final settlement as soon as possible. If I have to make them pay, it’ll be in court. There’s no in-between… Once I get a court date, I am beyond being “paid off” for any amount less than the total cost of what they save by not going to court. This means mid 5 figures I reckon. Once in court, they can flaff about as much as they like, since every day wasted from then on pushes THEIR costs up - providing I can get “no win no fee” representation.
Thanks to Mike C as I missed that the DD has been dropped and they looking at leaving the scene of an accident which will have caused the Insurers current stance.
The situation is that the RTA under section 151 2b) makes an Insurer liable to claims by persons not insured by the policy eg car thieves, friends who have borrowed your car (And don’t have their own cover) etc. The legislation refers to obtaining judgement against such persons to invoke this part of the RTA to make an Insurer liable. The reality is that the driver just needs to be “identified” eg the police arrest a car thief or the “friend” who borrowed it gives their name to the injured party etc for the Insurer to be liable under RTA section 151 2b)
I assume the third parties Insurer is working on the basis that if the court case fails then the driver of the car will not have been identified meaning they’re not liable under RTA 151 2b) and also not liable to pay the OP’s costs. If this is the case the OP would generally look to the MIB although they will normally pass it back to the issuer or any motor Insurance Certificate current at the time of the accident eg the third parties Insurers to handle and pay the claim as the MIB is really there for the genuinely uninsured / untraced.
Hence my advice to contact the MIB for a chat and some advice still stands, bear in mind your situation will not be unique and they will have dealt with similar situations in the past so will be able to advise you how it will normally pan out and what they will expect of the Insurer.
Bear in mind that the court dealing with the leaving the scene of an accident will be working on the basis of “beyond reasonable doubt” when judging whether or not he’s guilty or innocent. However if you or your solicitor issue proceedings against him the court that deals with that works on the basis of “The balance of probabilities” which in effect is the judge looks at the evidence and weighs that up with how he views the witnesses testimonies. It’s perfectly possible for the criminal court to find him not guilty of leaving the scene but for a county court to find him liable for your costs. Should you obtain such a judgement then his Insurer then comes back into play due to section 151 2b). They may not even let it go to court if they feel they will lose as it means they rack up court costs they can avoid by settling before court.
With regard to your other queries.
-
Without seeing the contents of the letter I can’t comment
-
If you want to claim for loss of earnings it’s up to you to prove your loss, if you were a paye employee this would be done by a letter from your employer detailing lost wages etc, for someone who is self employed this would normally be done via a letter from your accountant detailing your net loss after taking into account previous months and if possible the same period for the previous year. If you used your holiday for the period you did not work you may end up not getting anything as (I assume) this was paid holiday and thus you did not lose out financially
-
Generally if your Insurer recovers their money and / or you recover your money then they will reinstate your no claims bonus and note the accident as being no fault. You will have lost two years no claims bonus plus any you were part way earning for that insurance year. This is what’s reinstated when either of you recover your money.
Many but not all Insurers will apply a relatively small load for a few years even when the monies have been recovered and the accident noted as being non fault.
If they’d made some kind of offer on a “prima facia” basis to save me the trouble of jumping through the hoops - I would have something to say yes or no to.
Instead, it’s “prove 100% to get pound one” which means I’ve got the choice of “all or nothing” with a burden of proof suggesting it might as well be “all” and “in court”. If I have to jump fence one, then I’m not backing down before the last… It goes all the way.
My determination by this point will be to cause as much financial damage to everyone involved - for intensifying my own by not making me a reasonable offer in the early stages!
Essentially, if I am in court to prove anything, the legal bill might go to six figures aggregate. I’m not going to be settling at the last minute for any but a huge amount. Last time someone tried this on me - ie not offer me a quick no quibble settlement - I ended up winning £20k as an out-of-court settlement - the day I got a court date. My side informed me that the max I was likely to be awarded was slightly below this, thus £20k was a reasonable offer to accept. I am for something similar achieved this time around. It’s all about “what price do you put upon” though, because proven financial loss is in this case at this time - mostly already in the hands of both side’s legal teams. Can you see why I’m so ■■■■■■ off that “no offer has been made” whatsoever? If I’m relying upon their own data to back me up, they are just asking me for something no one has got on top - and I’m kicked into the long grass… For example, if the loss of my no claims is claimable - the data as to how much I lose here is entirely within their possession already!
I don’t know how much losing my no claims is going to cost me - but the car insurers on both sides are going to have a much better idea then me - because they come up with the ramped-up premium difference - right?
To put it simply the fact that the insured is driving illegally in whatever way won’t provide an excuse for their insurer to back out of it’s responsibilities if/when their insured causes damage to a third party.Any insurer saying otherwise is probably a matter for the insurance ombudsman and possibly the police being a good place to start looking for advice.While as far as I know I think there is a scheme in place amongst the insurance industyr which covers the issue of damage caused by uninsured drivers.
Carryfast:
To put it simply the fact that the insured is driving illegally in whatever way won’t provide an excuse for their insurer to back out of it’s responsibilities if/when their insured causes damage to a third party.Any insurer saying otherwise is probably a matter for the insurance ombudsman and possibly the police being a good place to start looking for advice.While as far as I know I think there is a scheme in place amongst the insurance industyr which covers the issue of damage caused by uninsured drivers.
There are actually a few reasons why a person and in turn their Insurer would not be liable for what you would assume was a clear cut accident. It entirely depends on the exact reasons for the accident but could include being hit by someone whose had a heart attack, someone whose skidded on black ice or had a tyre blow out.
Incidently you can only complain to the Ombudsman about your own Insurer, you cannot complain to the Ombudsman about someone else’s Insurer
Winseer:
If they’d made some kind of offer on a “prima facia” basis to save me the trouble of jumping through the hoops - I would have something to say yes or no to.Instead, it’s “prove 100% to get pound one” which means I’ve got the choice of “all or nothing” with a burden of proof suggesting it might as well be “all” and “in court”. If I have to jump fence one, then I’m not backing down before the last… It goes all the way.
My determination by this point will be to cause as much financial damage to everyone involved - for intensifying my own by not making me a reasonable offer in the early stages!
Essentially, if I am in court to prove anything, the legal bill might go to six figures aggregate. I’m not going to be settling at the last minute for any but a huge amount. Last time someone tried this on me - ie not offer me a quick no quibble settlement - I ended up winning £20k as an out-of-court settlement - the day I got a court date. My side informed me that the max I was likely to be awarded was slightly below this, thus £20k was a reasonable offer to accept. I am for something similar achieved this time around. It’s all about “what price do you put upon” though, because proven financial loss is in this case at this time - mostly already in the hands of both side’s legal teams. Can you see why I’m so ■■■■■■ off that “no offer has been made” whatsoever? If I’m relying upon their own data to back me up, they are just asking me for something no one has got on top - and I’m kicked into the long grass… For example, if the loss of my no claims is claimable - the data as to how much I lose here is entirely within their possession already!
I don’t know how much losing my no claims is going to cost me - but the car insurers on both sides are going to have a much better idea then me - because they come up with the ramped-up premium difference - right?
In court it’s up to you to prove your losses not for the other side to do so, I explained in a previous post how you would generally prove your loss of earnings which if you took the entire time off as paid holiday may well be nil although a court may well pay you a smallish amount for the loss of the holiday. If at the time you were off you were in pain that would be a different head of claim.
Do you have a solicitor and if so what advice have they given you?
With regard to running up huge legal costs to punish the Insurers, the costs for minor injuries and losses are capped to a relatively low amount which was fairly recently lowed which is why most ambulance chasers now want circa 20% of your compensation.
By the sounds of it they’re not making an offer at the moment because they’re awaiting on the result of the court case to see if they’re liable under the RTA. In such cases the police normally go out of their way to secure a result as they don’t take lightly to drunk drivers and especially ones who play the system by doing a runner.
I am losing far more in increased premiums that I have through loss of earnings.
We’re talking about 2 weeks holiday pay compared to my premium increase (about £500pa) multiplied by the number of years now I’d be expected to pay through the nose thus…
Because MY insurer has all the data regarding the exact amount my premiums are likely to remain high for, and MY insurer has the power to drop them back to previous levels (which they’ve already said “isn’t going to happen”) then how on earth do I claim a payout based on what I am losing here? I’m being asked to supply proofs, but it occurs to me - they already have everything they need?
THe loss of earnings can probably be thrust through by saying “Look bud, I’ll accept 2 weeks holiday at minimum wage - how’s that? - Offer any lower, and you’re effectively accusing my employer of paying below minimum wage - so just pay the man and I’ll go away quickly ok?”
The loss of insurance excess is already documented @ £125. This isn’t being disputed of course, but on it’s own obviously isn’t going to do at all.
Then there’s the phone calls, the correspondance, the stress, the bull, the upset, and the constant fieiding off of “trying it on” legal tricks to get me to ditch my claim outright… Dunno what price I’m supposed to put on that, or indeed even if I’m able to! 
If a police result is awaited, then I don’t know at present how long I’d have to wait for this to know how to play the next stage… I already understand there’s no DD charge, but I don’t know what else is involved. My insurer says it’s all about “Indemnity” at present, which leaves me in a dark cellar with no torch. 
Winseer:
I am losing far more in increased premiums that I have through loss of earnings.We’re talking about 2 weeks holiday pay compared to my premium increase (about £500pa) multiplied by the number of years now I’d be expected to pay through the nose thus…
Because MY insurer has all the data regarding the exact amount my premiums are likely to remain high for, and MY insurer has the power to drop them back to previous levels (which they’ve already said “isn’t going to happen”) then how on earth do I claim a payout based on what I am losing here? I’m being asked to supply proofs, but it occurs to me - they already have everything they need?
THe loss of earnings can probably be thrust through by saying “Look bud, I’ll accept 2 weeks holiday at minimum wage - how’s that? - Offer any lower, and you’re effectively accusing my employer of paying below minimum wage - so just pay the man and I’ll go away quickly ok?”
The loss of insurance excess is already documented @ £125. This isn’t being disputed of course, but on it’s own obviously isn’t going to do at all.
Then there’s the phone calls, the correspondance, the stress, the bull, the upset, and the constant fieiding off of “trying it on” legal tricks to get me to ditch my claim outright… Dunno what price I’m supposed to put on that, or indeed even if I’m able to!
If you were took the time off as paid holiday then you have not suffered a financial loss as the time off was paid so they cannot be expected to pay you 2 weeks wages at minimum wage as you have already been paid for the time off. If you took the time off as unpaid holiday / leave then you can of course claim for the loss of earnings subject to you proving what you have lost.
The extra your currently paying due to your no claims bonus being reduced and being loaded for a fault claim is refunded by your own Insurer when either you or they recover losses from the other party thus proving they were at fault. This may leave a smallish loading of circa 10% for being involved in a non fault accident (Some Insurers would not load), some people report that they’ve been successful in recovering this from the other party although I’ve never seen it done but it could be possible as county courts judges can make their own decisions.
You can claim for costs for phone calls for the actual costs you’ve experienced and also for the time you’ve spent, I cannot remember the exact amount courts allow but from memory it’s circa £12 for each hour you’ve spent directly on the matter
Winseer sorry for your troubles but I was in a similar situation earlier in the year. My missus was hit by another car and the driver drove off without giving any details. She managed to get his registration and then informed the Police. Now here’s the rub - My insurance paid for the damage and the other drivers insurance refused to pay out as they claimed that we did not know who was driving at the time.
We then discovered that the Police were not going to take any action against the other driver and refused at the Police station to advise who the driver was. So what we did was send the Police a freedom of information request and believe it or not they supplied the name and address of the driver who caused the accident. My insurers then contacted his and they paid out after being threatened with Litigation. If it helps heres a copy of the letter we sent
Dear Sirs
My partner ■■■ xxxx was involved in a road traffic accident 11/03/2014 at around 17:10 on Oxford Road in xxxxxx whilst driving my vehicle .
My vehicle registration number is xxxx ■■■, the other vehicle involved was registration number xxxx ■■■. The driver left the scene of the accident without giving any details even though my partner asked him for them. He simply said that he was uninsured and promptly left the scene leaving ■■■ xxxx standing in the middle of the road. In fact he very nearly ran her over. She immediately went to xxxxx Police Station and reported the incident. She was advised that the vehicle xxxx ■■■ was insured and that they would make further inquiries.
The insurers of the other vehicle xxxx ■■■ are refusing to handle my claim and I now find myself in the situation where I need to enter into litigation to recover the costs of the repairs to my car. The driver of the other vehicle did not disclose his name a the scene of the accident, however I believe that the Police investigation has identified the identity of the driver.
I now require the name and address of the driver so that I may take legal action to recover my costs. I believe that I am entitled to discloser of the drivers personal information under section 35(2) of the Data protection Act 1988. For ease of reference the wording is as follows
35 Disclosures required by law or made in connection with legal proceedings etc.
(1)Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is required by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court.
(2)Personal data are exempt from the non-disclosure provisions where the disclosure is necessary–
(a)for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings), or
(b)for the purpose of obtaining legal advice, or is otherwise necessary for the purposes of establishing, exercising or defending legal rights
If you could supply me this information by email that would be preferable so that I can comense with Litigation against this driver
They didn’t email me the info they sent a letter - anyway I help this helps
I know who the registered keeper of the vehicle is by name and addresss.
I can identify the “driver” who spoke to me, then drove away when I insisted upon involving the police at the scene.
I have not been told by the police if this person is the same person as the registered keeper.
My holiday has been “wasted” on taking it for two weeks in may to sit on my arse at home, instead of the last two weeks in August. .Good job I hadn’t booked anything away I suppose, but I’m clearly not going to achieve a profitable outcome here. The submission of “months of back accounts of my agency” is therefore irrelevant.
This 10% loading might have been what my insurer said when I enquired about my premium going back to “what it was”. “What it was plus 10%” fits their remark of “That isn’t going to happen” after all. It’s still a ongoing loss regardless of the 100% my way result inthe meantime that might occur though.
Meanwhile, I have to pay through the nose…
£12 for my time seems reasonable, but who decides how much of my time has qualified for this amount to be claimed?
Even if I submitted 20 hours a week @ £12ph since the accident - I would imagine they’ll try and suggest it was 10 minutes per week or something, with no payments for amounts per week of less than an hour" or whatever other black they can call white can be said to try and get out of paying anything as ever…
In all of this, because there’s not a hard and fast formula for calulating all these very-difficult-to-prove-on-paper amounts - I’m happier to entertain an “offer” than taking years getting the legal system to work it all out for me, with the result that I might end up waiting to get a payout so long - that it’ll end up covering my funeral expenses in the meantime!
I suppose I would really like someone to just make a reasonable offer - even by their own standards - for all my interests in this affair. I want it to be over for sure, but why does anything involving me getting a payout have to have conditions attached to it like the Treaty of Versailles FFS?
It’s only the fact that they keep taking the ■■■■ out of me - both sides - that hardens my resolve to continue, and “cost them as much as possible regardless of the outcome”.
I approached a different solicitor (specialising in motor law) yesterday with regard to them taking over my case… Once I told them I had little or no case for personal injury, - I was shown the door… So much for “interested in motor law” rather than “compensation culture for whiplash” or whatever.
I don’t think I’m going to find it easy getting third-party representation to take it out of the hands of those supposedly acting for me under my “legal cover”… Seems like they are working for (1) themselves (2) for the insurance industry (3) the other side, and way way down the list… (4) myself in that order!