20th March 2020
The worldwide spread of the Coronavirus has resulted in emergency measures and Government guidance about restricting physical contact with other…
Mr D was a front seat passenger in a taxi on his way to pick up his child from school. Mr D was travelling along Wood Lane in Dagenham when he saw that an oncoming vehicle had veered out of his lane and was heading towards the taxi that he was travelling in. To avoid the collision Mr D’s taxi driver swerved away from the oncoming vehicle but he did not manage to avoid it and the car hit the taxi in the rear side which resulted in the taxi spinning 180 degrees, mounting the pavement and then spinning back onto the road.
The rear axle of the taxi snapped and both rear wheels were strewn across the road. Mr D stated that a passing ambulance stopped at the scene of the car accident. Mr D’s driver was stuck in the vehicle because his door was totally smashed. Mr D also stated that an off duty police officer saw the car accident and he stopped at the scene. The third party insurers advised that the accident had been reported. They were asked on their stance on liability and they advised that they were investigating so they couldn’t comment. The file was accepted by Clearwater Solicitors and the file was allocated to Mr Ahmed to purse a car accident claim. The claim was submitted onto the portal.
The third party did not respond to the claim on the portal within the allocated time. The file was transferred to Mr Yaqub head of Clearwater Solicitors litigation team. The third party wrote to Mr Yaqub and they alleged that Mr D’s claim was fraudulent and that he wasn’t in the taxi at the time of the road traffic accident. Mr D stated that he was in the taxi and that he had a record from the paramedics that attended the scene. He also said that a police officer talked to him in the back of the ambulance.
The third party confirmed again that they disputed Mr D’s legitimacy. They asked him to confirm the accident details and also questions about why he ordered the taxi in the first place.The third party wrote again and stated that liability was still in dispute because the defendant said that the taxi driver veered into the oncoming lane whilst trying to overtake a bus, therefore causing the collision.
Instructions were sent to counsel. The third party insurers responded again and stated that they still denied liability and if Mr D wanted to claim for passenger compensation claim he should do this through the taxi drivers insurance company. Proceedings were issued to court.
– The third party insurance received the letters to state that proceedings had been issued and they also received the police report which backed up Mr D’s version of events. They said that they would contact the taxi drivers insurance to try and share payment for Mr D’s claim on a without prejudice basis.
– The hearing date at court was confirmed. The third party insurers passed their file to their personal injury solicitors who advised they were not in a position to make any offers before the disposal hearing date because they wanted the taxi drivers insurance to deal with the claim.
The disposal hearing went ahead and the judge ordered the third party insurers to pay Mr D £2,604.00 for his personal injury compensation claim.
Clearwater Solicitors are experienced in handling car accident claims where there the Defendant’s claim the claimant’s claim is fraudulent. If you think you have a case or require further information contact Clearwater on 08000 430 430 or fill in the online call back request.