20th March 2020
The worldwide spread of the Coronavirus has resulted in emergency measures and Government guidance about restricting physical contact with other…
Mr C stopped at the traffic lights where the signal was red, the defendant failed to observe that our client’s vehicle had stopped and as a result collided into the rear of Mr C’s car. As a consequence Mr C suffered soft tissue injuries to his lower back, neck and shoulders.Upon research for specialist personal injury solicitorsin London and word of mouth from previous clients, about the quality of service and care provided to our clients, Mr C contacted Clearwater Solicitors putting his full confidence in our personal injury specialists to peruse a claim for car accident compensation.
Initially after the accident Mr C claimed compensation for vehicle damage which the third party insurers paid out. The matter was straightforward and the insurers had no issues.However two and a half years later Mr C decided to claim compensation for the injuries he suffered as a result of the accident. Mr C was well within his rights to do so, as the limitation period to bring a claim for personal injury compensation is three years from the date of the accident or knowledge.The third party insurers refused to pay Mr C compensation because they were claiming that: there was no record of the accident and that we had mistaken the identity of the Defendant.
Sarah Manders, one of our experienced and specialist personal injury solicitors discussed the case at length with the Claimant who assured Sarah he had the correct details.
– Sarah had full confidence in our client and even obtain a copy of a cheque paid by the Defendant’s insurers to our client’s insurers for his vehicle damage.
– Unfortunately the Defendant still claimed we had a case of mistaken identity. Therefore, Sarah recommended to the client we issue Court proceedings in the hope the Defendant would see sense. Such hope was short lived as the Defendant instructed solicitors who parroted the Defendant’s insurers belief we had the wrong Defendant.
– Through Sarah’s expert knowledge of civil procedure rules and attention to detail she effectively raised one part 18 questions. Part 18 questions are useful tools as they are used as a means to clarify civil issues that are in dispute.
– The point that was questioned was the insurers paid for our client’s vehicle damage so why wouldn’t they pay out for the injury he suffered.
– The sharp application of part 18 proved that:
Once the part 18 question was received the Defendant’s solicitors made an offer of settlement because they realised they had no basis to refuse payment and offered £2250.00.
Sarah said the case was straightforward and should not have got to the stage it had. The insurers made the case more complex than it should have been. This was through their failure to effectively communicate with us and keep records of documents we sent them, which they were claiming we hadn’t sent. The consequence of their lack of organisation resulted in the case going on longer than it should have.
Our client effectively communicated and promptly responded to us meaning we were able to move the case on quickly and efficiently, if the insurers had done the same the case would have been settled quicker, which would have saved both their time and costs. Our client was satisfied with the service and care we provided and was happy with the offer we eventually received.
Clearwater Solicitors is experienced in handling car accident claims where there the Defendant’s refuse to share information and claims where fraud is intimated. 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.