Dual sim phone? I have a Samsung A8. Got sick of carrying two phones. No idea if Iphone available in that format. Got sick of Iphones expiring after a short period of time and also like micro sd expansion...
Thanks. I will. To my untutored eye, it seems a very strange part of the law. My sol , who is a partner in quite a big practice, always seems to be in court when I have phoned. I thought that this was strange as I know that the practice are fairly choosy about which cases they take on. So, I thought that the arguments would be be on the amount of compensation, rather than liability. I'm wrong. I assume that my case if fairly typical in their portfolio. So. I thought that we would only argue about the amount of compensation, but no. Despite the fact that they have access to the Police accident report and despite the fact that the other driver pleaded guilty to, and was found guilty, of driving without due care and attention, my sol is still arguing the case that they are liable! If we do go to court, to start with it will be just to establish the liability of the driver! The strange thing is that we would take the driver to court. If I was the driver then I would be off the gauge with anger. She always accepted that the accident was her fault and has already been before a magistrate. Now, if she had to go back to court because of the stupidity of her insurance co, then I'd refuse saying that they are just wasting everyone's time! I did used to wander why my sol was always in court when her firm only take on cases hat they are sure to win. It seems that an insurance co would rather p1ss thousands up he wall to argue in court that black is the new white! What mystifies me is that the insurance co must have their own sols, who will read a case and tell them that they have no chance and just to try and argue the smallest amount of comp. Either they employ loser sols who know nothing, or they don't believe their own legal people. My sol, seems fairly grounded and reasonable. She has to deal with this rubbish every day! I don't know how much she is on, but it must be a fortune to keep her calm and not want to climb the walls! And who pays? The insurance company! Surely, surely, someone can see that they are just wasting money, that could be in their bonuses!
So sorry mate. I realised when reading this that you’ve already told me a few weeks ago in a different thread. I’m as baffled as you are tbh as it seems about as open and shut as cases get. The other driver might not even be aware her insurer is still fighting the case as they have what’s known as the “right of subrogation”, which means the right to take over and continue a claim. As for your sol “being court all the time“. Firstly, sols and especially PI sols don’t usually go to court (they brief counsel to do that). Secondly, the courts have all been closed due to Covid until very recently. What you said about the quality of sols that insurance companies employ or instruct is sometimes not that wide of the mark tbh, and many cases are run by “paralegals” (part qualified lawyers) and “caseworkers” (sometimes have no legal qualifications at all) so it could be that when someone with a sensible head on their shoulders reviews the file they’ll make an offer to settle. Gently prod your sol to ask her if she’s considered making an application for strike out and/or summary judgement on liability with the matter to be set down for a “disposal hearing” (ie: to consider damages only). Tell her some bloke on the internet told you and she’s sure to do it right away
Thanks. I'll ask that when she replies to the email that I've just put in. It was just getting an update, for my benefit, as to where we are, now. Quite a few people have asked me about whether I am getting an interim payment. I wanted to know that I am not getting anything because Hastings still deny any liability and asked if they are still denying that I was riding the bike, even! Depending on what she says, an application for summary judgement on liability could be useful. After 15 months we should be just arguing about how much the settlement is for - not whether, or not, they are liable! We are not in a position to settle yet as I am waiting for a response from DVLA and then I will need to see if they want me to do another sight test. My sol knows this and may of put my case at the bottom of the pile knowing that we can't settle until we have this matter resolved - one way, or another. If I don't hear back on Monday, I may send her another email to say that we should go for a summary judgement on liability as none of us should be talking about this anymore. It should just be about how much the settlement is going to be for, depending on the outcome of my DVLA deliberations. Not whether or not there will be one. What fascinates me is, assuming that insurance companies have to submit accounts, then those accounts should have a figure against potential liabilities. So, you should be able to value the business, if anyone was mad enough to buy and they wanted to sell. So, that would mean that someone would have to come up with a potential liability figure to put in the accounts. Or do they just fantasize that there is no liability, in which case how do you value the business?
