I got in touch with Cycling UKs solicitors went through a few bits and then they declined to help me because I only wanted to claim for the bike not for any personal injury (only had a few bruises and scrapes so got very lucky).

I’ve been hit and claimed from the other party twice, and each time CUK/BC solicitors declined to help as – like you – I only had minor injuries and was seeking reimbursement for the bike and not personal injury. The first time was a complete nightmare with me chasing the other party’s insurer repeatedly, so the second time to avoid all that I put a claims company to act for me – I simply didn’t the time or inclination to waste hours of my life chasing an insurer myself.

Heh, that sounds word for word like my experience of a few years ago, with the exception I didn’t get a reduced pay-out the first time around. After the initial ignoring me, I sent a letter suggesting if I didn’t get the full value I’d start a money claim against the driver. If they did pay out, it’d be full and final. Money with me the following day plus £50 as an apology for the initial delay.

Nice, but I’m still not sure it’s worth getting knocked off for! Glad the personal injuries were minor and cleared up quickly.

edit…

so the second time to avoid all that I put a claims company to act for me

Did you have to pay for that, or did they charge their costs to the insurance co? If it wasn’t worth the while of the BC/CUK solicitors acting, what makes it profitable for the claims company? Genuinely interested, not suggesting you’re wrong.

Good news OP.

Nbd pics needed…

Sent this in waited a bit again and then mysteriously last week some money went into my account overnight. This was about half of what I had submitted. Rung them up and they said I could get a new bike for X amount. I stated this wasnt acceptable. They immediately said OK we will pay the full value of the bike then. So got the full amount with little argument (just a bit of silly buggers) and about 8 weeks from accident to receiving the money.

Could I be nosey as this is intriguing – what did the report value your bike/loss as? i.e. was it the value of the bike 5 seconds before you were hit or the value of a brand new bike of equivalent ‘quality’ bought today to replace it? I’m not quite sure how it’s meant to work – if someone drove into me in my 64 plate (but in V nice condition) car and wrote it off I’d hope to get enough to buy another 64 plate of the same make and model and condition. And folk law and experience would mean I’d think I’d be doing well if that’s what I got. If someone did the same to me on my 8 year old (but still relatively mint) bike for some reason I’d ‘expect’ a new bike of the same standard. Not sure why I would, but I would!

So is that what you got?

edit –

Did you have to pay for that, or did they charge their costs to the insurance co? If it wasn’t worth the while of the BC/CUK solicitors acting, what makes it profitable for the claims company? Genuinely interested, not suggesting you’re wrong.

And this. To be honest I’m disappointed to hear my CUK membership might be of limited value if I manage to escape mangling and am only a few thousand pounds worth of machinery down…..it’s almost like they are encouraging you to discover you’ve got a back/neck problem after the incident.

I need to reread but I don’t feel I was informed of this when I signed up.

Cycling UKs solicitors … declined to help me because I only wanted to claim for the bike not for any personal injury (only had a few bruises and scrapes so got very lucky).

Is it just me that think this is a pretty poor response from them? What’s the point of being a Cycling UK member and having insurance through them if they don’t act for you ‘as its not financially worthwhile ‘?

I’ve reread…..the op didn’t mention it being ‘financially worthwhile’.

But the CUK blurb does actually say (beyond the headlines of legal assistance after a cycle accident which sounds like it covers everything to the inept like me) that they are personal injury lawyers. So I guess it’s for injury claims…..worth knowing ahead of time.

@convert at the time of the accident the bike was 3 months old so was treated as new price. I guess if it were older there may have been more discussions.

Cycling UKs solicitors didn’t want to take it on as they only make money of the opposing insurance company if there is a personal injury claim. Then they take a percentage. It was a no win no fee type of deal. The insurance is still worth it for the 3rd party aspect if you hit a pedestrian or car.

Edit: I had upgraded the wheels, crankset etc as well so they paid to replace them as well. CUk will do bike claims as well but only if there is a personal injury claim at the same time.

Edit: I had upgraded the wheels, crankset etc as well so they paid to replace them as well. CUk will do bike claims as well but only if there is a personal injury claim at the same time.

Great – thanks for the info.

What an utter horror show. It could have been so much worse though!

Did you have to pay for that, or did they charge their costs to the insurance co? If it wasn’t worth the while of the BC/CUK solicitors acting, what makes it profitable for the claims company? Genuinely interested, not suggesting you’re wrong.

@tthew, unfortunately just as robbo says above: CUK’s solicitors weren’t shy at telling me directly that they make their money from the personal injury claim part, hence wouldn’t take on a bike-only claim. That was the first time I had to claim, about 10 years ago. Second time I had a need of representation I asked CUK again but same outcome. Cycle Law Scotland’s costs would’ve been charged to the insurance company – I’m not a fan of the ‘where’s there’s blame there’s a claim’ culture, but given the driver was an absolute **** I couldn’t be arsed doing the donkey work myself.

CUK is still worth it for the 3rd party liability cover though, like robbo says.