We’re issuing proceedings against the other party

Hi all,
Appreciate nobody can offer proper advice here, but have a feeling my insurance are trying to load me up with bills.
Back in October I was rear ended an ambulance pulled out for which I stopped the other party did not. Since then I’ve had to do all the leg work for my insurer. Contacting them multiple times, passed to multiple third parties to manage my claim. I finally got my money and thought the matter closed.

Then today an email “We’re issuing proceedings against the other party. Because of this we’ve asked Keoghs LLP to contact you and represent you in this matter.”

Now you would think getting rear ended and an ambulance as witness plus an accident code from Thames valley police it would be an easy claim.

Obviously that is ringing alarm bells “represent you” then I’ll end up with a fat solicitor bill? The policy does not have motor legal expenses.

What do think, bat at back at my insurer saying it’s their problem to get the money off her insurer?

Is it not just that your insurers are seeking to recover costs from her (her insurers in reality) and this is just a formality in that process when there is not immediate agreement by the other party?

What do think, bat at back at my insurer saying it’s their problem to get the money off her insurer?

It is their problem, but they have to do it in your name. Look up subrogation. You have to assist them with the process.

What thegreatape says, they have to inform you by law I’d imagine that they are now pursuing their costs, and may require you as a witness.

Okay thanks for the prompt replies, it’s causing me a great deal of stress. As with many families money is tight, so I’m not keen to engage with anything that will cause further bills.

…just re-read the op; did you use a claims management company? Are you sure it’s your insurer pursuing the 3rd party? Or is it the CMC trying to recover your hire car costs?

As per Rich S – having paid you under the policy, they’re legally speaking, stepping into your shoes, to recover the money from the responsible third party. It’s up to them to decide whether it’s worth the time, money and effort based on the amount and the likelihood of recovering it. It shouldn’t cost you any money (apart from time, travel for court appearance if it goes that far? Don’t know about this hopefully someone can chime in!) but I’d be asking for written confirmation that you wouldn’t be bearing any further cost.

It’s worth cooperating if it’s going to help your claims record show the claim cost was recovered from the third party – underlines that it really wasn’t your fault.

Good luck – hope it’s not too much more stress!

but rich S has another good point. clever chap.

I reported a claim via my broker a few years ago and the first people they put me through to weren’t the insurance co. it was their TP solicitor – took a load of info about the claim, then told me who they were and that I’d then have to report it to the insurance co! Bloody livid about that.

Sounds like a scam to me. I’ve only ever dealt with the insurance companies in the past, no 3rd party solicitors. Maybe car insurance has got a lot more complex since I last had a prang.

As thegreatape says, your own insurers have subrogation tights, but in these circumstances it sounds like it shouldn’t need legal action if her insurance was correctly in place.

Makes me wonder if it is the claim management company recovering “courtesy” car hire costs, been a couple of threads on this in recent months?

Hi, I was lucky enough to read that very thread on hire vs courtesy car a day or two before my accident. I said in no uncertain terms I did not want a hire car despite them saying it won’t cost if you are not to blame. I’m as sure as I can be I’ve had a courtesy car.

The parties involved are Hastings who took the initial call > passed to enterprise > the repair centre (who supplied the courtesy car) > incident management company > no back with Hastings and Keoghs LLP.

I’ve spoken to a friend who worked in insurance, who has advised this is normal.

Keoghs is a big firm that represents a lot of insurers. If they are suing someone else in your name, which it sounds like they are, they need to tell you about it. Presumably you’ve given them authority to do this at some point. Perhaps they’ve settled your claim, but now need to recover the money directly from the other driver?

If you’re worried about costs in the event their (your) legal case is thrown out, speak to your insurer about it.

your own insurers have subrogation tights,

Too late to correct, but that was meant to read “subrogation rights”, what your insurers choose to do in their own time is up to them!

This is fairly normal – what may have happened is the TP insurers have simply decided to pull the shutters down in the hope your insurers will go away.

They may also look to be genuinely disputing liability – my in-laws were in a car accident a while back where someone deemed medically unfit to drive lost control of their car due to their medical condition, and smashed up their stationary car. Even in those circumstances, their insurers had to issue proceedings and it was not until a few weeks before trial the other side folded.

As others have said, your policy contains a contractual right for your insurers to bring a claim to recover their outlay from the other party, known as subrogation. It normally happens without proceedings being issued but it’s far from unusual. Just make sure you respond to all communications from your/their solicitors promptly – the last thing you want is to be deemed uncooperative and end up on the hook for the costs of the claim! You also have a right to know how the claim is proceeding, and to complain if they don’t do their job properly.

Keoghs will send you their terms of engagement in due course – they’re one of a number of volume firms doing insurance work, I used to work for another. Like every law firm, you have some decent people there and some rubbish people there. Unfortunately this sort of routine work, because of the very low rates, tends to mean the latter are more prevalent as it’s more junior and sometimes unqualified staff doing the work.

One tip – get them to confirm the court submission deadlines to you, and get them to confirm they will send you anything you need to review and sign well before those deadlines. A lot of the staff there have many, many cases – some over a hundred – and it’s easy to leave stuff until the last minute, which can then put the client (i.e. you) under a lot of pressure.

Thanks for all the help. Much appreciated.

I’m not very up on these things.

Is the OP at any risk if the court uncovers new evidence? E.g. If the other driver had new dashcam footage demonstrating that OP was (hypothetically!) reckless and drunk, could OP’s insurer move to reclaim from OP? It sounds like this whole process is super annoying and at best inconvenient. At worse, potentially something that could cause significant burden?

Is the OP at any risk if the court uncovers new evidence? E.g. If the other driver had new dashcam footage demonstrating that OP was (hypothetically!) reckless and drunk, could OP’s insurer move to reclaim from OP? It sounds like this whole process is super annoying and at best inconvenient. At worse, potentially something that could cause significant burden?

Potentially, except the example you’ve given is simply the truth coming out and justice being done, rather than an inconvenience!

I only wish there was a dash cam to show them speeding to get down the ramp to get through a green light. The ambulance that went through the red stopped and gave their details and checked over my son, the police also turned up.

Thanks Jakester, looks like yet more chasing from my part involved, if only I could bill for that.

If you need to attend court you are entitled to expenses. But not for looking over your witness statement etc. I think.

looks like yet more chasing from my part involved, if only I could bill for that

As Greyspoke says, you can claim expenses. If you can also show any loss of earnings or income as a result of having to deal with the aftermath of the accident (such as you’re self employed and had to devote a considerable amount of time to dealing with the claim etc) you may be able to claim that as an uninsured loss. If that’s the case you need to discuss that with your solicitors (i.e. Keoghs) as soon as possible. However, IME (I did do *some* RTC stuff, but mainly in the context of advising the insurers about dodgy claims) there’s nothing more likely to delay settlement than speculative uninsured losses – more often than not, that’s the stumbling block as the TP insurer sees it as a try on.

This is fairly normal – what may have happened is the TP insurers have simply decided to pull the shutters down in the hope your insurers will go away.

So just spoken with my insurer, this is what has happened. I’ll be pissed off if it goes to court but I’ve got no reason to back down as I was not at fault.

I had something very similar several years back, when a dozy driver in front changed her mind on a roundabout and cut in front of me on the exit, pushing in my offside wing and putting a dent along the nearside of her Berlingo/Partner.

I had a courtesy car for over a month while my car was assessed, and I kept the car with a reduced payout.

I was still getting communications from the insurers and solicitors informing me of their continuing attempts to get their money back from the other part two or three years later!
I did inform them that not only did I no longer own the car, but having had a successful resolution to my original claim, I was no longer interested in being involved in their claims against the other party.

I haven’t heard anything from them since. It seems these sort of things can drag on for aeons, though!

#heavysigh

I did inform them that not only did I no longer own the car, but having had a successful resolution to my original claim, I was no longer interested in being involved in their claims against the other party.

Sadly it’s not your decision.

In taking out the policy of insurance you agreed to their terms and conditions, which included that you would provide reasonable assistance if required in any subrogation claim. It will either be expressly in there somewhere, or if not (and I’d be surprised) there is also an implied term that the insured will provide reasonable assistance to the insurer.

If you refuse to assist then you are in breach of contract and they can potentially claim against you, instead.

Sounds like you got away with it, but I would caution anyone else against taking a high-handed approach when your insurer contacts you about a claim – the claims cooperation clause means you are obliged to render assistance when required.

Is it just me that thinks nobody should ever be communicating with you other than your insurer, even if they are passing messages on from whoever else they choose to involve?

I know I’m not correct here but as a consumer your contract is with the insurer you paid for the policy and you shouldn’t have to deal with third party claims management companies, solicitors etc because the potential for you to make a mistake/not understand a process/be scammed or cost yourself a lot of money is too high.

Just reeks of shit customer service to me like many other things these days. It reminds me of when you order something and the seller decides it’s your problem to deal with the postage courier when the parcel goes missing etc when in reality it’s the retailers problem to sort.

airvent

Is it just me that thinks nobody should ever be communicating with you other than your insurer, even if they are passing messages on from whoever else they choose to involve

In an ideal world, yes, but sometimes things don’t work like that. I had someone swerve across two lanes into the side of my car a while back, and my then insurers Axa were utterly useless.

The TP insurers, Admiral, were actually great – admitted liability straightaway, sorted a courtesy car and repairs for me (with the agreement of my insurers) and was much less hassle than dealing with my own lot.

To the point that at next renewal I changed to Admiral, and to a large extent have been with them ever since. (Edit – yes, I have done comparison sites and they are still the cheapest every year!) They were also great a few years later when we were rear ended by an HGV.

Is it just me that thinks nobody should ever be communicating with you other than your insurer, even if they are passing messages on from whoever else they choose to involve?

Back in the day, you never had to talk to your insurer let alone any other interested parties, your broker dealt with it. Then we all decided it would be cheaper if we replaced brokers with price comparison websites and there are no longer insurance brokers on the High Street. Which is fine, but the meerkats aren’t interested when there’s a claim to be dealt with.

Thanks Jakester, looks like yet more chasing from my part involved, if only I could bill for that.

I’d be wary of “chasing” anyone.

Just let them get on with it and refer anything from the 3rd party via your solicitor.

The absolute last thing you want to be doing is being helpful and talking to other parties*, ending up giving someone conflicting information and it being held against you.

At the moment it’s all someone else’s problem, and your insurance is covering it. Anything you help any other party with from this point onwards can only hurt you (just like you should never admit fault at the scene of the accident, it can void your claim).

*Let’s say you hypothetically get a phonecal from the 3rd party’s solicitor and helpfully refresh their memory of the events, except you accidentally get coerced into saying something stupid.

Back in the day, you never had to talk to your insurer let alone any other interested parties, your broker dealt with it.

A friend recommended their broker to me for house and contents insurance. I remembered having used a different broker many years ago, and they had been good at getting a suitable but good value policy so gave it a try.  Every year, the premium went up significantly, as did the broker’s fee. I looked at the market to to see what £50/year to the broker was getting me, and found better cover from Direct Line at half the price. Brokers aren’t what they used to be.