Mr P was driving Eastbound on the M25 motorway in heavy traffic and wet weather. As he came to a stop due to traffic queues the vehicle behind collided with the rear of his car forcing it forward into the vehicle in front. As a result of the collision Mr P suffered a whiplash injury to his neck and lower back.
Mr P instructed Hayward Baker Personal Injury Specialist Solicitors to act for him in his claim for personal injury compensation and associated losses.
The first thing that Mr P’s solicitor did after he had signed his paperwork, allowing them to act on his behalf, was to state the claim via the low value Road Traffic Accident (RTA) insurers on-line portal. To ensure they got the defendants insurers details correct a search was undertaken via the Motor Insurers Database (MID) to establish who the insurers were and this was done by checking against the registration details of the defendants vehicle. The claim was made via the portal and the reasons for alleging fault were:
a) Defendant failed to heed the presence of the Claimant’s vehicle
b)Defendant failed to slow, stop, swerve, steer or otherwise manoeuvre properly or at all so as to avoid colliding with the rear of the Claimant’s vehicle
c) Defendant drove too close to the Claimant’s vehicle to stop in time or at all
The defendant insurers did not take long to acknowledge the claim but they had denied liability on the basis that it was the car behind their insured that had hit the their insured ‘s car (the vehicle behind Mr P’s) forcing this vehicle a small van into Mr P’s vehicle and in turn he then hit the vehicle in front. Therefore the claim was now redirected to the other vehicles insurers. Details of the other vehicle and the insurers were given to Mr P’s solicitor by the first insurers in their acknowledgement so the claim was re-directed to the second defendants insurers.
It wasn’t very long before the second defendant insurers acknowledged the claim, admitted liability for the accident and decided to make a pre-medical offer of £1000.00 to settle the claim.
Mr P’s solicitor wrote to him explaining that liability had been admitted for the accident. This meant that provided that a medical report confirms that he was injured as a result of the accident the insurers have agreed to pay compensation. However the insurers have attempted to settle the claim now in full for £1000.00. His solicitor also explained the he has 21 days as to whether he accepts the offer. It was also pointed out that if the offer is not accepted then after the 21 days the insurers could change the offer or change the terms which may be less advantageous to Mr P.
Mr P’s solicitor advised him that without the evidence of a medical report to confirm the exact nature and duration of his injuries that he sustained due to the accident then it would be difficult for them to know if the offer was high enough. Although if a medical report was obtained then the figure could in fact be lower or higher there was no guarantee. Further if Mr P accepted the offer the claim would end now and there would be no going back for more money at a later date.
The insurers also offered to pay for any treatment he required for his injuries. However Mr P was already receiving physiotherapy provided my his doctor.
Mr P contacted his solicitor and said he would accept the offer but could his solicitor try to get them to go a bit higher. Mr P’s solicitor agreed to try and called the insurers over the telephone to negotiate. The offer was raised to £1250.00 but Mr P had to understand that this was to cover all losses including two weeks loss of earnings and the damage to his laptop which was in the boot of the car at the time of the accident.
As Mr P had only suffered from his injuries for a short period he decided to accept the offer in full and final settlement of his claim.
Mr P sent signed approval to his solicitor that they could now accept the offer on his behalf and his solicitor posted acceptance on the insurers portal.
Three weeks later Mr P received his settlement cheque from Hayward Baker Solicitors.