Thoughts on this accident claim

Semantik

Opinions please:
Involved in an accident 19 months ago. Knocked off bike at junction.Driver has formally admitted FULL liability through insurers. Claim still proceeding for injury to hand- surgery was needed to repair thumb ligaments and for damage to bike. Small amount of compensation already paid for 'interim expenses'.
My solicitors are in possession of photos of all the damaged parts to my bike and a written quote from my lbs for the repairs needed (£500)
Other party's insurers are now demanding inspection of my bike for the first time in 19 months including any damaged parts and proof that I have had the repairs carried out at the bike shop.
Well I can show them some of the damaged parts but not all, others were not worth retaining.
My queries are:
How reasonable is it for them to demand inspection of the bike for the first time 19 months after the accident? I mean,if it was a car accident would I be expected to keep the car somewhere for this length of time on the off chance the other party's insurers wanted an inspection?
How reasonable a demand is it that they expect the repair work to have been carried out by the same shop that gave the quote?- which is what they are apparently demanding. I HAVE bought all the new parts required and have retained receipts but as I am competent myself I have fitted them myself. Should I have kept all the damaged parts given that there are photographs of them and a written quote from the bike shop? Again, if it was a car accident would I have been expected to keep damaged parts from the car somewhere at home? Somehow don't think so.
I'm a bit confused by this and would appreciate any advice.

markhewitt1978

Resonableness is the usual test. You would be expected to keep the bike for inspection for a reasonable time. I would say nearly 2 years is not reasonable.

bails87

Agree with the above.

If you just bought a new bike and said "you owe me £2k" with no proof then they'd be right to haggle/demand evidence.

But you've got photos of the damage and you can probably get quotes from several bike shops (they might charge for this, so add it to your costs to be recovered) on what they'd charge for the parts.

They can't really expect you to hold onto a length of torn bar tape for over a year and a half just so they can quibble.

When I've had to claim I've been paid very quickly for the 'material' costs (bike inspection, repair/replacement as necessary, helmet/clothing) and the PI claim is what's taken the time.

davis

They're being gits, and your solicitors should have told them to do one.

sketchley

Technically you can only claim for "losses" the parts will not be in question as you will have reciept for them. What is in question is you time / labour charges. You need to speak with your solictor about it as you should be claiming for this as well. Tell the solictor exactly what you did, give them receipts and put in a claim for it. As you said you have photos and bike shop quote, plus they already made interim payment based on this.

Re inspection, I think that is unreasonable, after all you repaired the bike so you could ride it again and therefore not continue to rack up public transport / taxi costs instead to get you to and from work, cost that the insurer would be paying for. You could invite them at their cost to inspect the repaired bike but I cannot see the point. Plus you cannot be expect to of kept broken parts after this long, would the bike shop have done this?

Re both points above and I cannot say this strongly enough, tell your solicitor to do thier job!

Also I had hand injury, do not rush to settle the claim, 18 months after my accident I still have some pain particuarly when it is cold, hand injuries take a lot of time to heal and if you settle then have complications you will not be able to go back and get more or payment for medical bills etc. Listen to your hand surgeon about this and not your solictor as the the former is interested in your hand getting better and the latter is only interested in settleing the claim and getting the fees / costs paid.

mattv

In the car world, storage of a damaged vehicle would far outweigh the cost of a scrap car if kept for 2 years. If they get funny about not seeing the actual parts, also invoice them fir storage of the damaged parts you did keep. Then see what they say. Get a quote from one of these big yellow storage companies, for 19 months of storage!

fossyant

19 months is unreasonable, but seeing the receipts is not. It's unlikely you will get the labour charge as you did it yourself. My LBS quoted for replacement parts, no labour, and my solicitor had the cash to me in 6 weeks. Injuries took over 3 years to sort out though.

Semantik

Thanks for the replies so far. I have thrown this back at my solictors once already and their reply is that 'the other party's insurers,despite the information that has been provided to them,have indicated that they still wish to pursue this and carry out an inspection of the bike'.
I am a little disappointed with this reponse from my solicitors as I think they could have dealt with this a bit more robustly. I am a little reluctant to waste any more of my time asking my lbs to assist further when, as already pointed out by some of you, the other party's insurers are 'taking the p*ss.'
My plan at the moment is to strip the bike down(remove the new parts I fitted) and show them receipts for these as I do not want my bike to be seized for salvage value when I have spent hundreds on it, putting it back on the road.

markhewitt1978

Semantik wrote:

My plan at the moment is to strip the bike down(remove the new parts I fitted) and show them receipts for these as I do not want my bike to be seized for salvage value when I have spent hundreds on it, putting it back on the road.

No; don't. Your actions in rebuilding the bike were perfectly fine and no way should you have to strip it down again for their purposes.

sketchley

Seriously tell you solictors to deal with this, if your contact will not ask to speak to a senior partner and put in a complaint. If they do not then start acting on your behalf as they should then law society would be worth a call. However, if they want to inspect the bike let them. You have nothing to hide. You got a quote, claimed for that but did the work yourself. If they complain show them reciepts and add £100 an hour labour charge for your time and give them the option of which bill they pay.

markhewitt1978

Don't forget to stress the passage of time - it's not irrelevant here, in fact it's the key aspect. If they've responded in a timely fashion they would have been able to inspect the bike as is.

Semantik

Ok thanks. I take this on board. I have had to refer my case to a senior partner at the sols. once before as I didn't feel the lawyer handling the case was making enough progress and I got a good response from his manager on that occasion. I will contemplate another approach to his manager.

slowbike

Semantik wrote:

Thanks for the replies so far. I have thrown this back at my solictors once already and their reply is that 'the other party's insurers,despite the information that has been provided to them,have indicated that they still wish to pursue this and carry out an inspection of the bike'.
I am a little disappointed with this reponse from my solicitors as I think they could have dealt with this a bit more robustly. I am a little reluctant to waste any more of my time asking my lbs to assist further when, as already pointed out by some of you, the other party's insurers are 'taking the p*ss.'
My plan at the moment is to strip the bike down(remove the new parts I fitted) and show them receipts for these as I do not want my bike to be seized for salvage value when I have spent hundreds on it, putting it back on the road.

A little disappointed with your solicitors is a bit of an understatement I would think ...

I would be looking at charging them interest on the price of the new parts that you've had to buy out of your own money.!

Who did you get the solicitors through?

Semantik

BC! :oops:

bails87

Semantik wrote:

BC! :oops:

It's Leigh Day? They were pretty good for me.

Semantik

bails87 wrote:

Semantik wrote:

BC! :oops:

It's Leigh Day? They were pretty good for me.

Yup. Must stress tho' I am not having a serious pop at them here and should point out that I have been paid an interim payment 3 months ago that would have more than paid for the damaged parts. But that WAS still 15 months after the accident.

sketchley

Just remember you are paying them £300 an hour or somthing to work on your behalf, the fact that this loss can be reclaimed off third party is irrelevant you are still paying them. You are thier client. If you are not getting the service advice you expect then go to the senior partner. At £300 an hour service should be fantastic not adequate.

I used Levenes for my claim, within 3 months I had £~1400 interim payment for bike repairs travel etc, just over 13months we settled in full. That was with other party admitting full liability on day one though. When we got to the sharp end of the negiations the other side really tried it on with low offers etc and I have to say this is where the solicitor came into his own with strong argument, back up with previous cases and settlements etc, in the finish we still had to settle slightly below the max that was offered but we got there.

The only thing I can think might be a problem is if they deemed the bike to have been worth less than the repairs cost. If they suggest that point out the cost of replacement bike, new for old, was more than the £500 and that if they hadn't replaced the bike you would have run up travel cost far in excess of the £500.

Semantik

Sketchley wrote:

Just remember you are paying them £300 an hour or somthing to work on your behalf, the fact that this loss can be reclaimed off third party is irrelevant you are still paying them. You are thier client. If you are not getting the service advice you expect then go to the senior partner. At £300 an hour service should be fantastic not adequate.

I used Levenes for my claim, within 3 months I had £~1400 interim payment for bike repairs travel etc, just over 13months we settled in full. That was with other party admitting full liability on day one though. When we got to the sharp end of the negiations the other side really tried it on with low offers etc and I have to say this is where the solicitor came into his own with strong argument, back up with previous cases and settlements etc, in the finish we still had to settle slightly below the max that was offered but we got there.

The only thing I can think might be a problem is if they deemed the bike to have been worth less than the repairs cost. If they suggest that point out the cost of replacement bike, new for old, was more than the £500 and that if they hadn't replaced the bike you would have run up travel cost far in excess of the £500.

My interim payment was similar figure to yours. The bike was £1100 new and I have supplied an invoice proving this.The ironic thing to all this is that the damage to the bike is only a small part of the claim (@£500). My main grievance and grounds for compensation is a thumb which doesn't move properly and is still restricting my activities 7 months after surgery.It just doesn't bode well for this side of the claim if they are being so uptight about the bike.

sketchley

Semantik wrote:

Sketchley wrote:

Just remember you are paying them £300 an hour or somthing to work on your behalf, the fact that this loss can be reclaimed off third party is irrelevant you are still paying them. You are thier client. If you are not getting the service advice you expect then go to the senior partner. At £300 an hour service should be fantastic not adequate.

I used Levenes for my claim, within 3 months I had £~1400 interim payment for bike repairs travel etc, just over 13months we settled in full. That was with other party admitting full liability on day one though. When we got to the sharp end of the negiations the other side really tried it on with low offers etc and I have to say this is where the solicitor came into his own with strong argument, back up with previous cases and settlements etc, in the finish we still had to settle slightly below the max that was offered but we got there.

The only thing I can think might be a problem is if they deemed the bike to have been worth less than the repairs cost. If they suggest that point out the cost of replacement bike, new for old, was more than the £500 and that if they hadn't replaced the bike you would have run up travel cost far in excess of the £500.

My interim payment was similar figure to yours. The bike was £1100 new and I have supplied an invoice proving this.The ironic thing to all this is that the damage to the bike is only a small part of the claim (@£500). My main grievance and grounds for compensation is a thumb which doesn't move properly and is still restricting my activities 7 months after surgery.It just doesn't bode well for this side of the claim if they are being so uptight about the bike.

There is a couple of other possibilities. Most likely the loss adjuster need to show that they have reduced the value of the claim somewhere. They might be thinking the bike is the best way to do this and this may show they are in fact prepared to accept the rest.

The other possbility is they are looking to see if you have not told the truth on any part of the claim and are going to use this to justify not paying out. Providing you haven't at any time said the bike shop actually did the repairs and all you sent them was the quote, then you have nothing to worry about, you are entitled to repair the bike yourself. If you did previously state the bike shop made the repairs then tell your solicitor now that you in fact made them yourself. Also check you solicitor hasn't misrepresented you in saying the bike shop carried out the repairs, if they have get them to correct it now. Either way make sure your solicitor knows all the facts, put them in writting or an email and ask them for advice, it is what you are paying them for.

Semantik

Sketchley wrote:

Semantik wrote:

Sketchley wrote:

Just remember you are paying them £300 an hour or somthing to work on your behalf, the fact that this loss can be reclaimed off third party is irrelevant you are still paying them. You are thier client. If you are not getting the service advice you expect then go to the senior partner. At £300 an hour service should be fantastic not adequate.

I used Levenes for my claim, within 3 months I had £~1400 interim payment for bike repairs travel etc, just over 13months we settled in full. That was with other party admitting full liability on day one though. When we got to the sharp end of the negiations the other side really tried it on with low offers etc and I have to say this is where the solicitor came into his own with strong argument, back up with previous cases and settlements etc, in the finish we still had to settle slightly below the max that was offered but we got there.

The only thing I can think might be a problem is if they deemed the bike to have been worth less than the repairs cost. If they suggest that point out the cost of replacement bike, new for old, was more than the £500 and that if they hadn't replaced the bike you would have run up travel cost far in excess of the £500.

My interim payment was similar figure to yours. The bike was £1100 new and I have supplied an invoice proving this.The ironic thing to all this is that the damage to the bike is only a small part of the claim (@£500). My main grievance and grounds for compensation is a thumb which doesn't move properly and is still restricting my activities 7 months after surgery.It just doesn't bode well for this side of the claim if they are being so uptight about the bike.

There is a couple of other possibilities. Most likely the loss adjuster need to show that they have reduced the value of the claim somewhere. They might be thinking the bike is the best way to do this and this may show they are in fact prepared to accept the rest.

The other possbility is they are looking to see if you have not told the truth on any part of the claim and are going to use this to justify not paying out. Providing you haven't at any time said the bike shop actually did the repairs and all you sent them was the quote, then you have nothing to worry about, you are entitled to repair the bike yourself. If you did previously state the bike shop made the repairs then tell your solicitor now that you in fact made them yourself. Also check you solicitor hasn't misrepresented you in saying the bike shop carried out the repairs, if they have get them to correct it now. Either way make sure your solicitor knows all the facts, put them in writting or an email and ask them for advice, it is what you are paying them for.

That is a very good point you make about the repairs and my solicitors possibly having an incorrect grasp of the facts in that regard. I have never suggested to them that I had or would have the repairs carried out at the bike shop and your comments have now given me the uneasy feeling that my sols. have maybe lost something in the translation here and are under the mistaken impression that I have. I think I need to refer this back to them for some further clarification.

bigmat

This thread is an interesting read. I'm sure the solicitor who you report to his senior partner for being a bit slow / not robust enough will be really appreciative of that. Hell, why not report him to the Law Society and see if you can get him struck off. And while we're at it, no harm naming his firm on an open access internet forum - how very professional!

Sounds like the Defendant insurers are taking the mick a bit. If you have provided pictures of the damage and invoices for repairs then that should be that, especially if the claim is only £500. If you haven't provided invoices, just "quotes", maybe they think the claim looks a bit dodgy and they are testing the water on the bike before they respond to the injury claim.

Semantik

BigMat wrote:

This thread is an interesting read. I'm sure the solicitor who you report to his senior partner for being a bit slow / not robust enough will be really appreciative of that. Hell, why not report him to the Law Society and see if you can get him struck off. And while we're at it, no harm naming his firm on an open access internet forum - how very professional!

It is apparent from other posters' comments that I am not being unreasonable in asking my sols. to have another look at this. The reason I posted this thread was NOT to name and shame my solicitors and I have not done that.
My gripe is with the other party's insurers .

bigmat

Semantik wrote:

BigMat wrote:

This thread is an interesting read. I'm sure the solicitor who you report to his senior partner for being a bit slow / not robust enough will be really appreciative of that. Hell, why not report him to the Law Society and see if you can get him struck off. And while we're at it, no harm naming his firm on an open access internet forum - how very professional!

It is apparent from other posters' comments that I am not being unreasonable in asking my sols. to have another look at this. The reason I posted this thread was NOT to name and shame my solicitors and I have not done that.
My gripe is with the other party's insurers .

It was some of the other responses I was commenting on, rather than yours. Should've made that clear - sorry! Back to OP, not reasonable to inspect bike 2 years down the line. Not reasonable to see damaged parts. Invoices for repairs a reasonable request (but not in my view essential). Its £500, if liability is not in dispute they shouldn't be wasting long on this, but I can see how a "quote" from some bike shop that could be made up for all they know is not quite good enough. You need to provide evidence of a) what was damaged; and b) what it cost you to repair. e.g. photos plus invoices.

sketchley

BigMat wrote:

It was some of the other responses I was commenting on, rather than yours.

That was me and I take your point. Mine point was simply that the solicitor (or at least the firm) is getting paid a lot of money to provide a service / advice. The OP should not have to come here to ask for advice, the solictor should provided the advice (and charge the third party insurer for the time taken to give it). If they are not doing that and not helping the OP progress the claim then I think esculation is prefectly acceptable. Perhaps the law society bit was a bit strong, but I do seem to remember being given information on them and applicable procedures by my solicitor when starting my claim so it seemed a logical place to progress an issue if needed.

First.Aspect

Agree with all of this. The stuff you have done was sufficient in my case.

However I have noticed that solicitors and insurers are a bit odd sometimes when the vehicle is a bicycle. I think you should offer to let them inspect the bicycle providing that they provide a replacement courtesy vehicle or pay for a door to door taxi whilst you dont have use of your bike, and collect it for you and bring it back. That's exactly what would happen if it was a car and could cost them far more than it's worth to actually do it. If your solicitors put that in writing my guess is that the request will go away.