personal injury settlement

parsnip

Third party insurers have accepted liability for an accident in which I was a passenger and suffered whiplash and leg injurues.
They have offered £4000 as settlement and will not budge from this figure. My solicitor advises that the quantum of damages suggests that the claim should be in the region of £4500-£5000
do I accept their offer or proceed to court?

dacouch

Possibly best to listen to what your solicitor says as he / she is the expert. Have they told you how much longer they expect it will take if it goes too court? If so are you prepared to wait for this?

geri1965_2

Tell your solicitor to issue a Part 36 for £4,500 (if they have not already done so).

I think for an additional £500, no insurer will risk taking it to court.

Crazy_Jamie

Dacouch is right- the solicitor should be an expert in valuing personal injury claims, and as such you should follow their advice. If you're unsure then don't be afraid to ask him/her further questions about the offer and what your options are. Solicitors are there to fight your corner, but they're also there to address your concerns. Without detailed information about the nature of your injury and other losses, no one on this forum will be able to tell you whether that offer is fair or not and advise you based on that, so direct your questions to your solicitor.

SolicitorMidlands

What are your injuries? What is the prognosis period?

Your solicitor is best placed to advise you - ask whether they are happy to issue proceedings.

agaveworm

Goodness me.

You accept what is acceptable to you (after deliberation); not what some stranger in an ill fitting suit (plus his expenses) suggests.

What is this?

Crazy_Jamie

agaveworm wrote: »

Goodness me.

You accept what is acceptable to you (after deliberation); not what some stranger in an ill fitting suit (plus his expenses) suggests.

What is this?

It's a situation where the OP has insufficient knowledge to know what is an acceptable value for the injury he has suffered. Which is why they take the advice of someone trained in that area. Once you get past your obvious prejudices against personal injury solicitors, it's really quite simple.

SolicitorMidlands

agaveworm wrote: »

Goodness me.

You accept what is acceptable to you (after deliberation); not what some stranger in an ill fitting suit (plus his expenses) suggests.

What is this?

People will usually think their claim is worth more than it is. That's why you take advice.

It is not a "no win no fee, i can do what i want" agreement.

agaveworm

Crazy_Jamie wrote: »

It's a situation where the OP has insufficient knowledge to know what is an acceptable value for the injury he has suffered. Which is why they take the advice of someone trained in that area. Once you get past your obvious prejudices against personal injury solicitors, it's really quite simple.

Is it true that anyone can call themselves a 'lawyer'?

You don't have to be legally qualified in any way....

Just a thought.

SolicitorMidlands

We are talking about solicitors.

As for anyone calling themselves a lawyer, no. You would need some legal grounding and/or training.

Crazy_Jamie

agaveworm wrote: »

Is it true that anyone can call themselves a 'lawyer'?

You don't have to be legally qualified in any way....

Just a thought.

As SM said, no it's not true that anyone can call themselves a 'lawyer'. You would need the relevant legal training and experience.

In terms of what he said about us not talking about lawyers, technically lawyers don't exist in this country. It's solicitors or barristers. If you want to argue semantics then both solicitors or barristers are lawyers as they practice in the area of law, but if you want to practice in the law you generally aim to be part of one of those two groups. You cannot train generally to be a 'lawyer'.