Accident same insurer both parties

blossom30

Hi Does anyone have any experience of accidents where both parties are insured with the same company.
My brother in law was involved in a car crash 2002 and was badly injured . The third party accepted liability after a year. Both parties have the same insurance company and my brother in law was fully comp and was appointed a solicitor by the insurance company. The insurance company offered 2 menial offers and my brother in law duly refused. The solicitors acting on his behalf sent him to one doctor after another. Today with 6 days until the court date the insurance turn round and tell him they will not cover his court legal costs even though he was fully comp . Something doesn't seem right that they can refuse the legal costs as they have a conflict of interest here. I was thinking of directing him to the Financial Services Ombidsman. Has anyone any experience of this?thanks

Astaroth

Insurers tend to be fairly good at dealing with cases where they represent both parties for fear of being accused of underhanded tactics.

If they are refusing cover under the Legal Expenses section of the policy then speak to the solicitor involved about doing the case on a no win no fee basis. This will actually be a good way at seeing what the solicitor truely thinks of the offers. If they say they cant take it on then you'll find the offers really arent that bad at all and the sols just been stringing it along as they know they get paid more for going to court than settling it out of court.

oldwiring

This is wandering a tad OT, but I wonder if there is not more of this de facto rahter than de jure, as insurance companies amalgamate in to bigger and bigger groups. IM unturored O it would be good if the law required them tp pass all disputed matters like compensation claims to independent third parties to deal with, as with the current system there must be strong pressures to keep the costs down to the disadvantage of the insured, and as with many clubs and interests one will look after the other, because it might be them next in the firing line.

mattymoo

oldwiring - personal injury litigation / motor accident claims in general are dealt with under English Law. Insurers certainly do not side step it to their advantage.

To the OP. Has your solicitor mentioned anything about a payment in to court? Up until 94 (when I last dealt with this stuff) a payment into court worked like this.

Claimant says claim is worth £50k
Defendents insurers think it is worth no more than £30k and have offered this.
Court summons issued.
Defendent pays £30k in to court in a sealed account. Claimant knows the money is there but the judge does not. Claimant can at this stage choose to accept the payment. However, to go further become a gamble that goes like this.

Judge awards £30,000.01 or higher. Claimant wins and defendant pays all the costs.
Judge awards £30k or less. Claimant has to pay own costs incurred from date of payment in and the defendants costs as well.

Most spectacular example was William Roach (Ken Barlow in coronation street) who sued the Sun iirc. They made a payment in and judge awarded below that figure. His compensation (for libel) was eaten up by the costs.

OP - I wonder if the other side have made a payment in, you have not accepted and now you are at risk for costs. If you have been advised to accept the legal costs providers would be within their rights to withdraw funding for further action.

Astaroth

The insurers/ solicitors will call it a Part 36 offer (to give it the techno babble name)

oldwiring

mattymoo wrote:

oldwiring - personal injury litigation / motor accident claims in general are dealt with under English Law. Insurers certainly do not

Mattymoo, you are surely right at least in theory, and I am sure that the solicitors used are above reproach, but withib the bounds of legality it is only human that no matter under what guise the remuneration comes the urge will be there not to bite the hand that feeds. However I'll concede that a policy holder may feel aggrieved, but in truthsometimes unjustifiably, when the solicitor says a case should go no futher and offered compensation br accepted. Were the costs coming out of his pocket, the insured might well come to a like conclusion.

blossom30

Thankyou to all who posted in this respect, My brotherlaw found out from his counsel yesterday that the his solicitor failed to mention to them that the third partys' insurers were also his. They seemed a bit bemused at this to be told so late in the case. After my BiL left the meeting he thinks the solicitor received a b*****ng. The other thing about his solicitor that he's phoning my Bil at 8.30pm from call boxes talking about offers on the table. For instance he called him on 15th at 8.30 , told him he had been trying to phone him all day but this was untrue as my BiL has caller display and it list all the people calling. Anyway he says there is an offer on the table but if it doesn't get accepted by 2 pm next day it is withdrawn ! I mean this wasn't even 24 hrs. The next day at the meeting with the counsel he said it was until 5 pm. My BiL is so confused about whats going on. Does this all seem a bit underhand. Thanks for any advice

Bossyboots

First port of call is to contact the most senior partner you can get hold of at the solicitors and ask them to review the file this morning without fail and to then contact your BIL to explain themselves. The partner will need all the info given on this thread.

I had difficulties with my solicitor which only got resolved when I escalated it to his supervisor via the senior partner. There is no time to waste in getting this sorted out.

How does your BIL know the solicitor is calling from call boxes. If he is sure of this, it should be mentioned.

mattymoo

Cannot explain the call box part of things - does seem odd in this day and age.

Short timescale offers are a legitimate tactic though on cases that are about to go to court. Many cases are settled literally on the steps of the court.

I recall years ago we had a case where the claimant thought it was worth £250k but we knew it was no more than £40k due to info that had come out during the mornings evidence. During the lunch break we made an offer of £60k to settle, but the offer would be withdrawn once the claimant had resumed his seat in the courtroom. He duly entered the court room, reached his seat and caved in - told his barrister to accept the offer.

They say barristers are like actors and dramatic little scenarios like this are the tools of their trade.

wigginsmum

It sounds to me as if the soliticitor has got into trouble and is trying to get your BIL 'off the record' (hence the unofficial phone number) to accept the offer so the whole case can be pushed under the carpet.

mattymoo

Litigation proceeds on the basis that people are not insured. In other words, the judge is not concerned about the identity of the company who will pay the eventual damages. They are dealing with a civil law suit between two people - the plaintiff (claimant) and defendant.

The insurers obviously exert some control over the progress of a case since they are the ones footing the bills. They will have known they will lose either way by virtue of insuring both parties. The opportunity to reach an ammicable settlement would have been available to them in the months / years leading up to the now impending court date.

Your BIL really does need to check and see if a part 36 offer (thanks to Astoroth for remembering the name) has been made since this does put you on risk for costs.

The only stipulation I can recall on legal expenses in the past was that you could not use the legal expenses cover to sue your own insurance company or legal expenses provider. This would relate to suing them as the legal entity and not one of their policyholders.