Hit a pedestrian

BodyShopBabe_2

For what my experience in personal injury is worth (10 years), I would say to seriously consider whether to pursue any claim against her. As previous posters have said, there is a high chance she will have a change of heart about it not being her fault and sue you instead! It happens all too often where liability is admitted at the scene that people mysteriously seem to forget having the conversation at all... funny that. Again, as already said, pedestrians are always looked on favourably and you have to consider how good your insurance company would be at defending your corner.

lisyloo

there is a high chance she will have a change of heart about it not being her fault and sue you instead!

Yes but that won't affect the OP because it will go on their insurance as part of the same claim they already have.
Of course the insurer doesn't want that but it makes no difference to the policyholder.
So they don't have a lot to lose - the insurer does.
This is a case of the insurers interest being different to the policy holders.

Same with estate agents, solicitors etc.
It would be naive to think their first interest is to their client.
It never is. It' always to themselves.

BodyShopBabe_2

Yes but it will inevitably end up in a long winded liability dispute which the OP will have to go through which may even end up testifying in Court. A lot of hassle for the OP!

pokopoko

We’re in the process of seeking a professional advice from our insurance company. We'll send a letter to our insurer today. Wait and see what they say.

lisyloo

Yes but it will inevitably end up in a long winded liability dispute which the OP will have to go through which may even end up testifying in Court. A lot of hassle for the OP!

Totally agree, which is why I said in post #5

In both cases you need to weigh up the costs against the hassle because it won't be hassle free to claim.

Like a lot of other things in life you have to do a cost/benefit analysis.
But you have to start with information i.e. know the costs and chances of winning.
If the legal experts say there is NO chance (however unfair that is) then there is simply no point in preceeding.

It looks like the OP has now started down that track of getting information.
They have to find out whether their insurer is not pursuing because they are acting in THEIR best interests or because the case isn't strong enough.

This is one reason that I personally like having legal cover.
I don't think a "no win no fee" solicitor would pursue a pedestrian without insurance (although they might pursue with insurance).

Unfortuantely legally you do not get the benefit of the doubt as you are the one in a nasty 1/2 ton metal box charging around the street and she is jsut flesh and bones.
Sorry, I agree it's unfair but I do believe there is a bias and I have personally experienced when my FIL was breathalised, given an eye test etc. It's a case of guilty until proven innocent, so it WILL be an uphill struggle.
I think people who has said "just get on with your life" are saying it on a legal basis rather than a moral one.

stator

If the lady has money then you may consider small claims court, the costs are relatively low. If she is poor it's probably not worth the effort.

lisyloo

the costs are relatively low

That depends.
Some people would lose £350 if they take a day off work to attend.
So this is what I mean by cost/benefit analysis.
If the OP is a person of leisure then there may be no cost attached.

Also how do you find out if she has money?
I guess you could go to the address and look at the house, but it could be rented or she could be a non earning housewife.
I think it's quite hard to assess that.

pokopoko

We both work and my partner has already had to take ½ day off to sort out this thing.
It’s not just £350 we lose but also potential insurance premium increase for next 3/5 years.
We have already had to cancel hospital/dental appointment. My partner has to spend extra 90 minutes a day in the bus to commute.

The woman is in her 20’s, fit and in essence I believe she should be able to make a fair judgement.
She made an error and causing mayhem on our daily life. Whether she has money or not is none of our business.

Quentin

pokopoko wrote: »

Whether she has money or not is none of our business.

I think you have missed the point regarding this.

Were you to decide to sue the third party for your damages, then if she has no money/assets then should you win your case you still would get no £350 from her, but would have spent your own time and money on the case.

pokopoko

We've sent a letter to our insurance company. It's up to them. We have no intention of sueing her personally.