First road accident - Claim Advice Required

kiv

Hello,

These forums have always been very helpful to me, this is my first post and I would be grateful for some advice from this community.

I'm 24 years old and I was involved in my first traffic accident last week. I was stationary in a queue and the person approaching from behind didn't stop and hit me at 20-30mph. The third party has admitted full liability and my car has been declared a write off.

The day after the accident I had pain in my neck and right shoulder. I went to see my GP who prescribed strong painkillers and some anti-inflammatory tablets. My GP has told me that he will refer me to a physio if the pain does not subside. It has been six days since the accident and I still have pain in my neck. I think I should proceed with further treatment, but I'm not sure how to approach this legally.

After visiting my doctor again, who should I approach next regarding tratment and compensation? Should I ask my insurance company, or the third party insurance company for legal support? Or should I employ legal services from a solicitor or claims company that aren't connected to either insurance company?

I'm concerned that if I ask my insurance company or a claims specialist, the third party's insurance company might refuse to pay(?). I think asking the third party's insurance company to arrange it might be best, but then my concern is that they might cut corners to save costs - Although they have been very helpful so far and have provided a courtesy car.

Does anyone have any advice or experience in this matter and can recommend the best course of action for me?

InsideInsurance

You have three options:

1) Inform your insurers who will undoubtably appoint someone irrespective of if you have legal expenses insurance or not

2) Find your own no win no fee firm, some will even give you commission for bringing yourself to them

3) Deal with the TPI directly

Advantage of (1) is you get some protection from the FOS if you have Legal Expenses insurance should anything go wrong, disadvantage can be that insurers agreements tend to be with the mass farm style firms that are all about volume rather than getting the absolute best result

Advantage of (2) can be cash in your pocket and choose your own solicitor. Disadvantage can be if you dont actually know a good firm then its pure chance if you happen to pick a good company or not

Advantage of (3) MAY be you get more compensation as the TPI try to block out you switching to using a solicitor. Disadvantage is you MAY get less compensation because you dont know what your case is worth

3 is a very contentious option and some will think its great and others will say its the quickest way to be ripped off.

kiv

Thank you for your advice. I think I would prefer to have protection of the FOS, so I am leaning towards option 1.

Bearing in mind that the third party has admitted liability, would it be better to organise this with the third party insurance company or my own insurance company? Both have said they would be willing to proceed with my claim and appoint a solicitor.

Quentin

Don't accept a solicitor appointed by the third party! (Conflict of interest).

Get your own solicitor (google cashback injury solicitors to find firms that will pay you £100s in commission just for instructing them to act for you, on top of the compensation they win you).

(Your own insurance company will simply pass your details on to a PI solicitor and keep the commission for themselves!)

kiv

Quentin wrote: »

Don't accept a solicitor appointed by the third party! (Conflict of interest).

Get your own solicitor (google cashback injury solicitors to find firms that will pay you £100s in commission just for instructing them to act for you, on top of the compensation they win you).

(Your own insurance company will simply pass your details on to a PI solicitor and keep the commission for themselves!)

Thank you. Are there any risks with this approach? The third party refuse to pay and I'm left with a bill, for example.

Quentin

No - your solicitor will only take you on if he is virtually certain he is going to win. It will be a no win no fee arrangement.

As the third party has admitted liabilty, you look to be in the pound seats!

InsideInsurance

kiv wrote: »

Thank you for your advice. I think I would prefer to have protection of the FOS, so I am leaning towards option 1.

Bearing in mind that the third party has admitted liability, would it be better to organise this with the third party insurance company or my own insurance company? Both have said they would be willing to proceed with my claim and appoint a solicitor.

You only get protection from the FOS as a customer and so cannot escalate any complaints about the TPI to the FOS if you decide to claim directly from them

kiv

Thank you all for the advice, perhaps approaching an independent solicitor will be best then.

Are there any I should use or avoid? Is it best to use a smaller local claims company/solicitor or one of the larger and well-known ones?

InsideInsurance

At the end of the day it almost as much comes down to who your personal case handler is more so than the firm they happen to work for.

Some argue a small local firm can be good as you are more likely to actually get a solicitor managing the case but then a local solicitor may not have actually handled a personal injury case in their professional life and not read up on it since passing law school. That said, you are more likely to actually get to know who it is dealing with it rather than it being someone at the end of the phone who changes every couple of months

A large firm can mean your more a number going through a system and likely to be assigned to a paralegal with little or no actual legal qualifications - but then some of these people have 5 plus years experience and all they do day in day out is pursue personal injury claims.

I used to defend personal injury cases and I cannot remember any one firm being universally better or worse than the next. I remember a lot of arrogant local solicitors who claimed their client was right simply because they were a solicitor and I was a "call centre worker" - thankfully the courts rarely agreed.