50/50 liabilty offer- refuse or accept

Dandytf

Been asked if i am willing to attend court whils my insurance recovers costs for an accident a few minths ago

I thought it was all setteked as 3rd party adimited liabilty immediately at the time .

Is this worth attending court or should i settle 50/50 not that i know what to expect

my car was written off 3rd party admitted crossing into my lane which resulted in my car hitting a wall-deemed beyond econimicle repair- i was gutted at the time though got enough to clear finance and a depsit on my latest car

I plan to call solicitor monday to discuss
Any idea what to expect:eek:

dannyrst

Do you have evidence that they crossed lanes (dashcam)? If not, do you have witnesses that weren't in your car at the time?

If you have neither of these, you're likely to only get 50/50 anyway. Your word vs theirs with no evidence either way.

Dandytf

dannyrst wrote: »

Do you have evidence that they crossed lanes (dashcam)? If not, do you have witnesses that weren't in your car at the time?

If you have neither of these, you're likely to only get 50/50 anyway. Your word vs theirs with no evidence either way.

I dont have a cam or winesses


what does 50/50 mean?

dannyrst

It means you were both equally at fault. Unless you have evidence or witnesses to confirm otherwise, it is very hard to prove the other person was at fault.

Them admitting liability at the roadside doesn't mean much unless you can prove it.

Dandytf

dannyrst wrote: »

It means you were both equally at fault. Unless you have evidence or witnesses to confirm otherwise, it is very hard to prove the other person was at fault.

Them admitting liability at the roadside doesn't mean much unless you can prove it.

I'll attend court anyway not often if at all a car crashes into mine sending my car into a wall

Thanks for advice very much appreciated.

Ive since read some other examples it could be very difficult for insurance companies to prove 50/50

As mentioned earlier i'll phone solicitor Mon a.m

facade

Dandytf wrote: »

what does 50/50 mean?

To you:

If you have the usual fully comprehensive insurance-

You have to pay 50% of your excess (the third party will pay 50% of your excess)
You will lose some of your no-claims bonus (unless protected)
You will have an "at fault" claim to declare and on your record, and your policy will cost more next year.

unless you have third party only-
in which case the other insurer will pay you 50% of your losses.
You will lose some of your no-claims bonus (unless protected)
You will have an "at fault" claim to declare and on your record, and your policy will cost more next year.

if they fold and agree 100% liability-

the third party will pay all of your losses
You won't lose any of your no-claims bonus.
You will have a "none fault" claim to declare and on your record, and your policy will cost more next year.

if your side lose and agree 100% liability-

You have to pay your full excess
You will lose some of your no-claims bonus (unless protected)
You will have an "at fault" claim to declare and on your record, and your policy will cost more next year.



So the difference is possibly losing no-claims bonus, and 50% to 100% of your excess.

Your insurer will find a way to charge you more next year whatever the outcome

lluzers

Going to court is like buying a lottery ticket.

Have they admitted liability in writing to you?If you don't have written confirmation ,it is not a straight forward case.Do you have witnesses?Do you have photographs from the scene ?Do you have police report?Are you using Legal expenses insurance?

Read the following thread ,it will give you a better idea of court system and the cheap and ineffective legal representatives , that you may be provided.Most of the LEI legal staff and services are sub standard.

Thread:LEI legal expenses car accidents scam

Dandytf

Excellent facade thanks for the detailed examples.

As always appriciate mser's advice

I'll update once I call soliciotr Mon a.m.

Dandytf

Thanks Lluzers

I read the mentioned thread not an ideal decision at all

Though I'll attend court anway

lluzers

Dandytf wrote: »

Thanks Lluzers

I read the mentioned thread not an ideal decision at all

Though I'll attend court anway

Ok here is some tips

Prepare mentally for the court appearance , present your case as a person full of innocence , don't rely on solicitors because you have to do the hard work of presenting an effective case with effective evidence.The solicitors are only good for presenting your legal part of the case to court.They add no value ,in fact the LEI solicitors are geared to present little information , little information can be dangerous.

If you get to the court stages , you have try and contradict the defense statements e.g They say your car already had other damage (standard defense) , therefore value should be much less , you have to say I had it valued at £xxxx 1 week months earlier. You have to get smarter with these !!!!!!s.

Usually insurance companies don't like going to court , so they may settle in full on court notice.Say Norwich union is also re-insurer for Tesco insurance , so you can have them agree 50/50 instead of going to court ,they lose in fees .I don't know the value of your car , so can't comment.

About 30 years ago ,I had an accident ,I sent them a bill for £3,000 in 1983 ,and just took it to the high court.They settled within a few weeks by depositing money in court , otherwise in other cases they would take 15 months to settle.

Good luck

lluzers

Get one of your friends to write you a written conditional offer for the car , that you were going to exchange that weekend for £2k+, but the accident happened in the meantime .It might help prevent the third party insurance from screwing you.They might settle.