Insurance excess court hearing

Torak006

Long story short, someone hit me at a roundabout last yr, went through insurances and they admitted liability via their insurance company. My car went off to get fixed and I had to pay out my excess and claim it back.  My insurance company solicitors are shocking, ive had to chase them over things and they set my claim up wrong originally etc etc. But now they say other party insurers are not replying and to get my excess back (150 plus some other expenses £40) they need to take them to court.  So they have sent me all the stuff to sign for court along with them also asking for nearly 4k of repairs, which I had to check this was correct so I could sign the paperwork as being correct.  I sent it back and then they confirmed i would need to attend court... more expense for me e.g travel, time off work.  But as I am down as the claimant im assuming I have no choice? My questions are, is this normal? Why am I the claimant including for the repairs which I havent paid and I assume my ins co did? Surely my insurance company sols should be handling all this, why do I need to attend? And what happens if I cant attend (Im waiting on a medical appointment nothing to do with this)?

MyRealNameToo

Torak006 said:

Long story short, someone hit me at a roundabout last yr, went through insurances and they admitted liability via their insurance company. My car went off to get fixed and I had to pay out my excess and claim it back.  My insurance company solicitors are shocking, ive had to chase them over things and they set my claim up wrong originally etc etc. But now they say other party insurers are not replying and to get my excess back (150 plus some other expenses £40) they need to take them to court.  So they have sent me all the stuff to sign for court along with them also asking for nearly 4k of repairs, which I had to check this was correct so I could sign the paperwork as being correct.  I sent it back and then they confirmed i would need to attend court... more expense for me e.g travel, time off work.  But as I am down as the claimant im assuming I have no choice? My questions are, is this normal? Why am I the claimant including for the repairs which I havent paid and I assume my ins co did? Surely my insurance company sols should be handling all this, why do I need to attend? And what happens if I cant attend (Im waiting on a medical appointment nothing to do with this)?

Its normal

The case will remain as you -v- the other driver as the two people involved in the accident, elements may have been paid for by the insurer but it was done so on your behalf and the law recognises this. 

The insurer could issue under their own name but that would be taking your rights away from you and your insurer hasn't paid your excess nor the £40 expenses and so they cannot issue for those losses. A party can only go to court once about one incident so there must be one case in your name for you to be able to get your excess back and them to get their outlay back. 

Most cases dont end up in court, most are resolved before the court room. Even if it does go to court in a simple case it can be judged on by submissions only or potentially by a video call. This is something the judge will decide when it gets to directions. 

You need to attend because the judge may ask questions and given you were there and your insurer wasnt they won't be able to answer. The one way to guarantee losing a case is by not turning up. Judges dont like their time being wasted. 

Torak006

Thanks for your reply, that does make a lot more sense, but from your reply it reads like the court papers should read me vs the other person, but its me vs the other parties insurance company.   He was insured through Hastings but the insurance company named isnt them so I can only assume Hastings are the broker.   Should it be me vs him, or is it ok that its me vs insurance company?

MyRealNameToo

Torak006 said:

Thanks for your reply, that does make a lot more sense, but from your reply it reads like the court papers should read me vs the other person, but its me vs the other parties insurance company.   He was insured through Hastings but the insurance company named isnt them so I can only assume Hastings are the broker.   Should it be me vs him, or is it ok that it's me vs insurance company?

Its more commonly done as you -v- him but there is nothing wrong with you -v- his insurer... they dont have the same problem of dealing with both their own and their clients losses, if they did they would file to get him included as co-defendant with a counterclaim. 

For a start someone having court papers turning up on their doorstep normally gets them on the phone to their insurers asking why they haven't sorted this all out already etc 

Torak006

Amazing, thank you. You've put my mind at rest. Let's hope it doesnt get to court.  🤞