Accident claims, does anyone else feel like this?

[dionherbike]

I am interested to know if anyone feels the same way that I do about the personal injury claim culture. I was knocked off my bike this morning, classic SMIDSY. I was hit by a car joining the road that I was cycling along in the daylight with my high viz jacket and helmet cover, and flashing lights. I have a developing bruise on my chin and road rash on my elbow. I got all the details from the driver and he brought my bike home. Another lovely couple who had stopped to make sure I was ok brought me home (he offered me a lift, but I didn't want to get into the car with him). I have reported the incident to the police, but we all know the story there .... My only recourse is to take action through personal injury. Now, I can't stomach these things and I think that they cause a whole lot of misery in all sorts of ways. I just makes me feel like I would want to take several hot showers to get the slime off, so it is unlikely that I will do this. It's also made me realise that the police seem to have handed over the management of and justice for 'minor', i.e. I'm not dead, incidents to the insurance companies. I know that there are plenty of people who will say 'go for it' and 'you must do this'. I just want to know that I am not alone in feeling like this.

[Mark1978]

Yup. You've been thrust into this world of personal injury claims, accident claims, insurance comapanies and everything else. Through no fault of your own.

[gaz]

Sorry to hear of the incident, I hope you make a swift recovery.

If you haven't already please see your GP for an assessment of your injuries. You need to be sure they are only superficial and if you do decide to make a claim a medical record will prove useful. Take some photographs too, keep a diary of your pain/discomfort and recovery.

If there was any damage to your bike and clothing and you need to use buses/trains/taxis until your bike is repaired then you'll be left out of pocket unless you seek compensation.

The "No Win, No Fee" brigade will only be interested in helping if you also pursue personal injury compensation, otherwise the amounts are most likely too small for them to bother with.

You don't have to deal with them, you can go it alone. Posts from stoobs in this thread give a little background to claiming directly from the driver using "small claims court" procedures. Another recent case reported here which seems to have been settled through the driver's insurance without employing any ambulance chasers.

CDF provide some information on what you can do after an incident. It's up to you what action you take.

[karlt]

Even if the police prosecuted, you'd still be going through the same procedure to claim civil damages. The civil and criminal justice systems are quite separate in what they cover.

[thirdcrank]

I am interested to know if anyone feels the same way that I do about the personal injury claim culture.....

I'd try to get that line of thinking out of your head and be as dispassionate as possible. That's not easy because you have been dumped in an unpleasant situation with which you are presumably unfamiliar and all the aches and pains, combined with the realisation of how much worse it could have been, don't contribute to clear thinking.

You need to be clear now about what you hope to achieve and then think about how that might be done.

It's an unfortunate fact that the police take a lot less action following collisions than was once the case. If you have reported it - and if you are confident that it has been recorded as an injury "accident" - then there's not much more to be done in that direction. In any case, the police action is limited to prosecutions ie having the guilty punished.

Think of the personal injury claims services offered by many reputable solicitors including things like the CTC's accident helpline as providing access to legal advice and representation that would not otherwise be available to most of us. It suits insurance companies and others to characterise this as a "claims culture" but they would say that, if you think about it. It is true that there are all sorts of cowboys trying to act as intermediaries between people who have been injured and the people offering legal advice and they have brought some disrepute on the entire system. The answer is surely to avoid the cowboys.

Any decent solicitor will tell you if you have a worthwhile case and will explain the options for pursuing it. Don't be misled by stories in the pub of telephone-number compo payouts: in personal injury cases, big payouts only result from serious disabilities. The scope for exaggerating injuries is relatively restricted. If you have "only" suffered minor bruises etc., the extent of any compo will be proportionately restricted.

The most important thing now is to get medical attention, both to ensure there are no underlying injuries which will only become apparent later, and to have a proper record of your injuries. This and other evidence is best recorded and secured at the time, rather than trying to recover the situation months or even years later.

Finally, another big advantage, IMO, of getting decent legal advice is that it should put your mind at rest. ie there's less likelihood of "if only" misgivings in future if you sort things out now.

[honesty]

Personal injury in the UK is not about getting punitive damages, but to cover you for money you are out of pocket because of the accident. This includes costs for transport, reduction to ability to work now and in the future, property damage, and so on. There is a lot of stigma around the personal injury area, but I think a lot of this is inherited from the US and the ambulance chasing culture there.

on top of this, it has become because the police are doing less and less to "minor" road incidents, the only way to get redress against poor driving...

[MartinC]

I don't really understand the OP's position at all. They are quite happy to report the other party to the Police and potentially trigger some criminal sanction against them. But they have moral qualms about getting the perpetrator's insurance company to redress the damage they've caused. So sorry, no, I don't feel like that at all. Seems almost like some strange sort of snobbery. It takes all sorts though, apparently some people will pay good money to be mistreated.

[stork]

For a relatively minor injury/damage claim, it may be better not to involve lawyers/ambulance-chasers. If your injury claim is worth less than £1000 then you'll probably be in Small Claims territory anyway.

I had a relatively minor claim which arose the year before last, knocked off by a car pulling out of a side road into me (I was waiting to turn right into the side road). Approx £100 damage to bike, and some minor bruising/discomfort for up to 4 weeks. It was a hit and run, and it was not clear whether the driver was insured, although the car had an insurance policy associated with it.

I wrote to the insurer and asked them to settle it. They delayed on the pretext of trying to contact the driver (who had by now disappeared and was unlikely to make contact voluntarily, given that there was an arrest warrant out for him), but they eventually settled on acceptable terms (£300 overall). There were no legal costs/fees, so the only outlay in my case was £4 to the Motor Insurers' Database.

If you're going it alone, then I'd say go through the driver's insurance company. Keep all your evidence (invoices, medical reports if any, photos etc.) and provide it to them. You can either ask them to suggest a figure (which will probably be met with a lowball offer) or you can start negotiations by suggesting your own figure. There is some reasonably reliable information out there as to the 'worth' of injuries, i.e. the appropriate level of compensation, but for minor injuries there's not so much.

Be patient with the insurer and persistent when necessary, and it'll most likely settle without any need for Court proceedings - which would often cost the insurer far more than the value of the claim.

[dionherbike]

Thank you all for your advice. This is not the first time that I have been knocked off my bike. Last time involved an ambulance and the police and resulted in a new bike, funnily enough the very one I got knocked off of today.

[chris_suffolk]

I was knocked off last year - crutches and no walking / driving for 6 weeks. Police came round and took statements, and (eventually) after justice had run it's course he was taken to court and pleaded guilty. His insurance company admitted liability irrespective of his view point, and damage to bike was paid for very quickly.

Make sure you see a GP / hospital, as once you accept any payment, or agree there is no need, then it's final, and if there are problems later then you have no where to go.

Def persue, and whilst the police may need the odd 'reminder', I did find that they were keen to prosecute

Just my observations.

[Tom Richardson]

I don't understand why you feel like that Dionherbike. If you had run into their car you can bet they would be suing you for damages now. There is very little redress for injury by careless motorists. So little that many motorists don't give a second thought to putting vulnerable road users at risk. The civil system of negligence claims for damages paid for by insurance is just about the only protection you will get as a vulnerable road user (and a non vulnerable one as well).

Motorists are usually not aware that they can be sued for negligence if they injure a vulnerable road user. Strict and presumed liability has been discussed in other threads. The only practical benefit that it brings is that it makes road users aware that they can be sued if they cause injury to others. The evidence from more civilised European countries suggests that by doing that it makes the roads a whole lot safer for vulnerable road users. Claiming damages for your loss and injury in this case will make at least one more motorist aware that they can't cause harm to vulnerable road users without risk of redress and, more importantly, it will cover your loss from people who chose to act in that way.

You have a right to claim damages as result of their negligence, to put you back into a position that leaves you at least no worse off. You say that you don't want that and seem to find it distasteful. I find it distasteful that people use motor vehicles in public places in a way that presents serious risk to vulnerable road users, frequently causing harm to vulnerable road users and without concern for the consequences. Your message gives the view that you're ok with that and better still its ok to cause injury and damage because their won't be any consequences.

[RogerThat]

My nephew recently ran into the back of a car which (in his estimation) braked too fiercely. To cut a long story short he suffered pretty extensive facial lacerations and a broken tooth. The car sustained bumper and paint damage. He contacted me to say the woman was now asking for £750 to repair the car. I've advised him to sue her for physical injury and write off of a brand new bike. No witnesses, or statements given to the police (by him at any rate) any thoughts?

[gaz]

any thoughts?

If he has any form of legal assistance or public liability insurance (e.g. cycle club membership, home insurance, union) it's time to use it. If not then phone one of the "no win, no fee" people, they'll only take the case if they think he could win. If they don't think he can win then it's either paying up, trying to settle or waiting to see what the driver does next.

[irc]

My nephew recently ran into the back of a car which (in his estimation) braked too fiercely.

Why was it braking? If it was braking for a valid reason to avoid a hazard I think your nephew was at fault. Cars have better brakes than bikes so an appropriate gap needs to be maintained. In an emergency stop situation drivers can be expected to brake hard rather than assessing precisely how much braking is needed.

Why does your nephew think she braked too hard?

[Steve922]

I don't think it matters why or if she 'braked too hard.' If you run into the back of someone you are at fault. You were following too close for your speed/reaction time.
The only exception I can think of to this is someone moving in front of you too closely (say, after overtaking) and then braking hard and that could be considered assault.