[Russeh]

In April some idiot went into the back of me on the A1 (orginal post here). The guy is not admitting liability and its still dragging on, solicitors are involved now and i signed the papers a couple of weeks ago to start court proceedings

. I really dont want to go to court but i wont just roll over on just on sheer principle, so has anyone been to court before and what should i expect. I've googled it quite a lot and theres not much out there on this so was just wondering if anyone else has been through it?

Greenlight think i'm in a good position becuase i was stationary when he hit me but with no witnesses i'm not convinced. I have no convictions or points on my licance and l'm hoping my own integrity will help my case, becuase thats what it comes down to his word against mine. The whole thing is at the back of my mind quite frequently and i just wonder if its all worth it, my insurance would be about £1400 with no NCB which could be worse in all honestly. And apparently it can take up to 40-50 weeks to get a court date so its going to drag on even more.

Anyway, anyone with any experience or input on the situation would be appreciated.

 

[fishface31a]

This has happened to me twice on the motorbike! Both times the other party suddenly admitted liability just before the court date! I would say you are in a strong position as the party that hits the rear of the other vehicle is usually held accountable for the damage caused! Im sure there will be somebody along soon with better understanding of the law that can put your mind at rest further though!

 

[Tigger390]

I have been in a similar situation, hit up the rear, but did not have to got to court, the other side settled. I suspect it is a delaying tactic, or they are angling for a deal. If you stick to your guns the threat of court should make them come to their senses.
Good luck.

 

[Russeh]

Humm is it him that has to admit liability or his insurance company, becuase if its him i dont think he will. I've spoken to him a couple of times and he's been to court before and he's clearly not phased by it.

 

[Dabhand16]

If he is not admitting liability, is he saying you reversed into him, or the incident never happened? Has his insurers been notified of the incident by him? Your insurers might be able to give you an indication of why liability is being contested.

Often, when you take someone to court they admit liability either when the papers are served on them giving the date, or maybe closer to the date. Sometimes they will not turn up at court!

If you do have to go to court, don't worry about it. You will have to give your side of the story as will the other bloke. Evidence and/or witnesses can be produces to support or negate either story, but you need to know what his story is in order to be prepared.

 

[Russeh]

Shortly before the accident lane 3 was closing which i was in i had to move over, i moved into a big gab between him and the car infront of him in lane 2. I safely moved over and serveral seconds elapsed when traffic came to a standstill, i stopped and then he went into me. from what i can gather he's not contesting that i made a safe manover but rather that i took his breaking distance. Now i lef thim more room than than i did infront of me and there was easy 40 yards between us, which is ample at 30-35mph.

 

[Tigger390]

QUOTE(Russeh @ 4 Jan 2010, 04:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Humm is it him that has to admit liability or his insurance company, becuase if its him i dont think he will. I've spoken to him a couple of times and he's been to court before and he's clearly not phased by it.

I think that if the facts speak for themselves, his insurance company will admit liability regardless of what he says. Usually when 1 car runs into the back of a stationary car, the stationary car is punted forward and suffers less damage. iirc this is a rule of thumb fact recognised insurance companies and their engineers.

 

[Si]

Go to Court its easy, to be honest most of this stuff settles well before the door, even if you do its usually done with very quickly, half the time in chambers rather than in a Court, dont be phased by it, modern Court Rooms are not what you may expect at all, I take it your insurer is backing you and paying the costs?

 

[Russeh]

QUOTE(Tigger390 @ 4 Jan 2010, 04:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I think that if the facts speak for themselves, his insurance company will admit liability regardless of what he says. Usually when 1 car runs into the back of a stationary car, the stationary car is punted forward and suffers less damage. iirc this is a rule of thumb fact recognised insurance companies and their engineers.

yeah no i didnt go into the back of the guy in front which kinda backs up my story (he also says he was doing 50mph) you've only to look at the damange to see thats not the case.

QUOTE(Si @ 4 Jan 2010, 05:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Go to Court its easy, to be honest most of this stuff settles well before the door, even if you do its usually done with very quickly, half the time in chambers rather than in a Court, dont be phased by it, modern Court Rooms are not what you may expect at all, I take it your insurer is backing you and paying the costs?

cheers thats kinda want i'm trying to get to know, what to expect at court etc never been in a police station let alone a court lol. Yeah insurance company have been fully supportive, appart from being messed about by Car crash line at the very begining Green light have been spot on.

 

[Si]

QUOTE(Russeh @ 4 Jan 2010, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>yeah no i didnt go into the back of the guy in front which kinda backs up my story (he also says he was doing 50mph) you've only to look at the damange to see thats not the case.

cheers thats kinda want i'm trying to get to know, what to expect at court etc never been in a police station let alone a court lol. Yeah insurance company have been fully supportive, appart from being messed about by Car crash line at the very begining Green light have been spot on.

OK heres what to expect, if your Insurer is funding it they will probably instruct a Barrister or a Solicitor with higher rights of audience. You will end up in a normal room with some desks, the middle one will be inhabited by a DJ, no not with decks, District Judge, there will be you and your counsel on one side and the other person and theres or not on the other, you will be asked to give your version the other side theres and at some-point either on the day or a couple of days later judgement will be given by the DJ. It really is nothing to worry about

Its not like Crown or Magistrates Court, its Civil Court and usually is very Civil.

 

[Russeh]

QUOTE(Si @ 4 Jan 2010, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>OK heres what to expect, if your Insurer is funding it they will probably instruct a Barrister or a Solicitor with higher rights of audience. You will end up in a normal room with some desks, the middle one will be inhabited by a DJ, no not with decks, District Judge, there will be you and your counsel on one side and the other person and theres or not on the other, you will be asked to give your version the other side theres and at some-point either on the day or a couple of days later judgement will be given by the DJ. It really is nothing to worry about

Its not like Crown or Magistrates Court, its Civil Court and usually is very Civil.

thank you! i've been asking for someone to give me that kind of low down for a while now and now ones really explained it, i think its becuase like many of you they dont really see it going to court but me being a bit of a planner i like to be prepared.

Cheers Si

 

[Russeh]

well the end is nigh, court date tomorrow so if its going to be settled out of court then i expect some kind of phone call today

As it stands i reckon i'll be going tomorrow this guy is pretty persistant and there's no way i'm backing down.

wish me luck :S

 

[Sus]

Good luck but im sure you wont need it.

 

[Mart170]

All the best buddy, let us know the outcome

 

[Mick-ST]

Just read this post from the start mate, it's a pain how much these things can drag on. I was involved in a nasty shunt at the beginning of last year, I was a passenger in my lasses car and someone went flying into the back of us on the A1 due to very low sun, there was probably about 5 cars involved in all (3 in our accident and 2 in another unrelated accident)

Fortunately she didn't try to dispute liability to much, though she did try to say that guy who hit her pushed her car into ours! (there was a slight crack in his bumper and no damage to the rear of hers!)

Anyway the car was a write off and after about 6 months we got a canny little payout that paid for our holiday

Again best of luck matey, I'm sure you will not need it.

 

[Russeh]

thanks for the support

- its got to the stage now where i dont care & i'm not nervous about tomorrow, if anything it'll be over ad done with at last. Thing is without witness's its his word against mine so the most likely outcome will be 50/50. This would be very annoying after all this time & worry. Anyway i'm going to throw my integrity at them and hopefully that should help me

 

[Foran]

from what i can gather he's not contesting that i made a safe manover but rather that i took his breaking distance.

Call me old fashioned, but isn't that a contradiction - if you took his breaking distance away from him then it can't be a safe manoeuvre. If he agrees it was safe then I'd think he's really rather dropping himself in it!

 

[Russeh]

Call me old fashioned, but isn't that a contradiction - if you took his breaking distance away from him then it can't be a safe manoeuvre. If he agrees it was safe then I'd think he's really rather dropping himself in it!

yeah well i hope so, i've a good chance apparently becuase i was stopped when he hit me and the damage that was done was directly to the rear of my car and just on his front bumper. if i'd cut him up as he's suggesting there would be damage to the rear quarter & sides etc.

not had a phone call today so i'm assuming its all still on, will be glad when its all over.

 

[Russeh]

well i can't quite believe it but i lost!

it went right to the wire the judge clearly thought it was a dificult desion as she said so but desided to believe him on how fast we were going which was 50 and not 35-40 that i was saying. Seriously angry right now my barrister was utter pap, he tryed to make some argument disputing the stopping distances in the highway code! This is my first experience of the legal system and i can quite honestly say if the rest of it is like the small claims courts its utter

. My advise to anyone thats in a similar situation is just lie, just outright lie because honestly gets you no where.

i'm off to sulk

Russ

 

[Phil]

Russ sorry to hear the outcome, can you not appeal the decision? Not sure if you can?

If not its done now. don't beat yourself up over it.
sounds like they sent along a junior barister to fight your case, you were unlucky this time, but your ok and you will build up your no claims again.