RTA, insurance company want me to possibly go to court...what should I do?

[Shreksfiona]

Hi

I was involved in a RTA about 3 weeks ago and it was my fault as I went into the back of someone, which I reported this straight away to my insurance.

About a week later I got a telephone call from my insurance that the other driver has put in a personal injury claim for whiplash and they felt somewhat skeptical as the accident was low impact, I was going round a corner doing 5mph.

The insurance are saying that her claim is borderline and there was minimal damage to her vehicle, her insurance company have written her car off, not just caused by the accident but other factors aswell, such as past deteoration of the vehicle.

My daughter was a passaenger in my car and suffered mild whiplash for a few days but this has resolved and she seems ok, and she does not want to claim.

My insurance are trying to say that this other driver could not of possibly suffered whiplash as a result of the accident.

I am started to feel sorry for this girl and I dont want to go to court as I would not want to call anyone a liar when my daughter had mild symptoms herself, the other girl has no vehicle and now my insurance are not willing to pay out and want to challenge everything.

Do I have to challenge this with the insurance as I am no whiplash expert
I am really begginning to dislike the insurance company I am with, any advice would be appreciated.

TIA x

[dedado]

I'm no expert.
The terms of your insurance policy could require you to help them minimise the claim. Whether that includes you attending court in person might be worth checking.
If you attend , if think you can only give a factual account about the accident as thou remember it. Speculating on how anyone in another car was affected is not on.
fwiw the other driver's chance of suffering whiplash are also dependant on things like her posture during the collision . That's why airlines talk about the brace position. If e.g. the girl had her head turned to the side she could be affected differently than if she was facing straight on. also she may have a preexisting condition which was affected by the collision.

[dedado]

Predictive text! Thou!

[TensionWheelsCoolHeels]

I would suggest that you tell your insurer that your passenger suffered similar symptoms being claimed by the other party, and you could not agree to go to court to challenge her claim while knowing your own passenger had genuine symptoms following the collision. You don't have to agree to go to court, it's entirely your decision, and if you don't go to court, the insurer will have no choice but to deal with the claim.

[prh47bridge]

As dedado says, your policy may well say that you have to give your insurer all the help they need in conducting legal proceedings. That means you have to turn up and give evidence. If you fail to do so you will be in breach of your insurance policy and could be personally liable for any damages awarded to the other party.

No-one is asking you to call anyone a liar nor will you be treated as an expert on whiplash injuries. You will simply be asked to say what happened.

[Hanginggardenofboobylon]

Make it clear to them that you do not agree that the other driver could not have suffered injury.
They will not call you as a witness in court if you are not supportive of their case.
You are usually under an obligation with your policy to cooperate with any court proceedings. They may decide to take it to court if they think the claim is exaggerated depending on what they think she is exaggerating about you may need to give evidence in court eg about the location of the damage on the car.
Insurers love trying to run these arguments, you may well find that it never gets as far as court anyway. Insurers like to be bullish at the outset to flush out dodgy claims

[TensionWheelsCoolHeels]

Any claim an insurer wants to defend in court is dependent on the strength of evidence they have. If your own passenger sustained an injury, then they'll have a hard job trying to disprove any injury claimed by the other party. You need to tell them that, as it affects how they assess the strengths/weaknesses of their case, and will determine what route they'll take in dealing with the case. You won't be held liable for the outcome or costs if you have made it clear you do not want to attend court and that you do not agree with their view because your own passenger was injured. The T&Cs of your policy require you to co-operate with any enquiries they have about the claim/accident circumstances/losses etc. but they do not mean you are compelled to go to court against your wishes. I've dealt with these claims for 20 years, and in claims where there is a dispute that relies on the policyholder to challenge whatever it is/attend court to give evidence, the PH is asked if they are willing to attend court. If they say no, the claim is dealt with on the best terms. No one is ever forced to go to court. And refusal does not mean you'll end up paying for the claim or the court costs. The most an insurer can do is refuse indemnity due to non-co-operation with an investigation but not refusal to attend court (which could affect the cover for your own repairs) but even that still means they'll have to meet the costs of the claim against you.

[cumfy]

What have they actually said re court ?

What did police say ?

[Shreksfiona]

They want me to say in court if neccesary that the accident could of not caused her any injuries, the police are not involved, thx everyone for your replies x

[Pollywallywinkles]

Most claims like this do not go to court. Even if it did, all you should be asked are the facts of the accident. It will be down to expert clinical bods to give an opinion on injury.

You should cooperate with any investigation by you insurance company and should also inform them that your daughter suffered with some whiplash as well.

[TiredDog]

I was asked if I was prepared to go to court over an RTA. Said yes. It never went. I think I was asked to assess whether I stood by my statement. I did, the other party didn't and my version was accepted.

A court would never accept an opinion from another driver over whether an accident could have caused an injury. They might want to hear your estimation of speed and other facts that you have already given e.g. backing up your already given statement. An unprofessional opinion on likelihood of injury. No.

All you can be asked is to confirm in a court setting the details you have already given

[Shreksfiona]

Then why are my insurance asking me this question of her personal injury? In his words over the phone 'we would like you to be a good witness and if necessary tell the court that this was such a minor incident where it is highly unlikely an injury had occurred' I feel absolutely rail roaded by my insurance into doing something I don't want to do, so in my opinion I don't want to co operate.
I hit the back end of her vehicle and cracked my own headlight and it was a jolt more than a tap, don't get me wrong it wasn't a bad accident but it was heavily raining and when we got out of the vehicle , there was no visible damage on her vehicle only on my vehicle.
The girl was in shock and start crying, I had to calm her down and we did not leave this on bad terms, I apologised and she kept apologising to me.
I have had an assessor already look at my vehicle and get his measuring stick out etc,
Also he told me over the phone the other day that this all depends on cost, whether it's worth going to court, it will be cheaper to pay her out.

I feel crap and feel sorry for this girl, as it was me who caused the accident and all this seems to be about is my insurance trying to reduce the payment, as soon as this is over I will be definitely going with another insurance company... X

[TiredDog]

we would like you to be a good witness and if necessary tell the court that this was such a minor incident where it is highly unlikely an injury had occurred

You can be a good witness and tell the court the facts of the accident. Whether the court decide a personal injury is a likely consequence is down to them. Your opinion is irrelevant as you are neither expert nor independent. (I mean that in the nicest possible way :) )

I just wonder if your insurers are trying to pin some degree of blame onto you...suggesting your version of events is inaccurate unless you 'testify' to them? Call their bluff and agree to testify. I can't quite see why tbh. I suspect they are trying to minimise the personal injury payout but that will be decided on medical evidence

[ZiaMaria]

Tell them you are happy to go to court but if you do you will tell only the truth. Then tell them that since your passenger did get whiplash, it is likely that the other driver did too. If they keep telling you that they want you to say she could not have got whiplash - ask them if they want you to lie. Then as them if their call is being recorded (which it should be).

Your insurers will then back off.

[Shreksfiona]

Thx tired dog, I am not an expert at all and my opinions on whiplash are irrellevant, I had told them this on the phone that this will be down to the experts, they also told me that they are trying to build a case round the fact that the accident was minor in nature.

I have not told them about my daughter suffering an injury, this has resolved and she did not want to claim, there story is wishy washy, at first, they told me that the other party was still off work after 10 days then he tells me she was only off one day work.

[TensionWheelsCoolHeels]

Shrek, it sounds like your are dealing with someone who is just determined to get the evidence he needs to prove this woman is lying about her injury, and is wrongly telling you that you have to go to court. You don't have to. You can say no. And if you haven't told them your DD suffered similar injuries then they'll not realise they are barking up the wrong tree with this claim. If you are unhappy with how this person has been pushing you to do this, phone back and explain about your DD and ask to make a complaint about how you were dealt with. I have worked with these claims a long time, and I've never been able to force a policyholder into giving evidence in court. None of our solicitors would appreciate their case being based on a very reluctant witness, who also has information that another person involved has suffered a similar injury in a case being run to prove no one could have been injured. It completely undermines their case, and would be a waste of time and money.

Phone them back and tell them you do not want to attend court. If you get more pressure or threats re your own policy cover, ask to speak to a manager and make a complaint. If they are suggesting that you are compelled to attend court against your wishes, ask them to quote the section of your policy that says this (it won't say it because it's not part of T&Cs - the duty to report a claim and co-operate with an investigation is just that, an investigation. It will not specifically say you must attend court if requested to). These types of claims are very difficult to prove as bogus, and as someone else says, you are not qualified to say the other driver couldn't have been injured. Plus you know your own DD was injured so that again undermines the strength of your evidence here.

[Shreksfiona]

Thx so much tension, this has been stressing me out so much, I feel so guilty about the accident as it was my fault, I also mentioned to someone on the phone that my visibility was low as it was heavily raining and I wasn't sure 100% whether I shunted the other vehicle x

[greenfolder]

Another insurance claims insider. I would actually put in writing (email will do) that you do not feel able to comment on whether the impact could have caused an injury-you are no expert. Your own daughter suffered a mild injury and the other girl would not have been in a position to brace herself. You will not stand in court and say something that you do not know.
The insurer will check each claim to see if its worth defending. Due to recent changes in costs the insurers are unlikely to defend the case, the risks just are not worth it. Where I work, if there is a suggestion of low speed impact, the handler will call and ask questions to screen. The only ones that run are where there is no damage to either car.

[Shreksfiona]

Thx greenfolder and everyone for the sound advice , much appreciated xx

[QuintessentialShadows]

Maybe they are trying to ascertain whether she wore a seat belt or not when driving?