DH involved in an accident in June, other party is asking for more money. We genuinely don't know what to do.

[RaisedFromPerdition]

DH was following a car while on his pushbike in June and the driver braked suddenly to avoid hitting a pedestrian who had stepped out. DH saw what was happening without time to avoid hitting the back of her car. He managed to swerve and only made contact on the bumper.

Obviously he admitted it was his fault as it was but he has no insurance as he was on his push bike. He said he would pay reasonable costs. He said there was a scratch on the bumper but no other visible damage (obviously acknowledging there might be more damage that was unseen).

We had a flood of solicitors letters within a week and finally two quotes for repair. One for £500, one for £700. The £700 one said that the entire rear of the car needed new panels and/or resprays. DH caught the bumper and nothing else.

DH phoned his work's legal advice line and they said to ask for the car to be taken to our garage for a further quote. We trust our mechanic and have known him for years. He said he wouldn't touch the repair with a barge pole. He knows the woman through another incident and described her as 'litigious'. He advised just paying the lower quote and chalking it up as a bad experience.

So we did. We said about a month or so ago just to get the work done for the lower quote and we'd pay it.

We've just had another email from the solicitor. They want another £100 for more work that they've found.

We just don't know what to do. We barely have the £500, now it's £600.

What do we do? Pay up? Hope that's it?

DH was on a pushbike fgs. He clipped her bumper. But the mechanic was very clear. Do not push her unless we want a court battle.

Also the woman may be guilty of a criminal offence.

Attempting to gain a pecuniary advantage by deception.

I would fight them (unless this gets your hubby in trouble at work ). I pulled out slowly from a junction a couple of years ago in my car and did not see a car coming. (I blame 7 month pregnancy blindness )I swerved, he slammed on but my right hand bumper scraped his front wing. It was my fault, and I apologised, there was no mark on my car except for a slight graze on my bumper, his car had no dent apart from my bumper colour on a streak,.

I said I would pay for the repair and took his details, I also said he could take it to the garage where my brother works and I would make sure they take care of it today

It was a local taxi, so the tax boss then started phoning, refusing to take it to our garage, demanding that we pay firtly £200 then £500. he then came to my house with 3 friends, and showed me "damage" from the wrong side! and said that if we refused to pay cash he would make sure his driver claimed whiplash and that the car would be in a lot worse state..

I was bloody annoyed and scared, and phoned the local council taxi service as they really started harressing me...turns out they have to report EVERY accident, and had not, they were overdue their MOT inspection, and that the driver I described was not the driver they had on record under that name. I explained, it was my fault, and I was happy to pay to put it back, but not to respray and get dints out I did not put in.

Council officer went to see them and I never heard another peep from them..

Your husband has no liability unless he intentionally caused the damage or his negligence caused the damage to the car.

Cyclists and pedestrians do not need insurance and that is why all vehicles do require insurance by law.

She should claim on her own insurance and you should pay her nothing. If she can't claim on her own insurance, then she should have got fully comp.

The reason cyclists and pedestrians don't need insurance is that they are unlikely to cause significant damage to a vehicle and therefore should be able to pay for any damage they do cause. In this case the bicyclist has hit a stationary car. The cyclist is therefore responsible for the accident and legally liable for any damage to the car. Yes, the driver may be able to claim it against their insurance but why should they lose their no claims bonus?

As you say, he has no liability unless his negligence caused the damage. On the facts of this case, the courts would have no hesitation in finding that his negligence did indeed cause the damage. However, the driver is clearly inflating the claim - there is no way that a small scratch costs £600 to repair.

We've taken independent legal advice and think we're going to the small claims court if it goes that far. Apparently, the worse case scenario is that we have to pay the quote and £65 court fees.

The solicitors say the only reason he hit the back of her was because she had overtaken dh seconds beforehand. She took his chance of having a stopping distance by overtaking at an inappropriate moment. Luckily, the fact that it was a police accident means that she gave a statement (as did several witnesses) confirming that she overtook dh and then immediately braked (she overtook by a rh junction too which is also important apparently).

We are not trying to wriggle out of paying. DH is still offering to pay reasonable costs for the repair of the scratch. But the respray, new panels etc he is challenging.

Does that sound fair?

DH has offered her £200 as acknowledgment of the fact that he did hit her and scratch her bumper. He has pointed out that he had an adequate stopping distance on approach to the pedestrian crossing, she had to accelerate to past him and then slam on her brakes at the crossing, effectively taking away his stopping distance. He has also pointed out that his bike was undamaged entirely and he can provide documents to attest to this fact.

You are being more than fair in my view. The new information about overtaking by a rh junction changes things somewhat and raises the question of whether or not your DH is actually responsible for the accident. However, having admitted responsibility and taken the approach that he has to pay it will be hard to go back on that now.

Personally, I would now withdraw the offer of £200.

We only offered it this morning.

That is being over generous, I feel

I would hang tough and let it go to court. I can't see that a judge looking at all the evidence would find for her, and you have been more than reasonable. Also, given that your dh is a Police Officer, he wouldn't lie as it would affect his job. She does know what he does for a living does she?

you are being overgenerous to this scheming cow
honestly if you are happy to pay the £200 and want to get this settled then hang tight and DO NOT OFFER ANYTHING ELSE!!

personally i would see it go to court, she has NO chance.

she has insurance, she can claim on it. that is what it is for. cyclists and pedestrians are not insured! it is irrevelant if they are millionaires or broke, they do not have to pay.

amidaiwish - I'm sorry but you are confusing insurance with liabiity. The fact that pedestrians and cyclists do not have to be insured does not mean they can avoid liability.

If a pedestrian or cyclist causes damage to a person or property they have to pay. The reason they are not required to be insured is that they are unlikely to cause damage requiring thousands of pounds in compensation but they are still liable.

prh47bridge. The cyclist in this case has not caused much damage ( if any).

It could be regarded as 50/50 fault. The driver could be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention. It could be argued that the car driver was in too much of a hurry and she was driving recklessly.

Bumper scratch, pay nothing. You agreed to be reasonable and they haven't been and so deal broken.

I was in my car and changed lanes, a woman hit me from behind (she was in the outside lane) and despite the fact that I checked where she was before I pulled out, I was at fault. She obviously wasn't looking and speeding but it made no difference. So using that as the rule, the driver is at fault and not even 50/50.

Lucinda - I know he hasn't caused much damage. If you read my other posts you will see that I have said the driver is taking the p*ss (albeit not in as many words).

PosieParker - On the facts as stated in the original post I would have said the cyclist was to blame. If you hit the vehicle in front because it brakes suddenly it is your fault. However, now we know that the car overtook on a rh corner and then immediately slammed on the brakes it is less clear cut and I tend to agree that the car driver may be at fault. Unfortunately the cyclist has already admitted fault and made an offer of compensation, and it is difficult to go back on that.

Have you spoken to the CTC (Cyclist Touring Club) very long standing campaing/support/social organisation for ALL types of cycling, despite the archaic name. They provide legal advice in RTAs involving bikes and run a scheme called the Cyclists' Defence Fund. I am not sure if these services are for members only, but it is worth giving them a ring. And membership is about £25 I think for a single member. Number is 0844 736 8450.

She's going to take us to court.

Let her take you to court my dear. Everything is well documented. There are statements, photos, everything you could need. She will not win. I know it is a headache you just don't need right now but try to relax.

No she's trying to call your bluff and scare you into paying. Might be worth asking your mechanic a bit more about her as she's known for being 'litigious'.

You have all sorts of strong evidence which will have her case blown away should it get that far. Stay strong!

I don't think you should pay any more for all the reasons stated but I have had to replace the bumber on my car a couple of times and £500 (once VAT and labour is included) is fairly standard. The bumper may only needs to have benn dented a bit to need replacing.

I think the agreed price was £500, and that should be paid on production of a receipt.

Let her take you to court for any more. She will need to prove exactly how much she paid and whether it is a reasonable amount

I'm scared.

She has admitted in a statement a couple of days ago that she was aware that dh was cycling fast. You don't overtake on the approach to a pedestrian crossing. Do you? Or at a right hand junction. I don't drive.

Her solicitor says we have no evidence. But are the position of the pedestrian crossing and her admission that she'd just overtaken not evidence?

We're not refusing to pay, we've offered half the money in acknowledgment that they were both involved in the accident.

I don't think that the rights or wrongs of the overtaking etc really matter when it gets down to it. All that should matter if/when it gets to court is that you have always agreed to pay reasonable costs but that she is not being reasonable. That part is easily backed up by the photographic evidence you have.

Her solicitor's job is to represent her to the best of their ability. I would ignore their assessment of the evidence.

You are right that she shouldn't have overtaken on the approach to a pedestrian crossing or at a right hand junction. Her admission that she had just overtaken may help but she will probably maintain that she did so before the crossing and turning. You can, of course, bring this up and it may help. However, as your dh has admitted liability, questions about the rights and wrongs of the accident are unlikely to form a significant part of this case.

Her statement that your dh was cycling fast may be designed to suggest that he was going fast enough to cause significant damage to her car. You need to be careful about that one.

As Indith says, the real question is whether your dh caused the extensive damage to the car that she is claiming. You have photos which should undermine her claim. You should see if any of the police who attended the accident are willing to give evidence as that will also help.