You got a message when you called CN that the call may be recorded for training purposes. You are allowed to request this information. If you did indeed have a conversation that recorded you were told you weren’t liable, then request a copy of the tapes as admissible evidence.
For this reason, don’t call up CN and have a hissy fit. Treat every word you say as if written in a letter.
If I were you I’d be talking to a proper Solicitor right now before I say anything to anybody. A firm like White Dalton (or TC above ?) will give you unbiased advice, unlike your insurer or their preferred ‘legal’ company. They specialise in Motorcycle claims and have been great handling mine.
They said that some of their business comes from people who have started a claim with one of the insurers appointed legal firms but they’ve screwed it up and White Dalton take over the claim.
Or, as in my case try Rider Support Services who may be able to take on the claim for you.
You have paid for the legal expenses policy so you can opt to take your claim to them if you want to.
Just call them for advice first and see what they say, they are generally helpful.
Under legal expenses, you can normally only switch once proceedings have been issued. Most LEI’s will not approve the case being moved from their appointed panel firm unless there is a formal complaint and it is substantiated.
RSS are an accident management firm not a law firm therefore they do not have the clout to be able to follow this up.
The people who may be able to assist you are either the Law Society ( Home | The Law Society) or the Financial Services Authority (FSA) (http://www.fsa.gov.uk/)
However, it all again depends on what you were told at the time the bike was hired to you, what you signed and whether the information was passed to your legal team.
That having been said, you should have been asked to complete a form asking you to detail all your out of pocket expenses or pending expenditure which is what is used to complete the schedule of losses, and this can be done 2 or 3 times as the case progresses to ensure that no additional costs have been incurred that need to be claimed back.
The other question is, was your case completed on a full and final settlement?
He doesn’t seem to say whether or not he took a payment without prejudice to settle, he simply says his solicitor provided money for the bike.
Sounds as if a settlement has been made without establishing liability to cut their costs, and as he’s accepted that they’ve closed the claim and want to pursue the hire costs against him.
It doesn’t surprise me given my experience of insurance firms.
As to changing solicitors, my policy specifically states that if I’m dissatisfied with my solicitors I can arrange to change them. Which seems reasonable.
get a solicitor sorted and make sure you DO NOT PAY THIS. Even the cost of you getting a solicitor to give you advice and back you up would be reclaimable.
This is a worry to read as i had a hire bike for about a 2 weeks when i got mine smashed, and they said they had to “bill me” in order to make it a cost and so they could claim it back.
They got me sign sign an hire agreement, and then at the end sent me a bill with 13months to pay it.
Im now a bit worried!! But mine was with Ebike!
J
I forgot to mention, we also had a no fault claim in June where a bus decided to take the front of the van off whilst again, parked up.
We had to have a hire van, its all part and parcel of a ‘curtsey’ vehicle that you have it as a hire. You have to sign a lease whatever the circumstance. As has been said before, this should be added to your total loss claim to the third party insurance, not out of your pocket. Stick to your guns especially if it was a non fault claim against them. (Ours was with e’van).
I had a similar situation some 3 years ago: had 3rd Party only (+ legal cover), had accident , bike written off and got paid fairly quickly (bike was written off) for total value “Without Prejudice”.
Beware of that, it’s not an admission of fault by the other party’s insurance until settlement is reached.
Anyway, eventually my solicitors managed to reach full settlement in my favour so payment above was confirmed + some other bits for other minor losses.
Thought case was closed until three months later I get a letter from a different solicitors firm (acting on my insurance behalf) asking me to take to court the other party (not his insurance, him personally!) to recover the bike hire charges which his insurance had not paid.
I replied saying that I had no interest, time, nor will to pursue this case and as far as I was concerned the claim was settled and therefore closed as advised and confirmed by my previous solicitors.
They insisted by sending me county court forms with my name printed on it acting as the pursuant and the other guy’s name as the defendant ready to be signed and sent to open a court case – basically me suing this other guy…
I reiterated that I found it unacceptable that I had to pursue this for them on a personal level and so stood firm and refused even after assurances of not incurring in any expenses.
After a few months of calls and letters I think they eventually gave up (or managed to get paid, don’t know) as I haven’t heard from them in over a year (although I’m not holding my breath).
So my advice is: if you decide not to go with fully comp insurance, beware of what costs you might be held liable in the end, especially as in this and my case, with bike hire charges. Everyone knows it’s a legalised scam as they’re charged at exorbitant prices and you’re highly encouraged with no choice (once accepted) to keep them as long as possible.
Specifically in your case I’d advise you as others have said to speak to your solicitors and seek explanations onto why these costs haven’t been recovered from the other party’s insurance, to check your hire agreement and most importantly to check whether a settlement had been reached and favour of whom.
It sounds as if he’s simply been bought off with a ‘payment without prejudice’ approach intended to cut their costs, and in so doing they’ve effectively closed the claim and now want to try and recoup the hire costs through him.
I was offered a hire bike despite being third party only only to be told later that I wasn’t allowed one due to the TPO status of the policy, I would have been highly sceptical about accepting it given how poorly they usually treat third party policy claims - i.e. expecting you to arrange and pay for virtually every aspect of the service you’d expect them to cover freely.
TPO policy holders are treated very poorly in terms of accident claims, the general principle seems to be to minimise their costs rather than deal with the claim in your favour.
