Costs following injury in RTA

[bugged]

Hello. I am pursuing compensation through an uninsured losses reinsurance scheme following a car accident. The third party's insurer (TPI) has agreed liability. My car has been 'written off' and I sustained injuries. I thought the cost of travelling to a medical appointment to obtain a report and the cost of sourcing a replacement car (ie travel to car dealerships) would be claimable. My solicitors have responded thus :

' However the Courts state that travel to the medical appointment is not recoverable. As you are a Claimant wishing to make a personal injury claim, the only way of proving the injuries sustained is attending the medical.

This is also the same in relation to the travel for the replacement car. Legally the third party insurers are only liable to put you back in the position you was before the accident and as the car was a total loss, this is the total loss valuation. They are not liable for where you decide to choose to buy the replacement vehicle from. '

I would be grateful if someone knowledgeable on these matters could advise if the reply from the solicitors is correct and I am wrong.

Many thanks in advance

[des8]

You say the third party insurers have agreed liability but your losses are being met by an uninsured losses scheme (?MIB)
But if you know the third party insurers why is there a call on an uninsured driver's scheme?
There may be limitations within the scheme about Special Damages

Otherwise I always understood that under "Special Damages" for PI claims you were entitled to claim from the third party reasonable travel expenses that you need to make and you should, therefore, keep any travel receipts.
Ask your solicitor for the relevant case law that he refers to, (as I'd be interested)
If they have paid out the full value of the vehicle it is upto you where you purchase the vehicle at your own cost. (otherwise you might decide you need to go down the Cornish Riviera for a couple of weeks to look at cars down there at the insurer's expense).

[bugged]

Thanks. To clarify. The uninsured refers to myself, that is to say I did not have comprehensive insurance but my broker offered free 'Motor Legal Protection' underwritten by a reinsurance company.

As regards travelling to the Cornish Riviera obviously the operative term here would be 'reasonable' as, after all, I could claim for a hire car for the period I was car-less but claiming for a Ferrari would not likely to be successful if my written-off car was a Reliant Robin. No insult to Reliant Robin owners intended.

So, do you actually know that claiming for the travel costs to source a replacement vehicle is a no-no ?

[des8]

If I understand properly you only had 3rd party insurance plus legal expenses.
You were involved in an RTA.
With the assistance of the Legal Expenses Insurers you have pursued the other party who have admitted liability.
They have paid you the value of your vehicle, so you cannot now claim your costs in seeking a replacement
With regards to your PI claim you can claim reasonable expenses incurred in pursuing that claim. They are known as Special Damages.
As mentioned earlier ask your solicitor for a fuller explanation of his statement and details of the case law to which he refers.

[bugged]

I have received an interim payment for the value of my vehicle, through the car hire company engaged via my legal expenses cover.
By coincidence you made a statement on another post recently - '' 'information found on the internet' isn't evidence. '' I quite agree hence I am also unhappy with the engineer's report on my car which states that the valuation is ''based on research from the internet''.
I am also attempting to challenge the valuation and have asked for actual evidence to support the valuation.
I have provided examples of cars which have sold on ebay to support my own valuation
The valuation is difficult because my car is old (so not covered in guides) and modified.
The legal executive handling my case at my solicitors insists that the valuation is handled by the car hire firm and the solicitors will have nothing to do with it.
The car hire firm is at best acting as a go-between forwarding messages to and from the third party insurer (TPI)
Ultimately there is only one claim, albeit with several heads of claim within it, and their argument with this will be the same as with the PI travel costs (whether or not their statement on the latter is correct) they will not go to court over special damages.
Obviously I don't want to go to court but nor do I want the TPI to dictate the settlement.
Any thoughts ?

[des8]

At the end of the day, if you cannot agree with the TPI over the amount of the claim, you have the right to take action in the civil courts.
All you can do is take a pragmatic position and try and negotiate a higher figure than first offered.

You are quite entitled to challenge the vehicle valuation, and obviously there are going to be different views about this point.
The TPI will be trying to show that you could replace your vehicle for £xx (and should be able to substantiate this as you have requested) whilst you understandably are looking at higher prices obtained at auctions.

[bugged]

Thanks. The principal problem is that I am locked in to this arrangement with solicitors who are only interested with the PI side and the Car Hire firm who simply obey the TPI's diktat. The latter state that they know of no insurer that accepts ebay examples.

[des8]

Who the devil appointed a car hire firm to negotiate with TPI on your behalf?

Why stick around with eBay "valuations".
I wouldn't accept them either.
Your car is "old" (relative term and probably younger than mine which are 1951 and 1971!) so possibly a classic.
Is there an owners club where you might get advice on values?
Scour the motoring magazines?

[bugged]

Well I would have thought attained prices were a better guide to value than advertised prices (bearing in mind of course that nothing on ebay, or anywhere else, should be taken at face value). Anyhow the TPI have agreed my compromise proposal which is a significant increase on their valuation so at least this part of things is settled.

[victorross]

In my opinion, you should have a detailed discussion with your solicitor as he is the only one who can explain things in the best possible way.