Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

[mnutter30]

Re: Hi All - New member in need of help and advice!

They were injured but don't get me wrong it wasn't anything serious. They suffered whiplash as did I but obviously I was driving and at fault.

[Amethyst]

Re: Hi All - New member in need of help and advice!

Okay, I think your next step should be to go and see a solicitor to advise you on the risks of your wife proceeding with the claims.

Here wise, we should look at the CMC contract so you know what your options are if the solicitor does advise to pull out. ( They might not, intricacies of personal injury claims and insurance isn't my area as I said)

[mnutter30]

Re: Hi All - New member in need of help and advice!

Sorry what's the CMC contract?
I was thinking of sending Avivas complaints department an email asking for them to enlighten me as to what's going on. Do you think this is a good idea?

[Amethyst]

Re: Hi All - New member in need of help and advice!

Sorry what's the CMC contract?
I was thinking of sending Avivas complaints department an email asking for them to enlighten me as to what's going on. Do you think this is a good idea?

CMC = claims management company - so Silverbeck Rymer / Quindell

You can email them yes, they may just come back advising you to seek your own legal advice as they have pretty much positioned themselves against you now - so they aren't acting for you or working on your behalf now, only on their own behalf against your wifes claim.

[mnutter30]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Just had a thought about what you said about change in account.
After the accident when my wife rang the insurance company she obviously told them exactly what had occurred and explained that we were travelling down the motorway at the correct speed etc but now the claims company have made out in the POC that I was travelling to fast and not in control of the vehicle. Total contradiction! Could this be another reason why there not happy?
Ive advised my wife to bring this up because it's not right and goes against what she initially stated. Once again though her claim handler was supposed to call her today and she failed to do so!

[Amethyst]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Yes that's what I meant, if to claim the vehicle damage the accident was, well, an accident, caused primarily by the lane swapping anchor slamming nob head, then suddenly for a personal injury claim it becomes all your fault and being a boy racer... then it's going to flag up with the insurers.

[mnutter30]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

So in that instance surely my wife has the right to flag that up with her firm and demand that these are changed to reflect the true facts. I can't see how they can refuse when their supposed to be working in my wifes interest!

[Amethyst]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

It is in your wife's interest to make the case against you as strong as possible. Had it actually been a third party caused the accident then you would make it sound as bad as possible to try and win your case.

[Amethyst]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Can you try and get the CMC terms/contract please. It does sound like they misrepresented the claim to your wife so that might give a get out on any cancellation fees. (IF that's the way you decide to go)

[mnutter30]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Wouldn't that cause further problems though with Aviva as it would look like we have pulled out because it's dodgy!

[mnutter30]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

As for making the case strong for my wife surely they themselves can see that the POC's do not match the circumstances originally set out by my wife. They must know that this would not go without notice especially in the claims court

I have found a copy of the Conditional Fee Agreement that was sent to my wife and sent it via the admin email

[Amethyst]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Risk assessment.

What do you (as a family) stand to gain by proceeding ?

What do you (as a family) stand to lose by proceeding ?

So, this are just me thinking aloud really...

Best case scenario is Aviva pays out under the Insurance up to £3k on each claim. Costs are paid to the CMC and everyone is happy.

or Your wife loses against both Aviva and You - not sure where the CMC comes in on costs at that point but presumably Aviva will claim costs against your wife ( so that wants checking on the no win no fee agreement - guessing the CMC burdens that )

or worst case scenario I think, Aviva defend the claim on the basis it was a breach of the insurance ( see that I don't know about ) but the claim succeeds against you as being at fault. You have to pay your wife compensation ( up to £3k ) plus costs to the CMC ( there are limitations on costs I'm not sure exactly what they are but guestimating about £1k ) - plus pay costs to Aviva ( again not sure on that )

or Aviva lose and claim their costs and any compensation ordered off you in further proceedings.

I'm not saying you should pull out, but I really do think you should go and see a solicitor for a half hour free/fixed fee appointment to get a formal overview of your options and find out exactly what your risk is.

[Amethyst]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

As for making the case strong for my wife surely they themselves can see that the POC's do not match the circumstances originally set out by my wife. They must know that this would not go without notice especially in the claims court

I have found a copy of the Conditional Fee Agreement that was sent to my wife and sent it via the admin email

Great, I'll have a look

[mnutter30]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Yeah thanks for your time I know I've chewed your ear off with this one.
Cheers

[wales01man]

Re: Mnutter v Insurance company withdrawn indemnity

Seems from here the CMC are telling a few porkies if the wife is questioned in court she will have to tell the truth which appears to be rather different .
Can I suggest some independent legal advice