Small claim against us, after car accident.

[Cyclone]

Does this not all depend on whether you have opted to take out the additional legal cover on the policy ? Normally this is a separate charge which covers you for recovery of excess and any other indirect costs. If this is a fault accident and there is no legal cover in place you will have to defend this at your own cost.

 

No, that's not correct.

This isn't the OP needing to launch legal proceedings, this entirely business as usual between insurance companies when neither admits liability or they dispute the cost of the damage.

[Bikertec]

Just received a letter saying a third party are taking proceeding against me for a traffic accident 2 years go for over £4000. The Accident at the time was deemed 50/50 and sorted out by our insurance companies. What do I need to do now.

[Cyclone]

Pass it on to whoever your insurance company was at the time.

[Waldo]

The thing that concerns me about this (passing it on to insurance company), is that the claim is against you personally, so if something goes wrong...

 

You could end up with a judgement against you? (because you didn't defend it, or even acknowledge service)

 

What's to stop that from happening?

[Bikertec]

The question is what the hell do we have insurance for if people can sue you years after the incident.

[truman]

The question is what the hell do we have insurance for if people can sue you years after the incident.

 

Anyone can attempt to sue anyone for anything...doesn't mean they'll be successful..

[ECCOnoob]

The question is what the hell do we have insurance for if people can sue you years after the incident.

 

Because the law states that they people can bring most accident injury claims up to three years after the date or up to six years after the date for property damage. For some issues such as claims for children the time for bringing a claim can be even longer (right up to their 18th birthday) or cases of historical long term disease.

 

The point is, insurance will still have a duty to either pay out if it as a valid claim or in the alternative they will defend and fight it through to a trial.

 

That's what insurance is for. Its not one or the other. Its just two different parts of it.

 

In part of my work I am dealing with claims against (now defunct) businesses going back decades. After much research we find who provided the insurance at the time and (depending on the position) will either get them to pay out or represent them in defending.

 

Issuing of court proceedings is just the next natural step if a claim becomes stalemate and cannot be settled amicably. Even if insurance companies are involved, the proceedings themselves will always be in the name of the Claimant and Defendant so getting a copy served directly on you is normal.

 

As others have said, the simplest thing to do is just pass it back on to the insurers and let them/their solicitors deal with it.

Edited February 3, 2018 by ECCOnoob

[andyofborg]

The thing that concerns me about this (passing it on to insurance company), is that the claim is against you personally, so if something goes wrong...

 

You could end up with a judgement against you? (because you didn't defend it, or even acknowledge service)

 

What's to stop that from happening?

 

The claim is always against you personally because it was you who was involved in the incident.

 

The insurance company should be dealing with all the paperwork and such like because that's what you pay them for.

 

if you don't defend a claim that you know about it then you pretty much guaranteed to lose it.

 

If you genuinely don't know about a claim then I guess you would have to try to appeal or have the judgement set aside.