O/T - asking for advice my learned friends.....

I had someone go into the back of me 2 years ago and it hasn't affected my premiums.

 

7-++
`

Yes perhaps I didnt make myself clear.
The head of claim is negligence, under the Limitations Act 1980 claims for personal injury have a three year limitation with other claims under tort generally have six years. however, the damages can arise from negligence are split into two catergories, general damages often referred to as PSLA (pain, suffering and loss of amenity) it is this that is generally referred to as personal injury. The second catergory are what are referred to as special damages which refer to other damages which can be quantified in financial terms. The general rule kicks in and there are six years for a claim for repairs.

However, on a practical level, I do not think it is a coincidence here that the matter has been ressurected on the eve of the three year limit for personal injury in a rear end shunt by a (dodgy?) claims management company. If the OP's son admits liability he may suddenly find both occupants of the car have whiplash and the claim company file a claim at MCOL to protect their position and take it from there. Without an admission and without a viable general damages claim for PI, again on a practical level I can not see anybody pursuing a claim against the OP through the courts for £600. The contingency fee wouldnt make it worth anybody's while and the costs would exceed the value of the claim. Prima facia my advice would be to sit out the three year anniversary and then refuse to pay but as I said, the OP should see a solicitor if he wishes, find one on a fixed fee interview or see if there some insurance in place to cover this and appraise him or her of the full facts

 

That's probably because you or your insurer made full third party recovery. The OP's son is at fault here so that wouldnt help him much

 

Drivers using dash cams in Europe can land fines of up to £9,000
Dash cams are becoming increasingly more popular in Britain, with drivers using to protect themselves in case of a crash.
In fact, some insurers are even recognising the benefit of dash cam footage in the instance of a crash and a claim and can offer drivers a discount for using them.

However, it is a different case across other countries in Europe.A number of EU countries can punish drivers for using a dash cam while abroad and even risk a prison sentence for using them...
The use of a dash cam is completely illegal in Austria and drivers can be fined £9,000 for being caught using them and up to £22,000 for repeat offences.
In Luxembourg, drivers are banned from using them and can even face prison time for using them and in Portugal, motorists are banned from using or owning one.

Privacy laws because you may actually capture images of people without their permission (no sh*t Sherlock)!!

 

Check the images sent as evidence. Pretty much all photos taken on phones, digital cameras etc should present the time and date taken plus what device was used. If as you say there was no damage after your sons collision it may be that they are trying to use old photos

 

I did recovery works for the MIB for three years. I know how it works.

What you are missing is it won't be just 600 quid... be loss of useage, hire car costs, legal fees, loss of earnings when you decide to respond.

That 600 quid becomes 6000 easily..

It’s a fishing trip.

 

That was exactly my point. They are trying to elicit an admission for a low value claim and then lump on for other things. Get the PI part out of the equation first which stultifies a large part of what the claims company will be angling for. Not really enough facts in OP to advise conclusively, hence I say go to solicitor with full story. However, as regards legal fees they would be in the small claims court for £600 and only costs they could claim in normal circs would be cost of summons and cost of preparing summons, any contested case fee and a lay advocate for a day if they did win. However, I would agree there would be a legitimate (and specialist) credit car hire if a liability could be established given third party's business. I get the impression the £600 may be an excess reclaim perhaps?? I'd imagine that's in the ball park for a driving instructor. As a very, very last resort, given the admissions at the scene and the practicalities of it I'd be inclined if really painted into a corner to make a 50/50 without prejudice (save as to costs) offer. BUT like I've said we dont really have sufficient facts to advise properly

 

In insurance what happens if you change provider?

So if he used admiral in 2017 when the accident happened but now uses AXA who would deal with it if a claim happens now?

 

The company who covered you at the time.

 

Sorry for the delay acknowledging and thanking you all for your replies - I've been offline.

Really appreciate all your thoughts and suggestions - thank you all.

 

One point that might be relevant here is indeed the removal of livery and the change of ownership - not least the time between the incident and the claim.

If the car was a lease car then this alleged damage could well have been highlighted when it was being returned to the lease company. Teh change of keeper only being registered when the new owner buys it - not when it is returned to the lease company / garage forecourt.

Now many lease companies see repairs of minor blemishes, etc as an income stream.

Imagine the situation - car gets returned - over zealous inspector on bonus for identifying damage sends the driving instructor £600 bill for something that Chips away could have done for £90.

Driving instructor thinks - ******** to that, digs out your sons details and instructs the blame claim team.

This would be one option in my mind as to how the claim has come about.


As to how do deal with it - well if its damage to a bumper - and the claim is 2 years after the incident - balance of probabilities that the hundreds of vastly inexperience drivers who have specifically been practicing their reversing technique and performing unpredicable emergency stops...... what are the odds that when your lad and the driving instructor specifically confirmed no damage at the scene - that one of these inexperience drivers caused the damage or it happened at some other time. Or indeed happened elsewhere like a supermarket carpark in the mean time and your lad is just a convenient scapegoat.

I'd leave it until after three years (as others have recommended) and then go on the attack indicating the claim is fraudulent and malicious.