personal injuries claim

Caryatnid

This summer, my OH and I were involved in a minor crash in which we rear-ended a brand new car. The car had a mother with 3 children, none of whom were in seat belts. I didn't say anything about this at the time, as I was relieved that they were not hurt (as they said), and didn't seem very upset. The mother's husband insisted we waited on the gardaí to came, during which her friend collected the children, who were all in pyjamas. It was all very civilised and calm.

Gardaí came, everything okay, (details had already been exchanged), we drove on. We got a claim for the back bumper of the car for 1K. It cost 200e to fix the car we were in. Fine. Went through insurance for their car. About a month ago my OH got a solicitors letter stating there was compensation owed the mother and a child (20K each) for injuries. The bump was fairly minor. In my heart, I am sure there were no injuries. My OH rang the insurance who agreed that the injuries probably weren't genuine, but as they had a doctor's report, the insurance wouldn't argue, and would pay.

So we thought that was the end of that, and awaited a large hike in insurance. Today my OH opened 2 letters from the Personal Injuries Board, stating that a further amount are payable by my OH to the mother and the child. It states the child has suffered 'loss' as well as personal injury. They have a doctor's signature. The letters finish stating that failure or delay to pay can result in further amounts being charged.

Basically I'm looking for advice here. When I say my OH has no money, I literally mean it. My OH has just been giving the P45, and doesn't have any savings. The car will probably have to be sold soon, when the insurance is up as they won't be able to afford the hike. I cannot loan any more money to my OH (already owes me a few hundred) and have 100e in my bank account.

Does anyone have experience of this? I haven't heard of this 'extra fine' on top of what the insurance company has already paid. What happens if the fine is not/cannot be paid? Imprisonment? Further fines? Is there any point in stating at this late stage that the children were not strapped in the car? Can these further fines be challenged without involving solicitor fees (- as my OH doesn't have any money in the first place, I assume a solicitor will have no interest in helping).

Please help. I don't know where to turn.

Mr. Incognito

Step 1. Contact your insurance company immediately.

Step 2. See step 1.

tenifan

Op, this is a matter for the insurance company. It doesn't sound like a fine.
Hopefully the insurance company will tell them where to go. Insurance companies wouldn't even fight a €20k claim when their customer is in the wrong but they might fight this one. One disadvantage is it will be impossible to switch insurer while a claim is pending, so if you got a horrible renewal letter it would be a case of take it or leave it.

Caryatnid

tenifan wrote: »

Op, this is a matter for the insurance company. It doesn't sound like a fine.
Hopefully the insurance company will tell them where to go. Insurance companies wouldn't even fight a €20k claim when their customer is in the wrong but they might fight this one. One disadvantage is it will be impossible to switch insurer while a claim is pending, so if you got a horrible renewal letter it would be a case of take it or leave it.

Thanks for your advice. These 'new' fines are quite small (total less than 2K), but the insurance company already agreed to pay in the region of 20K to each of the 'injured' parties. To be honest, I was astonished that the insurance company wouldn't at least try to make it a little difficult, but told my OH that they can't argue the claims when there is a letter from a doctor. Surely it looks suspicious that two people were injured to the tune of 20K each, but the brand new car (this car is a high-end car) suffered just 1K worth of damage at an authorised dealer.

Re the renewal: yep, it probably will be horrible, in which case it will be time to say bye bye to the car.

Edit: When you said it's not a fine . . . you are right. I think I didn't comprehend the letter properly the first time around as it was such a shock. It is a 'charge' that is owed to the Personal Injuries Board, to for 'dealing with' the proceedings.

Will contact Insurance company in the morning, as you suggest.

Moyet

I was rear ended sometime ago , I was offered a sum of money from the insurance company of the other driver. In order to accept that money I was asked to sign a contract that meant I could not seek further compensation.

I would suspect your insurance company did the same. I believe a Personal injury claim is not an option when an agreement is already made to settle.

nuac

A very fishy claim indeed.

Parents claiming 20K for alleged injuries to children in what was only a minor shunt? I know people who would call that "unlucky money"

imho that claim should have been fought.

runawaybishop

nuac wrote: »

A very fishy claim indeed.

Parents claiming 20K for alleged injuries to children in what was only a minor shunt? I know people who would call that "unlucky money"

imho that claim should have been fought.

Don't think its fishy at all tbh. PIAB has a schedule of payments for injuries, just being in a crash and having minor soft tissue damage will get you 10k per person. A doctor from both insurance companies will have examined the kids and agreed that there was injury.

What is weird is the PIAB asking the OH for cash.

Pro Hoc Vice

Moyet wrote: »

I was rear ended sometime ago , I was offered a sum of money from the insurance company of the other driver. In order to accept that money I was asked to sign a contract that meant I could not seek further compensation.

I would suspect your insurance company did the same. I believe a Personal injury claim is not an option when an agreement is already made to settle.

As the OP's case involved minors it would have required a infant ruling to be made in court so if the matter was settled as in your case the contract would have been void as per the children's case.

Pro Hoc Vice

runawaybishop wrote: »

Don't think its fishy at all tbh. PIAB has a schedule of payments for injuries, just being in a crash and having minor soft tissue damage will get you 10k per person. A doctor from both insurance companies will have examined the kids and agreed that there was injury.

What is weird is the PIAB asking the OH for cash.

nit so weird the OP is after all the respondent all he needs todo is pass on to insurance company.

eyescreamcone

nuac wrote: »

A very fishy claim indeed.

Parents claiming 20K for alleged injuries to children in what was only a minor shunt? I know people who would call that "unlucky money"

imho that claim should have been fought.

Do people still think like this?

Pro Hoc Vice

nuac wrote: »

A very fishy claim indeed.

Parents claiming 20K for alleged injuries to children in what was only a minor shunt? I know people who would call that "unlucky money"

imho that claim should have been fought.

I have seen people after a minor shunt having a lot of pain. Also a car accident can be traumatic for children. In any event the money will be put in to court till children are 18.

It's funny how people with no information call a claim fishy that would have had a least 1 if not 2 doctors a couple of lawyers and insurance company think it was a valid claim. They must have missed something in all that info they had.

Pro Hoc Vice

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Do people still think like this?

Insurance companies would like it to be lots more who think like that. It's funny the accident is not unlucky it's only the money go figure.

nuac

Pro Hoc Vice wrote: »

I have seen people after a minor shunt having a lot of pain. Also a car accident can be traumatic for children. In any event the money will be put in to court till children are 18.

It's funny how people with no information call a claim fishy that would have had a least 1 if not 2 doctors a couple of lawyers and insurance company think it was a valid claim. They must have missed something in all that info they had.

I have been in court where such actions have been dismissed because in reality there was no injury.

Pro Hoc Vice

nuac wrote: »

I have been in court where such actions have been dismissed because in reality there was no injury.

Yes because the insurance company based on the evidence did not settle as they did in the OP.

Caryatnid

I know it's off-topic, but since the thread is going that way . . . I know that I cannot state it 'as a fact', but in my heart I feel they were not injured at all, even if the children were not strapped in. The children did not seem upset. In my opinion, children cry relatively easily when they get hurt. I also think that the reason only one of the children put in a claim is because there was only one child who would've been old enough to understand to lie to a doctor.
While we were in the car behind, and of course, felt the impact in a different way, I honestly can say that the belt didn't even hurt me even a small bit. It annoys me that the insurance company didn't fight it, even though they said they didn't really think there was an injury.
For the record, I'm all for appropriate compensation where there is a genuine injury.
Btw update: There is no update - OH rang the insurance company and they said they will call back.

salamanca22

OP I would take the word of a doctor over your "feelings"

I have been in a crash in the past. I felt okay after the crash but when I woke up the next day I was in bits. 4 years later and I still have pain.

Let your insurance company deal with it.

runawaybishop

Caryatnid wrote: »

I know it's off-topic, but since the thread is going that way . . . I know that I cannot state it 'as a fact', but in my heart I feel they were not injured at all, even if the children were not strapped in. The children did not seem upset. In my opinion, children cry relatively easily when they get hurt. I also think that the reason only one of the children put in a claim is because there was only one child who would've been old enough to understand to lie to a doctor.
While we were in the car behind, and of course, felt the impact in a different way, I honestly can say that the belt didn't even hurt me even a small bit. It annoys me that the insurance company didn't fight it, even though they said they didn't really think there was an injury.
For the record, I'm all for appropriate compensation where there is a genuine injury.
Btw update: There is no update - OH rang the insurance company and they said they will call back.

Both your insurances companies doctor and theirs feel differently, "your opinion" is not worth much compared to a trained medical professional.

hullaballoo

OP, would you mind confirming the circumstances? You said you were rear-ended. To me, that means the other driver drove into the back of your car. Is this correct?

runawaybishop

hullaballoo wrote: »

OP, would you mind confirming the circumstances? You said you were rear-ended. To me, that means the other driver drove into the back of your car. Is this correct?

From the opening post they said they rear ended someone else.

hullaballoo

runawaybishop wrote: »

From the opening post they said they rear ended someone else.

Ah right, D- for me for English comprehension there.

runawaybishop

hullaballoo wrote: »

Ah right, D- for me for English comprehension there.

You got the sentence largely right so going by today's exam marking I'd say you are on a B.

Mr_Red

Your Insurance company will deal with the whole thing

If they want to be strung along well its for them to sort out

kennM

One factor I don't see mentioned here and I'm not sure if you flagged it to your insurance company is the lack of seat belts. If there is proof of this then it weakens their position quite a bit.....

Regardless of blame of an accident I've read about cases where damages have been cut by 30%/40% due to contributory negligence on behalf of the person in the car. In essence they are negligent in not putting on a seat belt which in turn lead to a more severe injury in comparison to a seat belt have been in place.

Either way €20k a piece for, I'm assuming, whiplash is very steep!!! Did it go through injuries board?

goz83

kennM wrote: »

One factor I don't see mentioned here and I'm not sure if you flagged it to your insurance company is the lack of seat belts. If there is proof of this then it weakens their position quite a bit.....

Regardless of blame of an accident I've read about cases where damages have been cut by 30%/40% due to contributory negligence on behalf of the person in the car. In essence they are negligent in not putting on a seat belt which in turn lead to a more severe injury in comparison to a seat belt have been in place.

Either way €20k a piece for, I'm assuming, whiplash is very steep!!! Did it go through injuries board?

It's already settled, so there's no point in crying over spilled milk.

And 20k is not steep. You don't know anything about the circumstances of the injured parties. It's based on more than just the injury. Loss of earnings is one of many things that can increase the value of a claim. People who cause accidents often play it down to "a slight tap" and people who are the victims often exaggerate. There is no way to tell how serious a whiplash injury is, which is possibly why it's by far, the most common RTA injury for minor accidents.

theenergy

currently in the PIAB process say 12 + months

have already see doctor etc for assessment

now scheduled to see a psychiatrist and an orthopaedic surgeon - is this standard?

nuac

theenergy wrote: »

currently in the PIAB process say 12 + months

have already see doctor etc for assessment

now scheduled to see a psychiatrist and an orthopaedic surgeon - is this standard?

No, but is coming in.

About thirtyfive years ago I had a case for US tourists injured in an RTA here.

One client had no physical injury, but a person in another car had some bleeding. I was sent a US psychiatrist's report that the sight of this blood had brought back to his patient memories of a previous trauma, sleep affected, flashbacks etc etc.

After consultation with counsel I advised that such a claim would not be entertained. Not too sure about that nowadays.

Generally I am very surprised to see on this thread that the PIAB will pay out €20 K to a passenger just because two cars collide. I have known many judges who would throw out or drastically reduce such claims

goz83

nuac wrote: »

Generally I am very surprised to see on this thread that the PIBA will pay out €20 K to a passenger just because two cars collide. I have known many judges who would throw out or drastically reduce such claims

20k really is not much money. You can easily spend 2k on medical expenses for something like a soft tissue injury over a relatively short period of time, depending on what tests are done and if such tests are done without a medical card, or health insurance, as was the case with me a few years ago.

Consider lost days at work, can easily be another 1k loss for immediate loss of days and then the odd day here and there for medical appointments, or if pain is bad on some days while receiving physio, or other treatment. This is made worse if you're self employed, because loss of earnings is very difficult to prove.

The left over (in my opinion) is not worth the pain a genuine whiplash or soft tissue injury can bring. I understand there are many bogus claims of this nature though.