Knocked down by reversing car

bryangiggsy

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I've been to the doctor and I'm told that it is a soft tissue injury. I was given a prescription for Difene. It is pretty much freeing out now the last few days although still a bit stiff especially in the mornings or after lying on the couch.
I think I'll keep picking up the difene prescription anyway even though I probably won't use it.

Perhaps I should ask the doctor to write a medical assessment report?
I've already met the gaurd for passage and she took a statement so it's on record and I gave the reg.

I don't know the insurance details though.

I'd be very slow to contact insurance company without at least having the advice of a solicitor first.

You are the reason why insurance policiies go up. Pathetic. Soft tissue injury...HTFU!!!!!

fillup

bryangiggsy wrote: »

Soft tissue injury...HTFU!!!!!

Nice comment

The Bishop Basher

You fell off your push bike and have a soft tissue injury that will heal in time.

Why do you need a medical report ?

Chemical Byrne

Because it might well heal but it also could *potentially* have lasting effects or be more succeptible to injury or aggravation or in the future.

I strained a back muscle over a year ago. It healed up fine but then I still get the odd twinge when I'm on a long drive or slouching. So there is a lasting effect to soft tissue injury.

I beleive I'd need the report if I were to take a case. Having it done in a timely fashion is a good idea imo.

salamanca22

Soft tissue injury is a serious matter depending on where it is.

I was in a car crash nearly 5 years ago now and had soft tissue injuries in my back and shoulders and I still have pains in my back almost every day from it.

Yes I sued and yes I would rather it never happened then have the money that dried up long before the pain even started to get better.

So yes, op. You should sue.

Chemical Byrne

The prescription is dear enough though. I do know I would at least be reimbursed for the cost of medication.

Should I go back to the docs and ask for a higher dose?

I think I will ask for a referral to a physio first.

bryangiggsy

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

Because it might well heal but it also could *potentially* have lasting effects or be more succeptible to injury or aggravation or in the future.

I strained a back muscle over a year ago. It healed up fine but then I still get the odd twinge when I'm on a long drive or slouching. So there is a lasting effect to soft tissue injury.

I beleive I'd need the report if I were to take a case. Having it done in a timely fashion is a good idea imo.

Oh ffs....i really do feel sorry for this girl. Dont forget to print this thread up and bring into court proceedings with you.

The Bishop Basher

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I beleive I'd need the report if I were to take a case. Having it done in a timely fashion is a good idea imo.

You seem pretty fixated on this "case".

I don't know. I guess I was raised differently. Extracting money from others via a legal route would be a last resort and I'd want to be in a bad way. ie. Out of work, significant medical bills etc.

I have a number of scars, aches and pains. Some my doing, some others. Every morning I wake up and I'm just thankful for another day alive and well

All of my money is honestly earned and the things I've bought were bought with honest hard earned cash.

I suppose it's all about how you approach life and how you were reared.

Guess I got lucky.

bryangiggsy

salamanca22 wrote: »

Soft tissue injury is a serious matter depending on where it is.

I was in a car crash nearly 5 years ago now and had soft tissue injuries in my back and shoulders and I still have pains in my back almost every day from it.

Yes I sued and yes I would rather it never happened then have the money that dried up long before the pain even started to get better.

So yes, op. You should sue.

Big difference between injuries in a car crash as opposed to some bruises on an elbow from being tipped by a reversing car.

salamanca22

bryangiggsy wrote: »

Big difference between injuries in a car crash as opposed to some bruises on an elbow from being tipped by a reversing car.

Not really, you can have serious soft tissue injuries from falling in place. You really should stay out of something you have no idea about. Or are you a doctor?

bryangiggsy

salamanca22 wrote: »

Not really, you can have serious soft tissue injuries from falling in place. You really should stay out of something you have no idea about. Or are you a doctor?

no i am a cyclist who has crashed many times ...bruised,broken..batttered..got up dusted myself off...kept going.
Not in this life to heap absolute unneccesary misery on others especially for a sore fin elbow!

bryangiggsy

Karma (Sanskrit: कर्म; IPA: [ˈkərmə] ( listen); Pali: kamma) means action, work or deed;[1] it also refers to the principle of causality where intent and actions of an individual influence the future of that individual.[2] Good intent and good deed contribute to good karma and future happiness, while bad intent and bad deed contribute to bad karma and future suffering

Chemical Byrne

bryangiggsy wrote: »

no i am a cyclist who has crashed many times ...bruised,broken..batttered..got up dusted myself off...kept going.
Not in this life to heap absolute unneccesary misery on others especially for a sore fin elbow!

But yet you are willing to accept unnecessary misery upon yourself when it is the result of another's negligence? Fair play to you.

I don't know what you expect to gain out of being a martyr. A lot of seemingly small injuried leave a hidden impact that might potentially come back on you down the road in your 50s or 60s.

bryangiggsy

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

But yet you are willing to accept unnecessary misery upon yourself when it is the result of another's negligence? Fair play to you.

I don't know what you expect to gain out of being a martyr. A lot of seemingly small injuried leave a hidden impact that might potentially come back on you down the road in your 50s or 60s.

Buddy your definition of unnecessary misery and mine are on different planets. I hope a judge see s that to and finds against you. I've nothing further to add.

Iwannahurl

Just out of interest OP, why do you feel you were "lucky" to be wearing hi-vis when you were hit by that motorist reversing onto a cycle lane in a car park?

Weepsie

Surely, the solution is get the insurance details and let the insurance company sort it out. If she denies it, or doesn't accept responsibility, then consult a solicitor and/or guards.

The immediate thought of getting a solicitor is IMO over the top.

Chemical Byrne

I'd be wary of contacting the insurance directly. I would not know what value of claim to lodge against them or how that whole horse trading works.

I feel an experienced solicitor is best placed to deal with insurers as they are doing this sort of thing day in day out and know the best strategies and techniques.

RainyDay

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I'd be wary of contacting the insurance directly. I would not know what value of claim to lodge against them or how that whole horse trading works.

That's why the Personal Injuries Board publish a 'book of quantum' with details of the normal cost of different types of injuries. Check it out..

Chemical Byrne

I am aware of the BoQ but from hearing of people talking about it from experience I am told that the general way it work is that an insurer will make an initial offer based on the BoQ but you are not supposed accept it.Then you (through your solicitor) are meant to basically haggle for another offer that strikes an optimum balance between the loss of potential in accepting the initial offer and the additional costs of going to court. Apparently, this is just a sort of unofficial procedure and the way the system works in practice.

RainyDay

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I am aware of the BoQ but from hearing of people talking about it from experience I am told that the general way it work is that an insurer will make an initial offer based on the BoQ but you are not supposed accept it.Then you (through your solicitor) are meant to basically haggle for another offer that strikes an optimum balance between the loss of potential in accepting the initial offer and the additional costs of going to court. Apparently, this is just a sort of unofficial procedure and the way the system works in practice.

Was it a solicitor who told you this?

Why would insurers play this game, when they know they can go to Court and pay the agreed BoQ, leaving the claimant to pay the legal fees out of their settlement?

Weepsie

It kind of sounds like you're out to get as much as you can, rather than cover your losses if I may say so. It's becoming an ever increasing problem, the growing litigious culture.

They will make an offer most likely, you having kept your receipts and priced any physio for the forseeable future, loss of earnings, may refuse and inform them of these. They will likely come back with another offer, or tell you to take it or leave it. This comes from experiences I know of.

I'd say insurance companies deal with it more frequently than the solicitors.

realdanbreen

It's often the case that after a bump like this the immediate reaction all round is 'are you OK', 'Yeah I'm fine'. Then when the two parties get home and have a bit of time to think things over everything changes.

Chemical Byrne

RainyDay wrote: »

Was it a solicitor who told you this?

Why would insurers play this game, when they know they can go to Court and pay the agreed BoQ, leaving the claimant to pay the legal fees out of their settlement?

No. A family friend who was in an accident was told this by her solicitor. I believe the reason for this game of brinksmanship is that it is often cheaper for an insurer to reach a settlement rather than challenge the claim in court because to do so would cost them more even if they were to win.

thebiglad

RainyDay wrote: »

Was it a solicitor who told you this?

Why would insurers play this game, when they know they can go to Court and pay the agreed BoQ, leaving the claimant to pay the legal fees out of their settlement?

Not to mention the 10-20% of the settlement a Solicitor will take from the settlement.

If you do visit any Solicitors be sure you are very clear whether you will received 100% of the payment from the insurer - you may be surprised by the response.

You do not need a Solicitor as PIAB will look at your claim and make a ruling on it - PIAB are supposed to be independent but lean in favour of claimants.

As mentioned earlier, it is all the relatively minor soft tissue injuries which are driving up insurance costs for everyone - then compound that with Lawyers having everyone convinced that you cannot operate without them and obtaining fees from insurers which often exceed 40% of the settlement amount (plus their cut from the damages).

RainyDay

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

No. A family friend who was in an accident was told this by her solicitor. I believe the reason for this game of brinksmanship is that it is often cheaper for an insurer to reach a settlement rather than challenge the claim in court because to do so would cost them more even if they were to win.

But it won't cost them more if they win. They'll just pay the BoQ figure, and you'll pay your own legal costs. If they are in a bad mood, you'll pay their legal costs too.

Chemical Byrne

I think what they're getting at is that the insurer will have their own internal costs associated with people being assigned to the claim and their own solicitors time etc etc.

RainyDay

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I think what they're getting at is that the insurer will have their own internal costs associated with people being assigned to the claim and their own solicitors time etc etc.

Yes, they will. And they will claim those costs from the losing side of the case.

Zyzz

Very lucky that you had that hi-vis on otherwise she wouldn't have see....oh

groovyg

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I've been to the doctor and I'm told that it is a soft tissue injury. I was given a prescription for Difene. It is pretty much freeing out now the last few days although still a bit stiff especially in the mornings or after lying on the couch.
I think I'll keep picking up the difene prescription anyway even though I probably won't use it.

Perhaps I should ask the doctor to write a medical assessment report?
I've already met the gaurd for passage and she took a statement so it's on record and I gave the

So the doc has given you a prescription for Difene but you are not going to use it? why? Difene is an anti inflammatory it's a stronger version of ibprufoen and will take down any bruising and pain.

Now you are thinking of taking a case against the motorist

Stepping Stone

I witnessed an incident similar to this a few years ago. I was in my car, waiting to leave a parallel space when I saw a cyclists being hit by a car reversing from a space.

The cyclists claimed and the insurers faught it. it was ruled to be an accident and no compensation was given because while you are obliged to yield to other vehicles when reversing, you are equally supposed to drive/ cycle with due care and attention and cycling behind a reversing car with centimeters between you and it isn't very careful or attentive. Both parties were wrong so the cyclist got nothing.

Not that he needed anything anyway. Grazing and bruising doesn't tend to make much of an impression on people used to dealing with catastrophic injuries. No medium, never mind long term damage.