A claimant firm has made a public attack on its defendant adversary, accusing it of dragging its client through an unnecessary court process.

Manchester-based Graham Coffey & Co Solicitors posted on Linkedin that Horwich Farrelly had questioned the honesty of a client who took four months to submit a claim.

The claimant firm did not give details of the parties but said that the case, which was originally a matter for the Official Injury Claim portal, ended with the defendant insurer paying £11,400 in damages.

Graham Coffey & Co said the dispute was ‘sadly a typical story of insurers and their solicitors, on this occasion Horwich Farrelly, requiring an innocent victim of a road traffic accident to proceed through court proceedings to secure justice’.

National firm Horwich Farrelly has defended its policy to contest cases where there may be doubts about the facts of the claim, and pointed out that some evidence may  become available only once legal proceedings are commenced.

Graham Coffey & Co said liability in this case had been admitted but causation was denied due to ‘late presentation’. This was despite the claimant having sought medical attention within 24 hours and seeing doctors four times over the next month. Engineering evidence only became available later showing more than £9,000 of damage to the client’s car.

The firm said the insurer and its lawyers forced the claimant to endure delays as the matter progressed through the court system.

'Claimants are under no obligation to submit a claim within a unilaterally determined date set by insurers,’ said Graham Coffey & Co. ‘Even the most basic of enquiries would have established clear contemporaneous evidence of medical intervention at the time of the accident. Some victims of accidents are wary of the legal system and this can lead to delays in seeking help and assistance - and it isn’t hard to see why.’

Horwich Farrelly said the civil justice system works on a balance of probabilities with claimants having to prove that they sustained the injuries they claim.

‘Where that is proven above 50% probability their claim succeeds and where it is not, the claim fails,’ the firm added. ‘As in this case, some do not go to trial – they are litigated and settled based on evidence provided – often available only after the commencement of legal proceedings.

‘HF has been at the forefront of defending unmeritorious and fraudulent claims on causation grounds for over 20 years, saving the industry hundreds of millions of pounds (inclusive of any excess costs paid for the small number of unsuccessfully challenged claims) through tens of thousands of declined and successfully defended claims.’

Meanwhile, the latest figures from Official Injury Claim show that the average time for a represented claim (ie the vast majority) reaching settlement has now crept above 300 days. This is more than two months longer than claims took to be settled a year ago.

Martin Saunders, head of service, explained that a large number of cases are beyond a point when liability has been accepted, but before a medical has been shared.

Of the 129,000 cases in this status a year ago, 41,000 have gone on to settle, 25,000 are still being negotiated, 14,000 have dropped out, and 49,000 are still not progressed.