Report comment

"Perhaps the time has come for some PI practitioners to visit a defendant insurer or solicitor. Sit with them and listen to their calls. Speak to their clients and explain to them why someone can still make a claim for injury when there is virtually no damage to the car, let them know why its permissable for a solicitor to deliberately terrify them by having a judgment taken out against them even though their insurance company had nominated solicitors but hadn't received any evidence of the claim. Tell them its right that a certain firm of solicitors can charge £1000 credit hire for a Vauxhall Corsa for 3 days. If you do not accept the need for reform, you agree that these practices are justfied."

Damage =/= injury, that argument is tired and the insurers have already lost it. Perhaps it is time for them to tighten up their ships and stop playing the victim?

No-one "deliberately terrifies" your insured by requesting judgment, get a grip. Your insured should not have ignored the proceedings when they were served and the insurers, having been served with a 151 notice, should not have being so incompetent as to allow judgment to have been entered in the first place. Frankly the implication that we "have a judgment taken out" against your client betrays a fundamental misunderstanding o how the CCMCC works.

Perhaps if Defendants looked at their internal processes and stopped making offers which are later beaten at court by thousands of pounds the need for proceedings in 90% of cases could be removed? "Computer says no" is the new mantra of the insurer and it is costing them millions at stage 3.