Wishing you all a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, from all the team at Parkers Solicitors.
Please note that the office will be closed from 12:20pm on Friday 23 December 2016 and will re-open at 9:00am on Tuesday 2 January 2017.
We are seeking an ambitious paralegal with experience of independently handling own caseload of RTA matters.
Experience in MOJ Portal Stages 1 – 3 essential with a good range of Personal Injury, RTA, Credit Hire and Litigation knowledge.
Please send CVs to email@example.com
A without parties present application was made by the Defendant to have the claim for uninsured losses struck out on the grounds that an admission had earlier been made in the Portal by the Claimant’s insurer in response to a claim brought by the Defendant.
The application on paper was successful but was contested immediately on the grounds that the Claimant was not bound by the admission and that in any event could resile from the admission made by his insurer.
The Claimant’s insurer had settled the Defendant’s earlier claim and made a payment for vehicle damage and personal injury.
The Claimant had then sought to make his own claim.
The Defendant sought to rely on the Ullah v Jon judgment in which DJ Parker asserted that, whilst the Claimant in that matter was entitled to withdraw the admission under CPR14.1A(4) or CPR14.1B, she would use her judicial discretion against allowing the admission to be withdrawn.
PSL successfully argued that the admission should not be binding on the Claimant. DJ Wood stated in her judgment that any admission made under the RTA Protocol is binding only in relation to the claim within which it was made, and is not an admission on liability in relation to a potential counter claim.
DJ Wood granted permission to appeal her judgment. The Defendant has declined the opportunity.
PSL was instructed by a Client who had been in a road traffic accident with an untraced driver.
Our Client is a self-employed Private Hire/Taxi Driver. His own vehicle was a “tool of his trade”, without which he could not earn a living.
A claim was made to the MIB. Initially the MIB determined that our Client had acted unreasonably in incurring car hire charges in excess of the value of his own vehicle and awarded £2,500 in respect of credit hire charges..
A Notice of Appeal was lodged in relation to the MIB’s award which was considered by an independent Arbitrator who substituted:-
The Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 (“the Act”) seeks to provide redress for small businesses to encourage payment within agreed timescales.
The Act has two purposes; firstly, to compensate creditors for the late discharge of invoices and secondly, to deter late payment.
To achieve this, the Act enables businesses to claim interest and compensation on invoices that have been paid late. Interest can be claimed at 8% over Bank of England base rate (currently 0.5%), together with compensation of between £40 – £100 per invoice.
It is key to note that acceptance of a late payment does not extinguish the right to claim for interest and compensation.
Parkers Solicitors successfully obtained a judgment for a client which confirmed that, in addition to the outstanding invoices, the sum £32,000 was also due with regard to interest and compensation on invoices paid late or, in some cases, not paid at all.
Read more about the Evolution Costs claim here: