Fergus, one of our senior solicitors and bikers (40+ years on the road) has won 1000s of cases for fellow bikers.
We received an enquiry from a client who suffered a broken leg following an accident. They explained that on viewing the CCTV and ignoring his own version of events, their insurance company said they were at fault. Having listened to the client and seeking any excuse to get out for a ride, Fergus put on his leathers and took a 2-hour round trip to the scene and checked the sequence of the traffic lights where the incident occurred. Having taken in all the relevant facts Fergus took the opinion that our client was in the right, so we took the claim on (‘no win, no fee’) even though the other party’s insurers also held them to blame too. Following a very detailed letter to outline the true accident circumstances, an admission from the other side’s insurers followed and our client is now looking at a five-figure settlement.
The extra mile (or in this case 70 miles) made the difference and is an example of why we succeed where others fail.
This is another reason over 25% of our new clients transfer their claims from their insurance solicitors to move to us. Not many people are aware that if you are unhappy with the solicitors dealing with your claim you can transfer to another solicitor at any point while your claim is ongoing. All you need to do is notify the solicitors you want to transfer to fill out a simple form then they will handle the rest.
Talk to us today about your motorbike accident. If you fill out the contact us form and one of our specialist biker solicitors will call you at a convenient time or you can call 0800 6300 301.
This was one of those cases where the downright unfairness of the accident served to be the spur we needed to push and win this case.
Our client was on his bike on a ride out with his mate. They had filtered to the front of a queue and were stopped at traffic lights with their feet down waiting for the lights to change.
Once the lights changed our client slowly moved forward to be hit at speed from the right by a BMW that had jumped a red light and hit our client side on, taking him clean off his bike.
Very fortunately our client escaped from serious injury, but then began a case to prove it wasn’t his fault.
You’re probably thinking have I read that right? It’s not immediately the fault of the driver jumping the light? But that was exactly the situation we found ourselves in.
We registered the claim when it came through to us as we would normally do and after some investigation the insurers of the third party vehicle came back to say that they considered the accident was not their client’s fault. Clearly, someone hadn’t been entirely truthful with their version of events, and it was put to us to prove the third party fault.
Luckily, as our client had been at the front of traffic at a set of lights, there were cars both behind him, and also coming in the other direction, who had an excellent view of both the accident and its timing.
At the scene of the accident many of these cars stopped and offered first aid assistance to our client, but also their details incase witnesses were needed..and how invaluable this was.
These witness statements were sent through to the third party insurers and proved that not only was their client not being truthful about the incident, but that he was also at fault for the accident.
We won this case, and our client is now back on his bike and recovering well from his injuries.
It serves a useful warning however, that left to using his own insurers, our client may well have ended up with no settlement at all and also had on his insurance records that his was an at fault accident.
Always seek an alternative to going through your own insurer. You are entitled to do so and will end up with a much better outcome.
Always get witness details and take as many photographs as you can at the scene. Remember that not everyone is as honest as you!
If you have an accident call Sorrymate.com. Its what we do best
I wrote a while ago about the situation with MCE going into administration. This article is by way of an update.
The background is that MCE (as was) now Green Realisations 123 Limited, registered in Gibraltar, went into administration last year. All policies were cancelled as of 31st January this year.
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme must step in any pay compensation to
- those whose policies were cancelled before 12 months expired and who had paid up front for their insurance and
- Those people who made a claim on their policy between the date that MCE (as was) went into administration and 31st January this year and
- People who had made a claim against an MCE policy holder.
The administrators are the people tasked with managing, among other things, the handling of all the above claims.
For those who are seeking a refund of pre-paid premium, my understanding is that this process is ongoing, though slow. Those who have third party claims against a MCE policyholder should, in my view, claim against the actual rider and those claims will ultimately be met in full by the FSCS. I would not advise issuing against Green Realisations 123 Limited for reasons below.
If you are not at fault, claim for bike damage from the driver’s insurance and leave MCE out of it.
The real issues arise for those who have made a claim against their MCE policy.
I write to the administrators, the FSCS and after some chasing received a response from the Administrators.
If you have a claim under your MCE policy, they advise that you take the following steps:
The issue arises when the complaint fails. The gut instinct is to issue proceedings however, under the law of Gibraltar, which is the law governing the situation, proceedings cannot be issued against Green Realisations 123 Limited (previously MCE) without the permission of the Court or the permission of the Administrators. The Administrators have advised that they will not grant permission and will fight any application to the Court for permission. There is also a good chance that the costs of any application, if successful, would not be recovered. So, what to do.
I have spoken to a couple of people who have had some success. They did so by making themselves a real pain for the claim handlers. Whether this works for you or not, it may be worth the try.
- Follow the route of submitting the claim and making a complaint above
- Make a GDPR request for all the personal data they hold (Article 15). Google GDPR Article 15 and you will get a list of all the data you can request. Or you can see below.
- Challenge them to show their FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) reference number and ask how they are able to operate without supervision. Basically, ask awkward questions.
- Each time you do anything also offer to settle your claim for the amount that you think is reasonable. This allows them to consider the cost of arguing against the cost of paying you out.
If I get anything more, I will add it. In the meantime, I am writing to the Prime Minister, the Department of Transport and the Opposition to ask on what basis they allow insurance companies to operate in this Country without the laws of this Country applying.
And next time you insure, it might be worth paying a bit extra to insure with a UK registered company rather than a company who can hide behind the rules of a foreign jurisdiction. Just my thoughts.
On a closing note a couple of positive tales.
I was acting for a client whose son was killed in a bike accident and MCE were being a nightmare. The father came to me about a claim for the costs of the funeral etc. I submitted a claim to AXA Insurance for all losses except the bike as MCE were dealing with that. AXA paid out in a few weeks. Months later, after MCE and their solicitors had put every imaginable hurdle in my way I went back to AXA and asked if they could pay the bike directly as well. Yes, and within a couple of weeks all sorted. It was nice to come across some integrity and decency from an insurer so it should be noted.
A second case, a client who had been struggling to get MCE to handle a claim against him and was being taken to Court got in touch. One solicitor’s letter to the administrators and all sorted. It should not have taken a letter, but such is.
Art. 15 GDPR Right of access by the data subject
- The data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning him or her are being processed, and, where that is the case, access to the personal data and the following information:
- the purposes of the processing;
- the categories of personal data concerned;
- the recipients or categories of recipient to whom the personal data have been or will be disclosed, in particular recipients in third countries or international organisations;
- where possible, the envisaged period for which the personal data will be stored, or, if not possible, the criteria used to determine that period;
- the existence of the right to request from the controller rectification or erasure of personal data or restriction of processing of personal data concerning the data subject or to object to such processing;
- the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority;
- where the personal data are not collected from the data subject, any available information as to their source;
- the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4) and, at least in those cases, meaningful information about the logic involved, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences of such processing for the data subject.
- Where personal data are transferred to a third country or to an international organisation, the data subject shall have the right to be informed of the appropriate safeguards pursuant to Article 46relating to the transfer.
- 1The controller shall provide a copy of the personal data undergoing processing. 2For any further copies requested by the data subject, the controller may charge a reasonable fee based on administrative costs. 3Where the data subject makes the request by electronic means, and unless otherwise requested by the data subject, the information shall be provided in a commonly used electronic form.
- The right to obtain a copy referred to in paragraph 3 shall not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others.
As of 25th March, new rules to The Highway code have come in to force to make using any hand-held mobile phone illegal while driving.
The changes were supported by 80% of respondents in a public consultation in 2021.
The new rules now state you must not use a device in your hand for any reason, whether online or offline. The law applies to you if you are.
- Supervising a learner driver
- Stopped at traffic lights
- Queuing traffic
- Driving a car that turns the engine off when you stop moving
- Holding and using a device that’s an offline or in-flight mode
The only exceptions are needing to call 999 or 112 in an emergency or making a contactless payment in a vehicle that is not moving.
It is important to stay up to date with any changes made to The Highway code as it is your responsibility for the safety of other road users.
You can view The Highway Code for free on www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code
OPINION ON MCE AS WAS.
I am Fergus from Sorrymate and this is my view of the position as it stands with MCE Insurance. This sort of thing is never exciting but what follows will hopefully give some guidance and help avoid a few pitfalls.
This is what I have been able to find out to date, but it has to be taken with a degree of care as things are potentially subject to change.
1. MCE Insurance Company Limited is now known as Green Realisations Limited and is currently in administration (hereinafter MCE). Administrators are now running the company.
2. This company should not be confused with MCE Insurance Limited which was MCE’s sole broker for policies and is still trading. (Please note that I do not believe that there is a cause of action against this company for now).
3. MCE was registered in Gibraltar and as such come under Gibraltarian Law. More of this later.
4. As of 31st January 2022, all policies from MCE are cancelled so any claim after that date is void. If anyone has insurance with MCE, they need to arrange new insurance immediately.
5. The FSCS (Financial Services Compensation Scheme) will be arranging compensation to refund in part, premiums paid where people have paid for 12 months and received less cover.
6. My belief is that these are to be paid at 90% but I am awaiting confirmation.
7. My understanding is that in principle all first-person claims (where you are claiming on your own insurance) will be paid out at 90% and all third-party claims (where you have a claim against someone insured by MCE) are paid out at 100%.
8. The big issue at the moment appears to be those people who have made a claim against their own policy with MCE and MCE have refused the claim in full or in part.
9. Under the Insolvency Act of Gibraltar no action may be brought against a company in liquidation without permission of the Court or the Administrator.
10. The above Act applies in the UK as well (under the wording of the Act) therefore a Judgment against MCE is unenforceable.
11. According to the FSCS they will pay compensation where the claim is agreed and valued by the Administrator. They will not pay on the sight of a Judgment against MCE or GR123 Ltd. Basically obtaining a judgment, is pointless, at this stage.
12. The only course of action, at the moment, is to ask the Administrator to reconsider your claim. They have set up a scheme to enable this.
13. The review of claims is being carried out by a company called
Quest Consulting, 52 – 54 Gracechurch Street, London, EC3V 0EH
14. In short, my advice would be as follows:
A. If you are owed a refund of the premium, then sit tight. The FSCS is going to sort refunds of at least part of the premium, but be aware, this will take months.
B. If you have a claim against someone insured by MCE, make sure, if you are issuing proceedings, that you issue against the insured rider and not against MCE. These Judgments are not against MCE so are not covered by the relevant Gibraltar Insolvency Act. My understanding is that the FSCS will be paying these in full. I await clarification.
C. If you are making a claim against MCE then go through the procedure with their governance people first, firstname.lastname@example.org Once that runs its course, if you remain unhappy with the result (which will be paid out by the FSCS in time) file a complaint with Quest, details above.
I am currently awaiting further clarification from the Administrators, Quest and the FCFS and will update further in due course.
The Financial Services Compensation Scheme has declared that MCE Insurance Company Limited has failed.
The company who are based in Gibraltar sold motorbike, private car, van, and commercial vehicle insurance products in the UK through broker MCE Insurance.
Last week MEC had been put into a run-off following difficulties.
The company ceased writing new insurance on 5 November 2021 and predominantly wrote motorbike insurance and car insurance policies, specifically for UK customers.
Existing insurance policies remain in force and are valid. If you are a policyholder of the company, then your policy will continue to be administered by the UK broker MCE UK.
Our client was on the main road when another driver came from a side road to the left and crashed into him causing multiple injuries. This case was transferred to us because our client was unhappy with his own insurance company solicitors. They had done nothing about his bike despite him asking many times. We got the file – arranged an engineer and sorted payment for his bike and then arranged a medical and sorted his injury and damaged kit claim.
25% of our clients transferred from their previous solicitor. Why? because we are specialist-biker lawyers. Just like you we have had accidents ourselves and understand how stressful it can be. Oh and not to mention we care about you and your bike too!
“I started going through my insurance solicitors and was waiting for days or a week for a response and got sick and tired of waiting and then boom Sorrymate was on the radio. The response was incredible and so professional it’s unreal. A couple of months later my case was settled. I can’t thank my appointed solicitor enough. Definitely recommend them to anyone.” Kieran partridge.
MCN report on The National Motorcyclist Council (NMC) calls for changes to be made to the current UK’s motorcycle license testing and training regime. As it was found the multi-layered approach has not to be making biking any safer.
Motorcycle licensing changed in 2009 to involve a two-part test and two-stage licences, in the belief it would reduce casualties.
However, NMC analysis reveals that changes introduced in 2009 have failed to make motorcycling safer but the number of riders killed or seriously injured has risen. Now that the UK has left the EU, the NMC is calling on the Government to use this opportunity to revamp the system.
The proposed changes are to return to a single test and remove the A2 category. For young riders who pass they would be on a restricted licence as before, with a training course after one year to graduate to the full A licence.
Also, NMC would like to see the CBT include a theory test. The NMC are also in favour of training courses to move up from A1 rather than a repeat test. Other proposed measures are to return a direct access minimum age of 21.
The National Motorcyclists Council bring together a range of motorcycling groups across the country to voice their issues to parliament.
This includes making sure motorcycles and mopeds are included in current and future transport and sustainability strategies, making sure the process of getting a licence is fit for purpose post-Brexit and protecting motorbike sports venues such as race circuits and motocross tracks.
The council will also work with authorities on regulatory and enforcement issues like exhaust noise, bike theft, antisocial behaviour, vehicle excise duty, low emissions zones, and better security for riders. Visit the National Motorcyclists Council website for a full list of the new group’s objectives.
Recent figures reported from the Yorkshire Air Ambulance shown that RTC motorcycle incidents were the most common incident last week.
This year the Yorkshire Air Ambulance had responded to 1003 which, 694 patients were held.
SorryMate are proud to support Yorkshire Air Ambulance who work extremely hard to save lives across Yorkshire. The Yorkshire Air Ambulance is an independent charity which relies heavily on the generosity of the public & organisation to keep the service active.