Thanks for the quick response. I was very uncomfortable about the whole situation and felt they were trying to pull the wool over their eyes. Before I go back to them Ill give you a bit more info...
Thats where we're at now... here's the last email from the lawyer..
Dear Mr Porteous,
We refer to your previous correspondence dated 24th June 2014. Your case handler has now returned to the office.
The reason why we require your joint financial information is to show that your wife was not able to afford a hire car at the time of the accident. Your joint accounts shows funds that you, together, had saved for your wedding. If you wife had used these funds to purchase a hire car then you would have not been able to pay for your wedding.
The issue comes done to your wife's duty to mitigate her losses. Your wife had a duty to conduct her affairs to ensure that she suffered minimal loss as a result of the other side's negligence. We would argue that she did that by accepting the credit hire agreement as the other option was to cancel her wedding.
The reason why we require the joint account beyond the accident date is to show that those funds had a specific purpose, that they were effectively 'spent' at the time of the accident.
The reason why we are at this point is because the other side are arguing that your wife did not mitigate her loss by accepting the credit hire agreement. This stems from a letter sent to Kindertons offering a hire car at a lesser rate than the car you were using. Unfortunately, because the agreement is between your wife and Kindertons, she is legally liable for the cost, hence Kindertons have to sue the third party for the costs under your wife's name. This also means that we must show that the credit hire agreement was the reasonable option for your wife.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you wish to discuss this further.
How would I best respond to this? Thanks
We have spoken to the financial ombudsman who has raised a complaint for us to the insurance company. They have in turn raised one to Kindertons. Thats the last we heard.
I might have muddled things a bit there...
Our insurance included a courtesy car but when my wife reported the accident & advised it was not her fault the insurance company said "We can offer you a hire car to match your own at no extra charge." She accepted it. I mean, no extra charge, there's no reason not to. the insurer then passed us onto kindertons. So we were led the whole way with it. We werent given any other choices apart from the hire car.
As for the third party's offer of a cheaper hire car, we never saw that offer until a few weeks ago & I think it was sent to Kindertons & they just didnt pass it on.
Should I reply to their lawyer & say I will not be providing any further bank details and that they will have to pursue the third party with the information they have? Could they take that as us not cooperating & try to pursue us for the costs?
Ill reply and ask them that though I think its because it was received too late. I think we have a copy of it somewhere, sent to us by the lawyer. I cant find it in my emails at the moment though.
Here's a copy of an email they sent where they were threatening to pursue us for the costs..
I attach a copy of your signed credit hire agreement. Under section "2: Payment" it states that you are liable for the hire costs unless you allow Kindertons to make a claim against the other side. You do not need to pay for the hire, provided that Kindertons are allowed to pursue a claim on your behalf.
The other side are refusing to pay for your hire car. Under the agreement you are liable for the hire car costs. The only avenue open to you to avoid paying the hire charges is to raise a court action against the other side. Kindertons have instructed us on your behalf, and you have provided authority to them to do this under the agreement you signed.In order to win our case we have to prove that you could not have afforded to pay for a hire vehicle unless you took our a credit hire agreement such as this one. To do that we must show that at the time of the accident you had insufficient funds to afford, essentially, a pay-as-you-go hire agreement.
Please confirm your instructions, that you wish us to pursue a court action against the other side and that you are able to send the financial documentation requested.
The document she refers to
So you think I should provide them with the bank account information & my wage slips?
Im not sure I also mentioned the fact that the credit hire agreement my wife signed was handed to her by the delivery driver of the hire car & it was not explicitly pointed out that she was entering into a credit hire agreement. It all feels very underhanded.
An overall question would be - are we safe from any come back, given that the case the lawyer is trying to prove (that we took the credit hire agreement because we couldnt afford the car otherwise) is essentially a lie or an irrelevant point. If there was any costs involved, we would not have accepted the hire car. I dont want us agreeing with this un-truth. Does that make sense?
Ok, Thank you.
So you dont see any way around providing them with our joint bank records? Im best just sending them? Thanks
Sorry about the delay in picking this up, Ive been away on business. I also just received a call from the lawyer which reminded me about this. Id appreciate some help.
They tell me that the 3rd party isnt budging and will only offer a fraction of the settlement that Kindertons are offering them. The lawyer says that Kindertons are willing to take it & they want to bill ME for over £700!
The only other option is court action and me & my wife get dragged into court!..to say that we didnt receive the 3rd party's hire car offer (which we didnt) - but even then, if the judge doesnt agree, Kindertons can still come after us for that money!?
I dont know what to do! We're caught in the middle here when eSure & Kindertons both promised the hire car wouldnt cost us any extra. Then they never forwarded the 3rd party's offer of a cheaper car. How can we be liable for their lies & deceit!?
From what the lawyer said, Kindertons wont accept it if they cant come after us for the remaining amount.
Ill contact the ombudsman. We're no longer with the insurance company though so Im not sure what I can do with them.
Should we tell the lawyer to go ahead with the court action? She seems to think we have nothing to lose by doing it, just means we're dragged into court with all this & in the end, we may still get pursued by Kindertons. Thanks for the quick reply
Here's a link in dropbox - can you see it here?
If not, ill email it to the support email. Thanks
Sorry, my fault. can you try again.
here's also a link to the letter from esure - maybe that can help us...
Thanks. I got contact details for Kinderton's legal team. So i called them. Discussed it. They said as long as we cooperate they wont come after us for any shortfall from a court action. I got them to send it in writing too.
Its not ideal & may still require us going to court or making a statement but I think its the best we can expect from the situation.
Ill still be pursuing the ombudsman route against esure though. Thanks