justapossum
Well-known member
1. Did you have a medical examination arranged by your solicitors?This might seem a weird question but bear with me as I give back story to the query.
I was in a car accident last year, got rear ended. It left me in a fair amount of shock and anxiety and due to that I was having couselling. Counselling is expensive! Anyway I lodged a claim with the insurance through a solicitor so my counselling would be covered. They offered me £2,000 which I turned down because all in it will probably end up costing me £2,500 which is what I asked for. And for all I know it might even be more!
Now it sounds like they don't believe my claim and I might end up having to go to court as they aren't happy with the invoices provided etc. I kinda wish I just took the £2k but then I would be out of pocket for something that weren't my fault.
So my query is: Why would they be so resistant in offering the extra £500 to cover my counselling? Also if it did go to court, and I know this will only be speculation, why would they as I can obviously prove I am going to therapy/counselling?
I am just so confused. It's not like I tried to claim for physical injuries despite having slight backlash etc. I'm not trying to make money. Literally just want my expenses covered which is my mental health.
2. If so, what was the expert's opinion and prognosis regarding your shock and anxiety?
3. Did he recommend counselling?
4. If so, how many sessions?
You mentioned that you only had slight whiplash, so what was the impact of the accident? If it was only a slight bump that didn't cause you any significant physical injuries, the third party could be disputing how in that case it could have caused you significant (and accident related) psychological injuries.
Any treatment that you arrange yourself is at your own financial risk - you need to be able to prove that your treatment was necessary! As well as the amount of sessions.
This means that if you had a medical examination, and in the medical report the expert did not believe that you had significant psychological injuries that required treatment - you have no medico-legal evidence that you needed this treatment in the first place. You decided to arrange this for yourself and therefore third party are not legally obligated to pay for treatment that you decided to arrange for yourself.
(Imagine I had a car accident, let's say, I got reversed into in a car park at low speed - only slight damage, and I decided to privately pay for 50 sessions of physiotherapy and then asked the third party to cover these costs - these costs are unreasonable in this situation). - this is just an example by the way, I am in no way suggesting that you have not psychologically suffered, but you need to prove that 1) the injuries are appropriate to the impact of the accident and 2) that the treatment is appropriate to the accident.
I don't think they are disputing that you are in counselling/therapy - they're disputing your psychological injuries and treatment.