Witness expenses, court case 200 miles from crash site?

[OutInTheShed]

I foolishly volunteeered my details after witnessing a minor prang over a year ago.
Crash in Devon.
Now being asked if I can attend court as witness.
In the bloody Midlands!
At 10 AM.
Earliest train gets there 1240.
On a date I was keeping the week free to go sailing.

Should I say, yes, I'm available, it's up to you to arrange a chauffered limo and a decent hotel?
And by the way, I've spent about two grand to be able to go sailing that week...

The other problem is, I would be a crap witness, I remember the salient facts and could tell you who was in the wrong, but don't exactly have the date etched on my mind, couldn't tell you the makes or colours of the cars, and I won't recognise the face of the guilty party. It's not important to me and my brain doesn't work like that!
So I imagine any cross-examining laywer will make me look like an idiot.
Everything I can definitely say is bleedin' obvious from the fact that car the first has a dent in the side and car the second has a dent in the front, apart from a detail which suggests the cause of 2nd not avoiding 1st. 'suggests', not 'proves'.
I guess what's at stake is someone's blame-free record and small change for an insurance company
Not going to discuss the incident.
I just don't know the mechanics of these things other than by rumour.

[OutInTheShed]

valiant said:

Get down there and they’ll have settled just before the trial was due to start.

Is that 'catch 22'?

If defence can turn up with the witnesses, the other side will bottle?

Otherwise, the plaintiff will see the defence has no witnesses and will proceed?

Or am I relying too much on TV for knowing how this works?
I've only ever been to court as a juror!

[OutInTheShed]

Forester1965 said:

Just say you're not available on that date.

I am minded to do this.

It might be a fun day out on expenses, if it was a wet week in January.
Although I expect witnesses get treated worse then jurors?

[OutInTheShed]

Alex Z said:

The date and identity of the driver are unlikely to be key questions. The important thing will be “what did the cars do?”

Some court hearings are remote these days. Ask about attending via Zoom or similar

I think you are right, but a good barrister might shed doubt on whether we're even talking about the same cars?
Although there's only one driver I gave my details to.


While I completely empathise with one driver, his insurance company have treated me badly as witness, so I'm fairly mixed about the whole saga.

I may offer to participate via Tiktok or something.

[OutInTheShed]

KungFuPanda said:

Were you not asked about dates of availability prior to the Court date being set? Also, have you been served with a formal witness summons?

Only contact this year has been from a solicitor's dogsbody via email and phone.
I've previously said it's not practical for me to get to the arse end of the Midlands.
I was led to believe a formal emailed statement was all they needed.

[OutInTheShed]

Hungrymc said:

Responder.First said:

There is no civic duty anymore, its every person for themselves!

Let the suffer, you go sailing.

Which is partly fair, but the process of settling accident disputes is already a mess based on claim handling companies trying to exploit each other in hope of a best outcome for themselves in reclaiming obscenely inflated hire car costs etc.

I'd actually say the whole process has been corrupted and this undermines any notion of civic duty.

Terrible shame.

In theory, yes people should go to court as witnesses and justice should be done.
But, the insurance company who are wanting me as a witness have messed me about.
OTOH, I do empathise with their client. But maybe he's going to get a life lesson about cheapskate insurance deals.

The court system in this country is broken. We've got people waiting years to be tried for alleged serious crimes, while people argue about the insurance on a dented car.
Even if I do my bit, I have zero faith in the right outcome happening.
The cost of me going to court is a fair chunk of the value of either of the cars in question.
Why is there a court case 200 miles from the incident?


Lawyers - Terry Pratchett quote


'Hold on, hold on, there must be a law against killing lawyers.’
‘Are you sure?’
‘There’re still some around, aren’t there? (TT)

[OutInTheShed]

KungFuPanda said:

The location of the accident has no bearing whatsoever on which Court the matter is head.

Normally, the Claimant issues in their home Court or the home Court of their Solicitors. Then upon allocation of the case, the Defendant is given the opportunity to have the matter moved to a Court of their own choosing.

Perhaps the defendant should have taken witnesses into consideration and elected to use a local court and maybe local lawyers?
They've not exactly shown me much consideration or respect as a witness, so if their case collapses due to lack of witnesses, so be it.
I replied to the email days ago saying I'm not available, I've yet to hear back.
As I've got the names of the beligerants, I guess I might be able to look up the outcome of the case somewhere?

[OutInTheShed]

mkjess123 said:

Hi,
Are you sure that it is actually court that you have been asked to attend?
There is a possibility that it is some form of hearing or a panel which is deciding something like insurance culpability or similar (I have attended these in the past), and they might be using the court buildings.
From experience I doubt very much that a minor accident in Devon is being dealt with in Birmingham.
The only way that I can see that it would be, if for example, the car and driver were part of a much wider investigation and when one of the cars was recovered, interesting items were found within relating to an ongoing Midlands issue.

Yes, the letter is quite clear, it's civil trial at county court, the insurance co is the defendent.

[OutInTheShed]

mkjess123 said:

So it's a civil trial and County court!
In that case you have misled everybody..

Only lardheads who didn't read or understand the first few posts.

[OutInTheShed]

Forester1965 said:

OutInTheShed said:

Yes, the letter is quite clear, it's civil trial at county court, the insurance co is the defendent.

Minor point of order- the insurer's customer will be the defendent with the insurer acting on his behalf.

Minor point of fact, you're wrong.

[OutInTheShed]

The solicitor who emailed me, lists the case as A Bad-Driver vs Slimy Insurance LTD.

I'd assumed it's the other party's insurer, it was the other party to whom I gave my details, but maybe not?
Maybe Bad-Driver is suing their own insurer?
Or of course the solicitor could be a bit vague and has told me incorrectly.

[OutInTheShed]

leef44 said:

Sometimes it's a case that the insurance company has paid out and the insured customer has now moved on with a fault claim against their name.

The insurance company still pursues cases where it sees it worthwhile to get funds back from other party i.e. it has a high probability case. If the insurance company wins case and gets money back then it will reinstate the insured customers status back to no fault claim.

Wouldn't that make Slimy Insurance LTD the plaintiff?