Am I going to be sued ?
- Thread starter mkb
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Now you've admitted that you were at fault she can sue the pants off you.
what a grade A plonker Joe is.
First time he's ever got a grade A in his life mind so I suppose we should really be congratulating him.
Nah maybe next time.
What a plum
Joe is indeed sometimes a plonker...
But he is right here.
Going by what mkb has now said, he has as good as admitted that he is at fault, and she has won!
No point going on about how you are 'in the right' for all that time, and then to crumble at the last minute!
But he is right here.
Going by what mkb has now said, he has as good as admitted that he is at fault, and she has won!
No point going on about how you are 'in the right' for all that time, and then to crumble at the last minute!
Sponsored Links
Offering any amount during mediation is not admission of any guilt, it is merely a system to get things sorted quickly and get the case shut.
No decisions are final unless both parties agree, a mediator is not a judge and does not have a say in anything.
No decisions are final unless both parties agree, a mediator is not a judge and does not have a say in anything.
A lesson in life...
Most companies/government organisations/individuals will ask you to 'make a small payment' in lieu of the claim...
If you agree, that by default means you are accepting some form of liability unless you state otherwise...
Again, going by what mkb has said, he has not done that...
Therefore he has left himself open to other sanctions!
Most companies/government organisations/individuals will ask you to 'make a small payment' in lieu of the claim...
If you agree, that by default means you are accepting some form of liability unless you state otherwise...
Again, going by what mkb has said, he has not done that...
Therefore he has left himself open to other sanctions!
Someone posted that the mediation was not visible to the courts, if that's the case then this shouldn't make a difference should it goto court. I would have thought that by default all mediation was without prejudice.
Nope, wrong twice.
By your own argument, the other side not accepting the full amount claimed means the claim is spurious.
The only time these pre-trial negotiations mean anything is when it comes to deciding costs. In those cases the judge won't even know the details until after the end of the case, it has no impact whatsoever on the result. As it's a small claim they aren't going to get their costs anyway.
It's a shame that the original poster has been essentially bullied into a payment but that's how it works. The little man always tends to lose.
The true lesson in life here is to buy professional indemnity insurance.
However it probably wouldn't make much difference, sounds like the plaintiff has household insurance to cover these sorts of claims so she has nowt to lose and she'd probably sue her insurance company if they didn't cover her. Her lawyers are going to get paid no matter what so they don't care either.
If the story is as told I'd have offered nothing (or my lawyers would as I've got a large amount of PI cover)
That is true, what ever the outcome of mediation, it cannot be used in any court proceedings.
Could you then say with any confidence, that during a court case the actual fact that mediation had occured (whatever the outcome) would not be raised?
Is it not a fact that at present if a judgement is made in court, the settlement is often dependant on what had previously been offered out of court?
Well that question was answered 35 minutes ago so if you cannot remember from that short time ago what's the point in answering it again?
If you can't remember the original facts of the alleged case, then (in your words) what's the point in answering again...
Sponsored Links
