‘Emily’ – Hit by a car whilst crossing the road
Case handler: Gillian Lakes (Senior Solicitor)
In this case, our client sustained personal injury and loss as a result of a road traffic accident when she was hit by the Defendant whilst crossing the road.
Key elements of our client’s case
The stance of the Defendant Insurer from the outset was that our client had walked directly into their policyholder’s path giving him no opportunity to avoid a collision.
In the early stages of the claim, the Defendant Insurer put forward an offer to settle our client’s claim on a 90/10 basis in favour of their policyholder but this was very quickly withdrawn the following day.
As a result of the accident, our client sustained a left lateral tibial plateau fracture, a left pelvic fracture and a spinal fracture. The spinal fracture healed in 12 weeks as did the pelvic fracture.
Where our specialist serious injury experience really added value to our client’s situation
In light of the ongoing liability dispute, evidence was commissioned from an accident reconstruction expert, the conclusion of which was positive in our client’s favour. The evidence concluded that if the Defendant was travelling at 25-30 miles per hour as claimed, there was sufficient time for the Defendant to brake and avoid an impact with our client, in the alternative he could have slowed to a more reasonable speed and there would have been sufficient time for our client to clear his path.
The Defendant Insurer once again stated that our client was the author of her own misfortune but made an offer to settle her claim in full and final settlement for the sum of £10,000. We rejected this offer and conveyed the evidence of our accident reconstruction expert to the Defendant Insurer who then returned with an improved liability offer of 50/50. This was rejected and liability was agreed at 60/40 in our client’s favour. The medical evidence we had obtained from Orthopaedic and Psychiatric medical experts was then disclosed to the Defendant Insurer.
Our client’s physical injuries were evidenced by the instruction of a Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon who prepared a report concluding that our client would likely to continue to suffer with ongoing pain in her knee with a small, 5% risk of developing arthritis due to the injuries suffered as a result of the accident.
Our client’s psychological injuries were evidenced by the instruction of a psychiatric expert who prepared a report concluding that our client suffered with psychological symptoms because of the accident. The expert concluded that with a course of psychological treatment she would recover within 12 months of the examination.
Following disclosure of the medical evidence to the Defendant Insurer they made an offer to settle our client’s claim for a large five figure sum (gross of liability). This was rejected and after negotiation, our client’s claim settled for a considerably higher five figure sum.