Compensation Claims and Evidence
Perceptions and Reality
Perceptions v Reality
• Perceptions
– Claiming compensation is easy
• Reality
– Evidence based
Claims Management companies
Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy?
• Complex claims –no witnesses &
claimant no recall
• Fatal collisions without witnesses
• Contributory negligence assessing
respective blame 50:50 80:20
• Collision involving young childrenno fault for very young children
• So how easy or difficult is it to
prove a case?
Case Examples Mr T and his Seat Belt
• Mr T elderly retired hit
head on in RTA collision
• Serious crush injuries to his
legs
• Defence admit liability
argue contributory
negligence failure to wear
seat belt.
• Problem A & E notes state
“unrestrained “ in vehicle
Case Study Mr T & his seat belt
• Contradictory evidence
• Interview treating consultant who recalled the case and
took photos very bad seat belt bruising
• Difference to the claim on these facts 15% deduction of
damages
• Seat belt issues constantly raised on cases
Mr B a mystery incident
• Pedal cyclist in collision with car
on wide two carriageway road
• Inexplicable how it happened
• client catastrophic head injury
no recollection
• Only witnesses defendant driver
and his passenger.
Mr B
• Controversial evidence driver’s passenger
• Witness statement sent to defence expecting an
offer/settlement proposal
• Response: estranged girlfriend all lies
• trial 3 days
• Judge preferred our evidence and 2/3rd liability in
claimants favour.
Miss J – PTSD claim
• Horrific collision bus and small car driver killed at scene
• Sister goes looking for him comes across the scene and
sees mangled car suffers PTSD
• Claim rejected by insurers
• We track down the police officers - vivid and powerful
statements at this point insurers accept she was at
scene
Miss J PTSD Claim
•
•
•
•
•
But deny PTSD
Our medical evidence proves PTSD
Miss J wants case over takes low offer to bring to an end
Defence next argument costs
Each step was contentious high evidential burden
Final case study J - boys on bikes
• 3 boys out for cycle ride park up at a disused factory for
lemonade
• Accosted by security guard who aggressively pursues the
boys down hill
• Boys frightened – tight turn boy J fails the turn has
defective brakes hits lamp post and is killed
J boys on bikes
• Security guard prosecuted 3 times causing death by
dangerous driving – 2 no verdict finally pleads to lesser
charge
• Civil claim liability denied.
• We take statements from:
–
–
–
–
witnesses who saw guard confront boys aggressively
other car users who saw the chase,
friends and family who knew the boy’s character
the two boys who had been with the deceased
Young J boys on bikes
•
•
•
•
All the statements were distressing to take
Long 3.5 year fight for compensation
Family finding it hard, other problems to contend with
“Time bomb” offer to finish
• Not about money but justice
Evidence Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy
•
•
•
•
•
The claimant bears the burden of proof
Evidence can be intrusive
Finding and dealing with the evidence can be distressing
Circumstances may not be enough
Struggle and stress on families.
• The reality is very different to the popular perception