Seven figure settlement for father of two who walked into the path of an oncoming car

A pedestrian case, which presented some very significant challenges for our client. Initially, the third-party driver fled the scene but presented to police the following day. The anecdotal evidence was limited and the police investigation concluded from CCTV footage (which was subsequently deleted), that our client had simply stepped out into the path of the third-party vehicle. Therefore, the case required comprehensive forensic analysis and expert reporting to reconstruct the accident.

Damian Horan was assisted by Anna West and Christine Dowling from Aspire Law. Aspire Law was also assisted by Gerard McDermott KC of Kings Chambers and leading medical and non-medical legal experts.

Background

Our client had been to the pub for the afternoon with his partner. They had both gone outside to the pub car park where they were due to be picked up by family for a meal out. The pub car park
was across the road.

When they reached the car park, our client realised he had left his payment card behind the bar and had forgotten to pay his tab. He therefore had to return to pay the bill and collect his card. Our client turned to cross the road and was hit by the third-party car. His partner did not witness the accident as she had her back to the road. Our client had no recollection of the accident.

Liability

The accident circumstances were relatively straight forward with a car versus a pedestrian, however who was at fault was hotly contested. The insurer for the third-party driver argued their driver had no time to react and could not have avoided the accident. They said our client simply stepped out off of the pavement just as the third-party car was due to pass by. Given this they said their driver had not been negligent and should bear no liability in this case.

As the police evidence was incomplete and in parts unhelpful, Aspire Law needed to obtain evidence to support our client’s claim. We therefore instructed an expert forensic engineer to reconstruct the accident with scene measurements, photographs and laser scan data. This would assist in understanding the full extent of sight lines, the likley speed of the third-party vehicle, the relative positions of the parties leading up to and including the collision and the reaction times.

The expert investigation, information gathering and final report took many months to conclude. The report supported the third-party driver was likley driving in excess of the speed limit (reducing the time for the third-party driver to react), however, it also showed that had the third-party driver been driving within the speed limit of 30 mph the accident would likley have occurred in any event. It suggested there was little time in either scenario for the third-party driver to avoid the collision.

Litigation Process

During the claim a number of meetings were had with the third-party insurer. Despite the insurer alleging their insured had done nothing wrong, Aspire Law were able to obtain a number of significant interim payments to assist our client with his discharge from hospital, equipment and ongoing rehabilitation.

Aspire Law also met with counsel in conference to discuss the expert evidence Aspire Law had gathered; in particular the reconstruction evidence which wasn’t particularly helpful. Whilst the
prospects of success were thought reasonable, there would likley be a significant reduction for contributory negligence given that our client had walked into oncoming traffic. There was also the risk, given the circumstances of the accident, that the claim could fail in its entirety. Therefore, this was not a case that we wanted to run to trial; rather we would aim for a negotiated settlement.

Difficulties following injury

Our client sustained horrific injuries in the collision, to include C6/7 neck fractures, contusional lung injuries, fractured fibula, fractured ribs, knee fracture with ligament damage and lacerations. His spinal cord injury was incomplete leaving our client able to walk short distances but largely reliant on a wheelchair to get around.

Following discharge from St Georges hospital, London, our client spent three months at the London Spinal Cord Injury Centre where he received rehabilitation. Our client made good progress and his independence improved. However, he remained severely disabled and it was thought further improvements could be achieved with additional intensive rehabilitation. To that end, Aspire Law secured further funding from the third-party insurer, which would see our client receive 6 weeks privately funded rehabilitant at the Royal Buckingham Hospital in Aylesbury.

Developments during the claim

In addition to the interim payments and private rehabilitant arranged for our client, Aspire Law also instructed the services of a case manager to help our client with all aspects of daily living to include transport, equipment, accommodation and care/assistance. The expertise of the case manager meant that our client could return home to an environment that was suitable for a wheelchair user and receive the support and services required to integrate him back into family life.

During the whole process interim payments were obtained by Aspire Law, which meant our client didn’t have to worry about money nor affordability.

Valuation

As with the majority of Aspire Law cases, this claim was worth many millions of pounds. The value of this case, as with other cases, was relative to the extent of the injury, the nature of any ongoing disability along side the age of the client. To fully investigate the value of the case, Aspire Law instructed upwards of ten medical and non-medical experts to investigate and report on our client’s needs both now and in the future. Thes needs were fully costed in the various reports and entered onto a schedule of loss, which gave our client the headline figure in this case.

Negotiations

The risks in this case were significant. It was possible that our client could lose altogether if the matter went to trial. Therefore, Aspire Law were keen, as was our client, to avoid a court hearing.

Despite the reconstruction evidence proving difficult, Aspire Law maintained the third-party driver was at fault. There was evidence of speeding and of courses the third-party driver left the scene, for reasons unknown, which raised questions over his credibility and wrong doing. As legal proceedings had not been issued there was no obligation at the time for any disclosure of the expert evidence. Aspire Law pressed for a joint settlement meeting with the third-party insurer to see if agreement could be reached. The meeting would prove to be a success with our client accepting a seven-figure settlement, which accounted for the risks in this case.

Conclusion

This case is another example of why detailed investigation and quality expert evidence is so vital in these cases. The forensic reconstruction report told us how the liability evidence would likely play out at any trial, particularly if the third-party insurers evidence corroborated our own. It was therefore vital that Aspire Law maintained a robust position whilst being pragmatic, open and consensual on matters we could agree to achieve a favourable outcome for our client. As a result, and somewhat against the odds, our client was able to achieve a sizeable settlement.