Is there a time limit on claims for injury as a result of accidents? A friend has just been telling me about an accident that happened to her about 4 years ago where a speeding driver hit her after cresting a rise and found her turning right across his path.
Somehow he not only avoided blame for this, but managed to claim off her insurance for the accident. As she was young and inexperienced at the time, she didn't really know how to fight it, and as she was only TP insured, her insurer didn't want to know.
However, in the incident she suffered a fractured pelvis and there is now doubt over whether she can have kids.
Is there anything she can do at this late stage to get compensation for this or has this idiot got away with potentially ruining her life? Of course I've only got her word for what happened, but I can see no way the other driver could avoid at best getting a 50/50 fault, if not total fault. However, I assume that what happened at the time can't be changed and am really only wondering if there is any way she can get help over this.
TIA for any advice.
|
|
I've been told that it's a three-year limit, I'm afraid. Perhaps Pugugly can confirm this?
|
There seems to me to be complexities in this that, pending PU's sound advice, that there is no alternative but to use a solicitor/legal expert to further a claim.
However before committing funds contact your nearest Citizen Advice Bureau to see if they run a free interview with a Solicitor scheme. Your friend could then run the facts against him to assess if there is any chance of a valid claim, providing of course that limitations on proceedings have not expired. (Why do I think this is 6 or 7 years).
Whilst I hate the idea of them, have you had words with one of the No Win No Fee merchants?
DVD.
|
|
|
|
There might be time to take out a private prosecution against him. Are you saying she was sitting in the road waiting to turn right and was hit from behind, turning right and he hit her driver's door as she was turning or that she was in the process of turning right and was hit as she was actually going across his side of the road? In the former two he is more to blame but in the latter as she is going across the other lane then unfortunately it is basically her fault as you have to be completely sure that it is safe to turn. Is there is some hard evidence that he was speeding? What was the speed limit on the road?
teabelly
|
|
|
Statute of limitations is 3 years (from the date of harm)unless there are particularly mitigating circumstances.
If she's only just been diagnosed as unable to have children then it may be that the courts would treat that as the 'start date'.
In any case seek expert advice, - for something that might be 'touch and go' I'd stay away from the 'where there's blame there's a claim' people as they tend to go with sure fire winners rather than border line cases.
Stuart
|
|
|
My late wife and I were involved in 2 lengthy litigation actions (1 car accident & 1 train crash) and were advised in both that there was a limit of 3 years from the incident in which to issue proceedings.
IIRC the relevant dates were the dates of the incidents, not when the symptoms appeared.
The sooner your friend gets a proper legal opinion the better, but it may be too late and will probably be difficult to proove.
|
I found this on a solictors webpage
Claims ought usually to be brought within three years of the date of knowledge that injuries were received in an accident, but there are so many exceptions as well as the Court’s general discretion to override this time limit, that Defendants can have difficulty in proving that it is too late. Where there is a serious brain injury and injured children, the time limit does not apply. One example we dealt with concerned a case of clinical negligence which happened 23 years before solicitors were approached by the victim. We took the case on. Liability was admitted and over £1 million damages were awarded.
Children injured while under 18 have until their 21st birthday to claim. For those with serious brain injuries, time limits generally don't apply.
|
|
|
|
I can only assume that because this woman's TP insurance paid out for damage to the alleged "speeding driver", they must have accepted that it was 100% her fault. Sorry about her present situation, but there are too many uncertainties and "as you say "doubts" in her story. There the story ends. Full stop.
But this reminds of the marathon thread by SteveH42 titled "accident questions":
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=i&t=84...8
Steve: At the risk of starting it all over again, out of curiosity, may I ask about :
1. Did that finally get resolved?
2. Is there a chance the woman from that incident will claim off you in 3 or 6 years time for personal injury?
|
Without asking her for more details I don't know the full story, but as I read it, she started turning then saw this car crest the hill at speed. He saw her turning in front of him, slammed on the anchors, skidded and swerved, somehow hitting her driver's door. She says she was still on her side of the road when he hit, but I must admit I don't fully follow how he came to hit her driver's door. (Possibly she turned away when she saw him coming - sort of aborted the turn and ended up at an angle)
Apparently they couldn't tell how fast he had been going at the time for some reason - something to do with her car assisting his deceleration. He then proceeded to make things worse by reversing his car out of hers even though she'd pointed out to him (in no uncertain terms) that she thought this was a bad idea as she couldn't feel her legs.
As the insurance couldn't prove he had been speeding he was allowed to claim from her policy. I'm surprised at this as surely you have to take enough care when cresting a rise to have a reasonable chance of stopping if there is an obstruction just beyond it. Of course, things like distance of junction from the crest would be important - I don't know the full facts on this. I'd have thought 50/50 would be the best he could hope for, but I suspect it was the old FC vs TP problem - her insurance wasn't interested in fighting for someone who is only insured 3rd party.
The medical thing is a bit complicated. Her pelvis was pretty badly smashed, but they can't scan to find the extent of the damage as the x-ray could damage her ovaries. If she does decide to have children there could be all manner of unpleasant complications so the choice is either not to have kids due to the risk, or try and keep your fingers crossed that everything is OK. I'm not sure how recent this diagnosis it - I didn't really like to pry too much in to this as she was obviously quite upset about the circumstances.
As for my incident, I can see no way there could be any comeback for injuries suffered that far down the line. The impact was so minor that the only possible injury would be whiplash and surely that would have shown itself by now. Not that it is even remotely possible - an incident that only breaks the glaze on the paint, not even denting anything is highly unlikely to cause any injury.
However, it still hasn't been resolved. Despite me contacting them several times, my insurer doesn't seem to want to get involved as Direct Line keep sending me letters demanding I pay them and claiming they haven't heard from my insurer. I've decided to pay it myself as the cost is only just over what the premium increase would be, but I asked DL to provide a signed statement agreeing the settlement would be a full and final one. Their response was to threaten to take me to court within 10 days if I didn't pay up. (This only just happened yesterday) Any advice? It is worth holding out for a guarantee that this will be it, or should I pay up and avoid a court appearance? And is it worth demanding a refund from my insurer as they don't seem to be providing the service I've paid for?
|
Sorry about the delay in answering, I had to phone a chum at work about it....My advice is a summary of what has been said already. It may not be too late, I would suggest a CAB and get them, if you can, to suggest a no win no fee firm. Be very, very careful which one you choose as there are a lot of rouges out there.
You may find, and no doubt DVD will correct me, that the Police will have destroyed their records by now which will make things difficult if not impossible. Tell her not to dawdle any longer as time is whizzing by in legal terms.
|
Is there any point in trying to make a claim? From what has been said here, the fact her insurance paid out, not to mention the time factor and the difficulty in getting evidence sounds like it will be a struggle at best, and I'm not sure if it's worth putting her through this if there isn't much chance of a successful result...
I think she's resigned to it by now, so unless there is a reasonable chance of a positive result I think she'd prefer to just live with what has happened...
|
|
|
|
Right, just got more info on this and things become clearer.
My friend was turning right out of a side road on to a main road. The road was clear when she pulled out, but the visibility from the junction was poor as it was just after a bend and hill when approached from the direction she was heading towards. (i.e. her right)
A car came in to sight from the right just as she was pulling out, so she kept going to clear his side of the road before he reached her. He slammed all on, lost control, crossed the centre line and hit her in the driver's door. (She was on the correct side of the road when he hit her)
The skidmarks were measured and it was shown that he was travelling in excess of 60mph when he started braking. The speed limit changed to 30 at the crest of the hill, and there was a junction warning sign. In other words, he was going fast enough to warrant a ban had he been clocked at that speed.
This all makes it sound even more strange that (a) he was allowed to claim off her insurance for damage to his car, and (b) she was told she was very lucky not to be prosecuted for dangerous driving.
She sounds as if she may just be persuaded to persue this if there is any chance of a result, but I don't want to put her through anything if we are too late or things will be difficult to prove if evidence has been destroyed in the meanwhile. Is it worth persuing? The injury was known at the time, so nothing is new, just me being told about it.
All in all, it seems a right travesty and I'd certainly like to see justice done, but I'd also not want to put her through anything unpleasant if there isn't a reasonable chance of a positive result.
|
I have had a similar situation, where a driver came around a blind bend as I pulled out. The police said that there was no avoiding this accident.
There was no sign posts saying that this was a blind bend. As both my self and the other driver of the vehicle were not to blame, both insurance companies did not want to pay either of us out.
I went to a claim company, like the ones you see on the TV. Anyway they sorted me out a car until the claim was sorted, and they got in sorted in under three months. Not sure if they could help you but here is the url anyway.
www.nationalclaimscentre.co.uk
Good luck chuck
|
|
|
|
