Car written off,son and girlfriend injured

schoolrunmum

Long story, short version. Husband had a head on with another car . Husband broken leg/ankle resulting in plates/screws in foot, still more ops to come. Son and his girlfriend were passengers in vehicle, son had fractured sternum,causing irregular heartbeat, kept in hospital overnight for obs. Girlfriend had badly cut knee from dash, and both had incredible bruises from seatbelts. Our insurers say husband not entitled to compensation for injuries as he was driving, but son and GF can claim. However they contacted a solicitor who told them they could not claim....is the only choice to go to one of these injuries- for- you type ambulance chaser companies?

k3lvc

Firstly hope they're OK and thankfully not more serious

The advice seems a bit strange unless it's an open/shut case that your husband was to blame - maybe he/they can't claim off his own insurance but given that there's a 3rd party involved then there must be a claim for all of them against 3rd party

ETA why was the first stop a solicitor ?

Quentin

Irrespective of who is to blame, the passengers can claim compensation for their injuries off whoever is liable. And if your husband was not to blame he can claim compensation off the responsible driver's insurer


A specialist injury compensation firm will assist over this

Crazy_Jamie

Not wanting to start on a picky note, but anyone 'can claim'. Whether or not the claim will succeed is another matter entirely.

This all depends on who was to blame for the accident. If your husband was to blame, he will not be able to recover any compensation for his injuries unless he has the benefit of an insurance policy that specifically covers him for injuries in these circumstances. If he is partially to blame for the accident or his found to be, he will be able to recover damages to the proportion that the other party is to blame for. So for example, if it was a 50/50 your husband will recover 50% of the compensation that he would otherwise be entitled to.

Save for unlikely circumstances in which they may be partially to blame, your son and his girlfriend will be able to claim from the at fault driver, and I don't know why you have been advised differently to that. Do you know the reason why they were told that they could not claim?

Assuming there are no issues in that regard, you should seek to instruct a solicitor who specialises in personal injury litigation or has experience in dealing with it. You should not instruct a claims management company; the two are different. Whether you use one of the larger national solicitors firms or instruct a more local solicitor is entirely up to you.

schoolrunmum

The Police say no one was "to blame", they were unable to find a reason for accident, neither driver appeared to be speeding,but weather conditions were atrocious.No-one is being charged with anything. As my husband was the least seriously injured the insurers seem to be pinning it on him..

Crazy_Jamie

schoolrunmum wrote: »

The Police say no one was "to blame", they were unable to find a reason for accident, neither driver appeared to be speeding,but weather conditions were atrocious.No-one is being charged with anything. As my husband was the least seriously injured the insurers seem to be pinning it on him..

Whilst the police don't make the decision as to whether or not to charge someone, they are aware that in order for someone to be prosecuted for any given crime the evidence has to be such that their guilt can be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt. As such, where they don't think there is sufficient evidence that an individual has committed an offence (in this case careless or dangerous driving), they may well just not arrest anyone at all.

However, the situation is different with civil claims. In order to succeed in a civil claim a person has to show that another driver or individual was negligent, that is to say they did not drive to a reasonable standard, and they must prove that on the balance of probabilities, not beyond reasonable doubt. Which, obviously, is a lower standard.

Whilst it is possible for no one to have been negligent when an accident occurs, it is relatively unusual. Adverse weather conditions are one situation where it is possible for no one to be at fault, but that tends to be where ice is involved and the accident could not reasonably have been avoided. Even where ice is involved most accidents are still attributed to someone, because every driver is expected to drive in such a manner that is appropriate for the conditions.

In this case there was a head on collision at what may well be a notable speed given the injury details that you have provided. Whilst the weather conditions may have been atrocious, the law still expects drivers to adjust their driving to account for those conditions. As such there is still every chance that one or both of the drivers will be found to have been at fault. I appreciate you have already been told once that there isn't a valid claim, but I would certainly seek a second opinion on that.

Aretnap

A head on smash implies that someone was on the wrong side of the road. The starting point ouod be that the driver on the wrong side of the road was to blame - unless there was a very good reason why he was on the wrong side of the road. So who was on the wrong side of the road, and was there evidence (eg skid marks, the position of the vehicles after the crash) to show who it was?

Jamiesmum

A head on accident with 50/50 blame? Really?

Not the point of the thread I know but one of them must have been at fault, I can't think of a reason they would be in that situation other wise.

How did the accident occur?

Crazy_Jamie

Jamiesmum wrote: »

A head on accident with 50/50 blame? Really?

Not the point of the thread I know but one of them must have been at fault, I can't think of a reason they would be in that situation other wise.

How did the accident occur?

We can obviously wait for the OP to confirm the circumstances if she wants to, but one possible example would be if the accident occurred on a narrow country lane where there is not space for two cars to pass and both vehicles and adopted a central road position. You can certainly envisage the police not taking action against either driver in that situation but the civil liability being 50/50.