RTA Compensation

nyck

My daughter was hit head on , on a dual carriageway 2 1/2 years ago by a drunk driver,after various physio ,assessments ,laser treatments etc we maybe getting to end ??


She suffered

Face = Moderate Scaring (£3.5K of laser treatment so far + recommended plastic surgery )
Nose = Distorted + minor scaring (rhinoplasty and septoplasty recommended)
Back = Still has mild discomfort when sitting for longer than 1 hour (physio)
Knee = Still painful (ongoing treatment)
Head = Concussion for 4-6 weeks

Neck = Whiplash for 6 weeks
PSTD = Minor ( wary on busy roads )


At the very beginning she was offered £17k which was rejected.
So far all the treatments have come to £4.5K with estimated another £17k to correct her nose and facial scaring Plus after treatments etc a total of £21.5K


She today was offered £30k minus the £4.5k of treatments plus the £17k for the rest of the surgery leaving around £8.5K.
Considering what she been through and was she still has to go through £8.5k seem way of the mark??
Looking at the JSB Guidelines for her injury's I think the minimum should be £25K upto £45K + £21.5K for Pre & Post treatments


Have any of you been compensated for any of these injury's or had a similar accident and what levels of compensation did you settle on.


We are using one of the big firm of solicitors ,but looking for some outside advice

.
Please people don't drink and drive even if just the 1


thanks nick

Quentin

You don't say why you are unhappy with your solicitor, but choosing to get "advice" on a forum rather than proper legal advice over a claim like this one is not the most sensible approach to this!

Nasqueron

How will the extra £k make her feel better? How much money (outside of paying for the treatment) does she need to become well again?

nyck

Quentin wrote: »

You don't say why you are unhappy with your solicitor, but choosing to get "advice" on a forum rather than proper legal advice over a claim like this one is not the most sensible approach to this!

I never said i was happy or unhappy , I was just looking for people who've had similar injury's and the compensation they received

Nasqueron wrote: »

How will the extra £k make her feel better? How much money (outside of paying for the treatment) does she need to become well again?

There isn't Enough money in the world to compensation her for having to look in the mirror every day and seeing those scars across her face reminding her of that horrific day.
I hope you or your family dont find themselves in the same position

Crazy_Jamie

Whilst I appreciate that you want to be reassured in a case like this, seeking advice on a forum like this is unwise. The vast majority of members on this (or indeed any) forum do not have the relevant qualifications and/or experience to assist you. Even those that do would not be able to without sight of the relevant medical reports, and in a case involving facial scarring probably the evidence of your daughter. You have solicitors acting on your behalf, and in a case of this nature their advice to you as to valuation may well also be reinforced by the view of a barrister. You need to take that advice, and avoid the temptation to ask other, non legally qualified people for their own experiences, which will not be relevant to your case.

Nasqueron wrote:

How will the extra £k make her feel better? How much money (outside of paying for the treatment) does she need to become well again?

As common as it is for replies like this find their way into threads like this, asking whether money will make someone feel better misses the point. A person who is injured as a result of someone else's negligence is entitled to compensation comprising of out of pocket expenses (special damages) as well as damages for their pain, suffering and loss of amenity (general damages). It is a perfectly viable point to make that money does not make pain go away and cannot adequately compensate someone for pain that they have suffered in the past, but that is the currently the best that are system allows when it comes to compensation for the actual physical effects of an injury, and that is what everyone injured by another person's negligence is entitled to. Making the point that money doesn't make someone feel better, whether directly or by way of a rhetorical question, is therefore simply neither here nor there.

Nasqueron

nyck wrote: »

There isn't Enough money in the world to compensation her for having to look in the mirror every day and seeing those scars across her face reminding her of that horrific day.
I hope you or your family dont find themselves in the same position

So why do you want to argue for more money? What exactly will having more compensation do to make her better?


I have been (twice actually) hit by a car when cycling, it hurts a lot, I got lucky on not having life changing injuries. However, I simply used a legal firm to deal with the costs and insurance claim. I didn't come posting on a forum trying to wangle more cash

Nasqueron

Crazy_Jamie wrote: »

As common as it is for replies like this find their way into threads like this, asking whether money will make someone feel better misses the point. A person who is injured as a result of someone else's negligence is entitled to compensation comprising of out of pocket expenses (special damages) as well as damages for their pain, suffering and loss of amenity (general damages). It is a perfectly viable point to make that money does not make pain go away and cannot adequately compensate someone for pain that they have suffered in the past, but that is the currently the best that are system allows when it comes to compensation for the actual physical effects of an injury, and that is what everyone injured by another person's negligence is entitled to. Making the point that money doesn't make someone feel better, whether directly or by way of a rhetorical question, is therefore simply neither here nor there.

It doesn't miss the point at all.



Out of pocket expenses, medical care, loss of earnings etc are calculable sums that the person is entitled to. They are nothing to do with compensation on top of that sum.



It is a logical question - if your bills and medical care has been covered, what difference does it make if you get paid £10k or £15k? That extra 5k isn't going to make the pain go away is it?


I got injury compensation after my cycling accident, it didn't stop the soft tissue damage that was still present a year later, it didn't make the bruising disappear any sooner than 3 months. Going to court to argue for more wouldn't have made me any better.

Quentin

Nasqueron wrote: »

It doesn't miss the point at all,.........


I got injury compensation after my cycling accident, it didn't stop the soft tissue damage that was still present a year later, it didn't make the bruising disappear any sooner than 3 months. Going to court to argue for more wouldn't have made me any better.

Compensation is entirely different to reimbursement of lost income/ treatment costs etc!

That's where you are missing the point

You are entitled to receive compensation for pain/suffering/inconvenience etc on top of all your actual losses and expenses incurred as a result of someone else's neglect

[Deleted User]

It might help if you had a figure in mind and simply asked for that much.

Crazy_Jamie

Nasqueron wrote: »

It is a logical question - if your bills and medical care has been covered, what difference does it make if you get paid £10k or £15k? That extra 5k isn't going to make the pain go away is it?

It's a logical question in a wider context, but it does miss the point of this thread. The OP is not trying to "wangle more cash" as you put it, but is trying to establish what his daughter is entitled to at law. You can see that because he's made reference to the JSB (now JC) Guidelines, so he is actually at least looking in the right place for what an appropriate valuation of the injury is. There's absolutely no reason why the OP shouldn't want his daughter to receive what she is entitled to. That's the point.

If you disagree, what do you say the practical relevance of your comment is for the OP? Are you saying that because money won't make the pain go away that his daughter should settle for a lesser sum than she is entitled to for her injuries, or something else? That's really all I can see that you might be saying, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

DELETED USER wrote:

It might help if you had a figure in mind and simply asked for that much.

This is not a good idea and will not help. What the OP's daughter is entitled to is a legal matter, and the OP's daughter needs to take legal advice in relation to it. Picking a figure out of the air based on what the OP thinks is 'fair' doesn't take matters any further at all.

nyck

Crazy_Jamie wrote: »

It's a logical question in a wider context, but it does miss the point of this thread. The OP is not trying to "wangle more cash" as you put it, but is trying to establish what his daughter is entitled to at law. You can see that because he's made reference to the JSB (now JC) Guidelines, so he is actually at least looking in the right place for what an appropriate valuation of the injury is. There's absolutely no reason why the OP shouldn't want his daughter to receive what she is entitled to. That's the point.

If you disagree, what do you say the practical relevance of your comment is for the OP? Are you saying that because money won't make the pain go away that his daughter should settle for a lesser sum than she is entitled to for her injuries, or something else? That's really all I can see that you might be saying, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

This is not a good idea and will not help. What the OP's daughter is entitled to is a legal matter, and the OP's daughter needs to take legal advice in relation to it. Picking a figure out of the air based on what the OP thinks is 'fair' doesn't take matters any further at all.

Im glad someone understands the purpose of my post.