How to claim compensation?

jimbo6977

Not normally a spelling/grammar member of the NDSAP but the correct spelling is

"COM-PEN-SAYYYYYY-SHUN"

 and requires a series of sad-face pics on a local news website. 

Sandtree

Day_Of_The_Doris said:

I see you are the type of person that thinks people shouldn't be even partially accountable for their actions.
There is no legal requirement for a vehicle to stop until a pedestrian has physically stepped onto the crossing so even if a car has slowed right down, it still needs some time to stop.
This is why the Highway code states:
18
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should

• always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
• 19 
• Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing
  

These two bits have always seem slightly contradictory to me... the traffic only has a duty to stop for a pedestrian (without a pram) once they have stepped onto the road and yet they say not to start your crossing until the traffic has stopped... I would have said stepping off the pavement onto the road is the start of your crossing 

ontheroad1970

I wouldn't involve solicitors until prognosis is more certain.

Manxman_in_exile

It's not a problem getting solicitors involved before a more certain prognosis.  What is a problem is reaching a settlement or having damages agreed before the full extent of any injuries is known.  And liability can always be accepted or decided with damages to be determined when full losses can be quantified.

Car_54

Another consideration is that a solicitor should be able to negotiate interim payments to cover rehab, scans, and other expenses before a settlement is agreed. Most punters won't know where to begin.

Manxman_in_exile

Yeah.  With a personal injury case likely to take many months if not years, interim payments can become crucial and you really need legal input from th outset.

Manxman_in_exile

Day_Of_The_Doris said:

leonj said:

The taxi driver is 100% responsible if she was hit on a zebra crossing, doesn't even matter if she stepped out at the last second, the driver should expect it at a zebra crossing and slow right down, it's essentially part of the footpath

I see you are the type of person that thinks people shouldn't be even partially accountable for their actions.
There is no legal requirement for a vehicle to stop until a pedestrian has physically stepped onto the crossing so even if a car has slowed right down, it still needs some time to stop.
This is why the Highway code states:

18
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should

• always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
• 19 
• Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing
  

Are you certain that is a valid inference from Rule 19?

I'm not sure that the sentence "Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing" means that there is no legal requirement for a driver/rider to stop before a pedestrian physically sets foot on the crossing.  I think I'd want to rely on something more concrete than that for a defence.  (Like decided cases).

Sandtree

Manxman_in_exile said:

Day_Of_The_Doris said:

leonj said:

The taxi driver is 100% responsible if she was hit on a zebra crossing, doesn't even matter if she stepped out at the last second, the driver should expect it at a zebra crossing and slow right down, it's essentially part of the footpath

I see you are the type of person that thinks people shouldn't be even partially accountable for their actions.
There is no legal requirement for a vehicle to stop until a pedestrian has physically stepped onto the crossing so even if a car has slowed right down, it still needs some time to stop.
This is why the Highway code states:

18
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should

• always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
• 19 
• Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing
  

Are you certain that is a valid inference from Rule 19?

I'm not sure that the sentence "Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing" means that there is no legal requirement for a driver/rider to stop before a pedestrian physically sets foot on the crossing.  I think I'd want to rely on something more concrete than that for a defence.  (Like decided cases).

The rule for vehicles is:

195  Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing

• look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
• you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
• allow more time for stopping on wet or icy roads
• do not wave or use your horn to invite pedestrians across; this could be dangerous if another vehicle is approaching
• be aware of pedestrians approaching from the side of the crossing.

A zebra crossing with a central island is two separate crossings

As noted in bullet 2, the obligation to stop occurs at the point they have moved onto the crossing (ie the road). The wording has changed at some point though as back in my day there was a seperate point for those with prams/pushchairs which said the obligation was when they were at the crossing rather than on it.

As mentioned earlier, I dont think rule 19 and 195 work together very well

Car_54

Manxman_in_exile said:

Day_Of_The_Doris said:

leonj said:

The taxi driver is 100% responsible if she was hit on a zebra crossing, doesn't even matter if she stepped out at the last second, the driver should expect it at a zebra crossing and slow right down, it's essentially part of the footpath

I see you are the type of person that thinks people shouldn't be even partially accountable for their actions.
There is no legal requirement for a vehicle to stop until a pedestrian has physically stepped onto the crossing so even if a car has slowed right down, it still needs some time to stop.
This is why the Highway code states:

18
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should

• always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
• 19 
• Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing
  

Are you certain that is a valid inference from Rule 19?

I'm not sure that the sentence "Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing" means that there is no legal requirement for a driver/rider to stop before a pedestrian physically sets foot on the crossing.  I think I'd want to rely on something more concrete than that for a defence.  (Like decided cases).

The law says " Every pedestrian, if he is on the carriageway within the limits of a Zebra crossing, which is not for the time being controlled by a constable in uniform or traffic warden, before any part of a vehicle has entered those limits, shall have precedence within those limits over that vehicle and the driver of the vehicle shall accord such precedence to any such pedestrian." [The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997, section 25(1)]

So, yes, the ped has to be on the crossing actually to have priority.

However, every driver should also have learned  "Where pedestrians are waiting on the pavement at a zebra crossing and obviously want to cross, slow down and stop to let them cross ... Be aware also of pedestrians approaching the crossing who may suddenly start to move onto the crossing, be ready to stop for them" [Driving - the Essential Skills]. That is what the DVSA say, and what is expected on a driving test. It would be remarkable if a court took a different view.

Manxman_in_exile

Car_54 said:

Manxman_in_exile said:

Day_Of_The_Doris said:

leonj said:

The taxi driver is 100% responsible if she was hit on a zebra crossing, doesn't even matter if she stepped out at the last second, the driver should expect it at a zebra crossing and slow right down, it's essentially part of the footpath

I see you are the type of person that thinks people shouldn't be even partially accountable for their actions.
There is no legal requirement for a vehicle to stop until a pedestrian has physically stepped onto the crossing so even if a car has slowed right down, it still needs some time to stop.
This is why the Highway code states:

18
At all crossings. When using any type of crossing you should

• always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
• 19 
• Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing
  

Are you certain that is a valid inference from Rule 19?

I'm not sure that the sentence "Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing" means that there is no legal requirement for a driver/rider to stop before a pedestrian physically sets foot on the crossing.  I think I'd want to rely on something more concrete than that for a defence.  (Like decided cases).

However, every driver should also have learned  "Where pedestrians are waiting on the pavement at a zebra crossing and obviously want to cross, slow down and stop to let them cross ... Be aware also of pedestrians approaching the crossing who may suddenly start to move onto the crossing, be ready to stop for them" [Driving - the Essential Skills]. That is what the DVSA say, and what is expected on a driving test. It would be remarkable if a court took a different view.

That's what I would think.  In the face of the apparent contradiction identified by Sandtree I'd be amazed if a court resolved it in the motorist's favour rather than a pedestrian's.  Rules 19 and 195 just contain a form of words calculated to try to ensure that motorists and pedestrian's don't "conflict" on crossings.  If followed literally pedestrians might never cross the road.