Presentation on theme: "Compensation Claims and Evidence Perceptions and Reality."— Presentation transcript:
Compensation Claims and Evidence Perceptions and Reality
Perceptions v Reality Perceptions –Claiming compensation is easy Reality –Evidence based
Claims Management companies
Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy? Complex claims –no witnesses & claimant no recall Fatal collisions without witnesses Contributory negligence assessing respective blame 50:50 80:20 Collision involving young children- no fault for very young children So how easy or difficult is it to prove a case?
Case Examples Mr T and his Seat Belt Mr T elderly retired hit head on in RTA collision Serious crush injuries to his legs Defence admit liability argue contributory negligence failure to wear seat belt. Problem A & E notes state “unrestrained “ in vehicle
Case Study Mr T & his seat belt Contradictory evidence Interview treating consultant who recalled the case and took photos very bad seat belt bruising Difference to the claim on these facts 15% deduction of damages Seat belt issues constantly raised on cases
Mr B a mystery incident Pedal cyclist in collision with car on wide two carriageway road Inexplicable how it happened client catastrophic head injury no recollection Only witnesses defendant driver and his passenger.
Mr B Controversial evidence driver’s passenger Witness statement sent to defence expecting an offer/settlement proposal Response: estranged girlfriend all lies trial 3 days Judge preferred our evidence and 2/3 rd liability in claimants favour.
Miss J – PTSD claim Horrific collision bus and small car driver killed at scene Sister goes looking for him comes across the scene and sees mangled car suffers PTSD Claim rejected by insurers We track down the police officers - vivid and powerful statements at this point insurers accept she was at scene
Miss J PTSD Claim But deny PTSD Our medical evidence proves PTSD Miss J wants case over takes low offer to bring to an end Defence next argument costs Each step was contentious high evidential burden
Final case study J - boys on bikes 3 boys out for cycle ride park up at a disused factory for lemonade Accosted by security guard who aggressively pursues the boys down hill Boys frightened – tight turn boy J fails the turn has defective brakes hits lamp post and is killed
J boys on bikes Security guard prosecuted 3 times causing death by dangerous driving – 2 no verdict finally pleads to lesser charge Civil claim liability denied. We take statements from: –witnesses who saw guard confront boys aggressively –other car users who saw the chase, –friends and family who knew the boy’s character –the two boys who had been with the deceased
Young J boys on bikes All the statements were distressing to take Long 3.5 year fight for compensation Family finding it hard, other problems to contend with “Time bomb” offer to finish Not about money but justice
Evidence Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy The claimant bears the burden of proof Evidence can be intrusive Finding and dealing with the evidence can be distressing Circumstances may not be enough Struggle and stress on families. The reality is very different to the popular perception