Jason Claridge, Director and Specialist in Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence Cases, recently achieved a settlement of £100,000 for a cyclist who was injured whilst cycling with a friend. Mr B* had always been a keen psychologist and caravan enthusiast. He and his wife would routinely meet with friends, as he was semi-retired, to go on such holidays. On the day in question he and another friend had decided to use a country cycle ride with the intention of cycling for around 2-3 hours on a testing and challenging course.
He and a friend had reached the part of the course which involved them riding along a country lane with tall hedges. During the course of the ride, as they approached the bend in the lane, the defendant came around the bend at speed and failed to control her vehicle properly so Mr B and his friend were both struck by the vehicle. Mr B’s recollection of the accident was vague because he was knocked unconscious. As a result of the accident, he suffered injuries to his chest including broken ribs and a punctured lung from which he recovered remarkably quickly within a few weeks. He suffered a soft tissue injury to his neck and spine, which he recovered within a few months.
He suffered damage to his knee with a recovery period of 2 years. He also suffered a mild traumatic brain injury and post-concussion syndrome. Furthermore he suffered anxiety in terms of riding his bicycle and it took him months to recover to the position where he felt safe to ride his bicycle, particularly on roads.
His financial losses were minimal. He had some damage to his bike and clothing. In the acute recovery period, he relied on his wife for personal care. He also relied on his wife to carry out domestic activities that he in the past would have done himself. He had some travel and treatment costs, having sought some physiotherapy. There was also some very modest loss of earnings for a couple of months as he was not fit for work. However he had no ongoing losses.
He was a very determined and stoic individual. He felt fully recovered apart from some ongoing memory and concentration issues, post-accident. We did argue with the defendant’s representatives regarding liability as they said the claimant was partially to blame for this accident, commonly referred to as contributory negligence. We pointed out he was on the right side of the road. The police accident report we obtained showed the position of the car after the accident and it clearly had gone onto his side of the road and his friends’ side of the road who fully supported our client’s case and unfortunately he was also injured.
We argued for provisional damages on the basis the condition of the claimant could deteriorate in the future, particularly cognitively. The defendants insurers wanted to see a full and final settlement of the case for the claimant.
As is common in such cases, we had a conference with a barrister who specialised in this area. The offer of £100,000 which was the defendant’s insurance companies last offer, was considered to be appropriate and in fact generous, on the basis that if the claimant did not develop the potential issues, and they were only potential issues, cognitively in the future then he had no real realistic chance of beating the offer which had been made. The claimant decided upon weighing up all of his options that he would prefer to deal with the case now and look to settle it now. He pointed out he was in his mid-70s. He felt he did not want to wait until his early to mid-80s before potentially coming back to the Court to argue the point. He said he would prefer now to simply get on with the rest of his life. Therefore the case settled for the last offer of £100,000 in full and final settlement of his personal injury and financial losses which resulted from the accident.
*Mr B’s name has been changed but this is indeed a true case. We are happy to deal with cases on a conditional fee agreement in relation to personal injury and clinical negligence. This can include road traffic accident cases, tripping and slipping cases, accidents at work and cases against the medical profession.
