Case study: Motorcyclist vs Car

Battens Solicitors has recently achieved a very satisfactory settlement of a claim made on behalf of our client, a young motorcyclist, who was injured in an accident on a rural road between Dorset and Somerset.

The Claim

On an October afternoon, as our client was following a car along a rural Somerset/Dorset road, the car stopped suddenly without warning, directly in front of his motorcycle.  It is understood from the account that was given to the police that the driver of the car was not familiar with the area, something that is commonplace given all the tourist trade in this area of the country, and they did not know whether the junction they were approaching was the junction they needed to take to get to their intended destination.

Due to the suddenness of the car stopping, our client had to swerve to the right (as there was no room on the left) to avoid colliding with the rear of the car.  As he did so, again suddenly and without warning, the driver of the car moved off and began turning right, thereby causing a collision with our client and his motorcycle as he was attempting to pass by.

As a result, our client suffered injuries including a fracture to his clavicle on the right dominant side, which affected his ability to work, and bruising and cuts to his right arm and left hand, some of which left scars.  He was also psychologically affected by the experience he had been through.

Medical expert evidence was obtained in support of our client’s claim which, amongst other things, indicated that our client was going to have permanent swelling and deformity as a result of his clavicle fracture, as well as discomfort, expected to be worsened by cold weather, for a number of years.

A claim was made for compensation for the pain, suffering and loss of amenity our client’s injuries caused and for the financial losses he suffered as a result of the collision, including the costs of replacing the specialist clothing and the helmet our client was wearing at the time of the accident (without which it is certain that his injuries would have been more serious) and for the time that our client’s family members spent assisting him with personal care and activities of daily living that he was unable to do because of his injuries.

The Arguments

Our client’s claim was put forward on the basis that the collision, and therefore our client’s injuries and losses, had been solely caused by the negligence of the car driver who had clearly been unaware of our client’s presence behind them when driving along the rural road.

The police collision report was obtained which appeared to blame our client for the collision, the police officer in the case having decided that our client was driving too fast to avoid the collision.

This influenced the decision made by the insurer of the car as to whether to compensate our client at all.

However, even though it took account of the police’s suggestion that our client had been travelling too fast and too close to the rear of the car to avoid a collision, the insurer did appreciate the likelihood of its insured driver being found partly to blame given the circumstances.

These circumstances included the fact that the driver had admitted to being unfamiliar with the area and was focussing intently on their Sat Nav just before the collision occurred, such that it was entirely likely that they had stopped suddenly and without warning as our client had said, and without first having taken account of what was going on behind them.

Furthermore, there were no independent witnesses to corroborate either version of events – in fact, the only witness was the passenger of the car, who had also not been aware of our client’s presence until after the collision occurred.

The Outcome

Having regard to the risk that the car driver would have been found at least partly responsible for the collision with our client, the insurer initially offered to split liability on an 80/20 basis in favour of its driver, which, if accepted, would have seen our client only recovering 20% of the compensation he was seeking.

Following a period of negotiation that thereafter followed, we maintained our position as to the likelihood that, by not being familiar with the area and trying to follow a Sat Nav when the collision happened, the driver was more likely than not to be found to have stopped suddenly, without warning and without first having regard to who/what was behind them.

However, given the findings of the police, we had to accept that had our client been driving slower and maintaining a greater distance between his motorcycle and the car in front, then he may have been able to stop in time.

We were eventually able settle the claim on a much more reasonable 50/50 basis, which enabled us to achieve for our client the greater proportion of 50% of the five-figure sum that he claimed.

Comment

This case raises a number of issues that are all too often raised in collisions involving motorcyclists on rural roads, including:

• The fact that it is commonplace for drivers in the southwest to be unfamiliar with the route they are taking, because they are not local to the area, which makes them an unknown quantity that other road users, including motorcyclists, should always be aware of.
• That motorcyclists of all ages, but particularly those who are less experienced riders, may not be as aware as they should be to take care when riding their motorcycles on smaller, more rural roads, and should equip themselves to ensure that it is more difficult, when there is a collision, for the other party and/or the police to suggest that they were the party at fault.

Here at Battens Solicitors, we are well-versed in the arguments raised by the other party to a claim made on behalf of a motorcyclist, and we have a proven track record of being able to achieve results for our clients in such claims, even where the odds seem stacked against them.

If you have been involved in a road traffic collision get in touch with our Personal Injury team for an initial discussion to see how we can assist by calling 0800 652 8373 or by emailing [email protected].