Scroll to top

Stationary Accident

Stationary Accident

CH client Mrs. P, from Blackpool was involved in an accident when she was parked stationary outside of her child’s school when the Defendant drove into collision with the rear of her vehicle, pushing it up a curb into collision with a lamppost. Mrs. P and her son brought a claim for damages for personal injuries and damage to her vehicle.

The Defendant’s Insurers rejected the claim on the basis that the Defendant had said the collision between her vehicle and the other Party’s vehicle was a mere touch and that no damage or injury could have been caused by that accident. The Defendant’s Insurers obtained a forensic engineer’s report which called into question the consistency of the damage between the vehicles, and called into question whether the vehicle would have moved at all as a result of the collision, and whether the Claimants’ would have been injured.

Proceedings were issued. The Claimant obtained a forensic engineer’s report which called into question the Defendant’s engineer’s report but due to the time that had lapsed from the time of the accident until the report was prepared, and the repairs had been carried out, the engineer could not definitively dispute the Defendant’s report.

The matter proceeded to Trial and the Defendant maintained its position.

At Trial and only at Trial it was conceded by a passenger in the Defendant’s vehicle that the Defendant drove a vehicle out of control, that the passenger herself tried to bring the vehicle back under control but was unable to do so before a collision occurred. On that basis the Judge found that the Defendant’s vehicle had collided with the back of the Claimants’ vehicle, had caused it to ride up the curb and into collision with a lamppost, and the Claimants’ had sustained injury as a result.

In this case there was no guarantee of success and in fact the prospects of success appeared to be impossible to predict. Given the circumstances of the accident and the weight of evidence against the Claimant she would have found it difficult to obtain the services of another Solicitor, and certainly difficult to find the services of a Solicitor that was willing to work on a ‘no win no fee’ basis. The matter was only resolved due to the bravery of Sheldon Davidson Solicitors pushing the matter to a Trial at which the Claimant was found to be an entirely honest person who had suffered the injuries and damage complained of.

< Back