Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cyclist wins £100k payout for collision that left him in wheelchair for four months

Lawyers fought to double the payout from the driver's insurers - and won...

A cyclist who was hit by a car, leaving him in a wheelchair for four months, has been awarded £105,000 in compensation.

Metalwork inserted into the cyclist’s legs after injuries sustained after being knocked off his bike by a car on a roundabout near Corfe Mullen in May 2010 was not removed for three years, during which time he missed many days of work and two holidays.

Following an MRI scan, he was diagnosed with a full thickness tear of the posterior cruciate ligament with joint swelling.

Although the driver’s insurer admitted liability and offered compensation of £50,000, the cyclist’s lawyer, Brian Parsons of Coles Miller in Poole, claimed for further damages and won, despite the three-year limit on the claim having expired.

Mr Parsons told the Bournemouth Echo: “My client suffered very nasty injuries to his legs.

“He sustained a fracture to his lower left leg but was unable to undergo surgery until the swelling subsided.

“His right knee was unstable.

“When surgery was able to take place, a plate was inserted in his left leg from the ankle to the knee with four screws to stabilise the fracture.

“After leaving hospital, he was unable to manage stairs and spent the first two months living in his lounge which had to be converted to a bedroom.”

Six-figure settlements for cycling injuries are not uncommon, due to the devastating effect they can have on a victim.

In 2014 we reported how a woman who was left with life-changing injuries after a lorry pulled left into her in 2010 won compensation following a long legal battle with the driver’s employer.

Kirby Stebbing, 27, was cycling along Balls Pond Road in Hackney when the HGV cut across her route, causing her to collide with the cab of the lorry. The impact threw her from her bike and dragged her under the wheels.

The incident left her with multiple injuries including a fractured pelvis and ankle, a dislocated shoulder and injuries to both legs. Her left leg required extensive skin grafts.

Ms Stebbing was left with post-traumatic stress disorder and her injuries continue to affect her.

A three and a half year legal battle finally saw her awarded a six-figure payout to cover her ongoing care and future loss of earnings.

The driver, Dean Simmons, pleaded guilty to careless driving. Insurers for his firm, Dunlea’s Enterprise, eventually accepted two-thirds liability.

And last year we reported how the widow of a cyclist killed during a charity ride from Land’s End to John O’Groats after he was thrown from his bike into the path of a car when he hit a pothole reached a six-figure settlement with the local authority responsible for maintaining the road.

Martyn Uzzell from Cleveden, Somerset, aged 51, was killed instantly in the incident on the A65 Settle Bypass at Giggleswick, North Yorkshire in June 2011.

A coroner’s inquest last year concluded that there was “no doubt whatsoever” that a 10cm pothole surrounding a drain cover was the cause of the fatal crash.

The victim’s wife Kate, to whom he had been married for more than 20 years, brought a civil action against North Yorkshire County Council, which had been notified of the defect by police five weeks before Mr Uzzell’s death, but took no action to repair it.

The council reached a settlement with Mrs Uzzell to avoid “prolonged involvement in further litigation.”

While the local authority said it "accepts no liability for the tragic death of Mr Uzzell", it acknowledged that the case was "a sensitive matter."

 

Add new comment

4 comments

Avatar
bendertherobot | 8 years ago
0 likes

Well, technically, the cyclist won the application rather than the case per se. He succeeded in setting aside the limitation defence. The insurer had already agreed liability. They then settled because, if the claim had proceeded back to a quantum hearing, that's pretty much what the Court would have awarded. 

There's not a lot really noteworthy here on the basis of the information available. It would be interesting to learn why the claim was not issued in time mind. Was that because of the claimant not seeking advice or because the claim was not issued in time by his, or prevoius, solicitors?

Avatar
JonD replied to bendertherobot | 8 years ago
0 likes
bendertherobot wrote:

Was that because of the claimant not seeking advice or because the claim was not issued in time by his, or prevoius, solicitors?

Possibly because the full effects weren't know ? - admittedly I'm an old git, but the few knee injuries I've had in recent years have taken 6 months to settle down, if there's been successive surgeries that could well draw it out.

Avatar
bendertherobot replied to JonD | 8 years ago
0 likes

JonD wrote:
bendertherobot wrote:

Was that because of the claimant not seeking advice or because the claim was not issued in time by his, or prevoius, solicitors?

Possibly because the full effects weren't know ? - admittedly I'm an old git, but the few knee injuries I've had in recent years have taken 6 months to settle down, if there's been successive surgeries that could well draw it out.

That's not a good reason for not issuing proceedings because AN injury was suffered, regarldless of it severity. You still only have 3 years to issue, whether you want to see if it gets better or worse. Hopefully the case will be reported somewhere shortly (in legal journals) to ascertain what happened here. 

Avatar
JonD replied to bendertherobot | 8 years ago
0 likes
bendertherobot wrote:

JonD wrote:
bendertherobot wrote:

Was that because of the claimant not seeking advice or because the claim was not issued in time by his, or prevoius, solicitors?

Possibly because the full effects weren't know ? - admittedly I'm an old git, but the few knee injuries I've had in recent years have taken 6 months to settle down, if there's been successive surgeries that could well draw it out.

That's not a good reason for not issuing proceedings because AN injury was suffered, regarldless of it severity. You still only have 3 years to issue, whether you want to see if it gets better or worse. Hopefully the case will be reported somewhere shortly (in legal journals) to ascertain what happened here. 

Well, you asked a question and I've suggested one possible answer - if the cyclist thought that the 50k offer was reasonable then they probably saw little advantage for issuing proceedings - only to revise their decision later.

Latest Comments