Duke of Edinburgh’s Road Accident

[SirGawain]

AIBU to ask why on earth is the Duke of Edinburgh driving at the age of 97.

What escapes me is how this is somehow any different from anyone who pulls out thinking they can see but because of bright sun missed an oncoming vehicle. This happens every day, I'm really not sure is considered dangerous driving, but only those involved can assess this.

If you miss a car because of bright sun, then no it follows you can not see properly. If your eyesight is such that you can not judge that, then you should not be driving. If you pull out when you can not see properly, that is dangerous driving.

Also I doubt very much that Philip will be treated like any other 97 year old.

Anybody will know that she will have got miles more going to the papers than she will get from a insurance company payout!.She will be waiting months!

Rudgie And so what if she has got to wait? That’s what everyone else has to do if they are in a similar position.

Where have you got your legal definition from Mary?

She seems to be milking this. Don't insurance policies pay out for loss limbs, eyesight, disabling injuries? They would cover medical costs, like exams and treatments, but do they pay for injuries such ad this?

Nick If you are low paid as she will be, then it does matter.
There is absolutely no reason why the Royals could not have quickly settled this, and sent a big bunch of flowers for the good will.

smother The Highway Code.
If you are dazzled by bright sunlight, slow down and if necessary, stop.

smother They will pay for loss of earnings. Try being a carer with a broken arm?

She needs to be careful. She’s contradicting herself.

That's not you said though Mary you made a legal judgement on dangerous driving. We have no evidence of reckless driving, and I doubt if he couldn't seehe road st all he would have just pulled out, as from the commentary on here, he will know it as a pretty busy road. Its a judgement call that you can't definitely make.

There's a lot of rubbish being talked by some here still.

I am sorry to hear your suffering from arthritis, and it must be quite insulting hearing from of the comments on his thread, also for any drivers at the top end of the age range of drivers, for things that are completely legal.

Aragog sorry... ^

mary She can’t have it both ways though. She wants him to be treated like any other driver so why should she then be treated differently herself?

I don’t think you would necessarily get compensation for a broken wrist. I think people overestimate what compensation they should receive.

She wasn't even driving.

smother I was not commenting on this accident, but on YOUR comment. And yes the law is clear. If you are dazzled by sunlight you don't pull out into a road.

Nick But he won't be. So yes given that he won't be, I can see why she wants to make a small bit of money. Surviving on a low wage is tough. So yes if she gets a few hundred for an interview, then fair enough.

user You wopuld only get compensation for a broken wrist if you have loss of earnings. Given she is a carer, she probably will lose earnings. If she is unable to work, she will only get statutory sick pay. The loss of earnings amount will be small overall, but very important to her.

Well, she might be in for a shock soon and serves her right.

but do they pay for injuries such ad this?

They pay out for loss of earnings, if you can't work, and for any additional costs incurred - hospital parking, etc if you provide the invoices. They will pay out for some 'distress' but they have clamped down on some of this in recent years. It normally involved a medical examination, or rather a chat with a doctor, to discuss injuries, loss of earnings and other factors. They then get sent to the insurance companies.

I think she will be disappointed at how much the compensation could be, if she goes just via the car insurance.

And yes, she will have to wait. Just like she would if it was any other driver, and just like anyone else has to when going through this kind of claim. The insurance companies will want to know exactly what the injuries were and how they will affect her in the short, medium and longer term.

The other thread is quite interesting now though - wonder what may come of the other poster's chat with the press and if that has any impact on the passenger.

Well, she might be in for a shock soon and serves her right.
That's right. Bloody plebs should know their place

Nick That is such a nasty comment.

mary You clearly didn’t read Lulu’s post on the other thread then.

No I am not reading the other thread. But I thought your comment on this thread was nasty.

You court the media, then it might backfire if you have skeletons in your closet.

And my comment was hardly shocking 😂

I did not use the word shocking, I said it was nasty.

Yes if you court the media it might backfire. But the women is low paid, can you really not understand why when you are struggling for money a few hundred for a short interview is very attractive?

Well, she might be in for a shock soon and serves her right. What? Shes done nothing wrong at all. How would anyone feel being injured when they were about to start a new job?. She wont be able to start as planned and will be reliant on piddling sick pay.
She'd be facing financial hardship, that's why she sold her story.

rudgie You might feel differently if the media follow up on Lulu’s story about the woman. The media have been in touch with her already.

The point is she has had an accident, like many many other people. She should be treated the same, not appear on the TV.