DS hit by car - can I claim compensation?

[Gremlin120808]

Hi wise ones.
My 6yr DS was crossing the road holding STBXH's hand. It was at a pedestrian crossing, the road is narrowed and the pavement has those bobbly things underfoot, but it's not a zebra crossing. They looked both ways (left,right,left...wrong way around), and stepped out. The wing mirror of the car hit DS's face. Nothing broken but a bloody nose, black eye and face and big swelling.
Police have dealt with the driver etc (who stopped and was very shaken), but can I claim compensation?? And how do I go about it??
I'm just glad he's alive and don't want to seem like I'm "grabbing", but is this a legitimate claim scenario???
I've never claimed for anything before so don't know what I'm doing!!!!

So, your STBXH is incapable of looking properly before shepherding your 6 year old across the road. Therefore, they stepped into the road at the wrong point, almost at point blank range to this passing car in fact.

As a result of this, your son received a bloody nose and a black eye from the wing mirror of the car, if I have read this correctly.

I don't think this sounds like negligence on the part of the driver. Claiming against him or her would be mean, grabby and immoral in my opinion.

I dislike this compensation culture. It is one of America's worst exports to the rest of the world. Why the fuck do you want to make things so much worse for someone who you say was already very shaken by the accident and who will be feeling dreadful about it right now?

People should not be out to destroy others like that. Just be grateful your boy has been lucky and has no lasting injuries. Perhaps stop trusting his dad to take him out again if he can't do better than that!

Sorry, but posts like these do little to restore my faith in human nature. They make me angry.

If he'd walked into a door in his own home could he claim damages for pain and suffering?

I've claimed after a car accident once. It is not just a form filling experience and you get money.

It involved medical reports being written. I assume your ds went to the hospital after the accident. They will ask for these details plus details of any subsequent visits and treatment.

They will want evidence and reports of losses incurred as a result of your child's injuries.

You and your child will be asked to go to an assessment with an insurance company provided medical expert - normally a doctor or consultant of some form. They will go through the known reports with you plus any additional information you share at the time. They will then write a report to the insurance company indicating total losses and compensation suggested.

This is not a fast process and will take several weeks to come through, even if straight forward.

Mine was a straight forward claim where I was clearly not fault in any way with known and report injuries at the time with medical treatment following. It took 4 or 5 months or so to be sorted and yes, it does affect the insurance of the other party (indeed it affected my own insurance despite me not being at. fault.)

And this was before the clamp down on accident/insurance claimants.

Think carefully about what your actual losses are as a result of your son's injuries. Remember the compensation for simple inconvenience and suffering is not much more limited also. And see if it is worth your while.

It's very depressing that compensation is the first thing that gets thought about after a lucky escape.

hopeclearwater - there has been a big clamp down on such awards in recent times. What was once acceptable is no longer. Been in the media etc and well reported at the time.

Why would the OP be "out to destroy others"?

If she doesn't have a claim then the law will not give her compensation! If she does have a claim on her son's behalf, why would she be 'mean, grabby and immoral' to take it?

me too Topsey, to the point where my drive to work from now on will take a while given ill need to stop every 2 mins incase some fool just steps out and, according to some (thankfully a minority but still......) they would be totes in the right.

disclaimer: unless im speeding in which case id get what i deserved

Also they will want clear witness statements regarding the other car, and will refer to the police reports from the time. Witness claims alone will not be enough as people usually over estimate car speeds as a pedestrian. They will look for key data to actually show the driver was driving above the road limits and evidence of breaking etc.
If the police attended there will be some records but you may need to speak to them again. The police will also then decide if action is required against the driver due to potential dangerous driving ie exceeding the sped limits

never be able to get insured again because i wouldnt be able to afford the premium hike. id lose my job so also my home and my kids would suffer massively

Rubbish

Your premium would hardly go up

Why would you lose your job

You can only claim for compensation if the driver was at fault, which it doesn't sound like in this case - at most it would be split 50/50. Then you would have to have a proven injury, of which you would receive 50% of their worth.

Tbh you'd be hard pressed to find a solicitor that would take this on. In order for the solicitors to claim costs the money awarded has to be over £1000, so with a 50/50 split your son would have to have an injury worth over £2000, a bloody nose and bruising wouldn't be worth that.

I worked in personal injury for a few years so am not against people making a claim - but in this case I don't think you have one.

Hopeclearwater - for a young driver the premiums will definitely increase a fair bit. As a non young female driver my premiums increased and I was NOT at fault.

Your premium would hardly go up. Knock it off, Hope, you must know that's not true. My household insurance premiums took a huge hike after I enquired about making a claim but decided not to actually take it any further...

And don't we all pay now more in insurance due to these hideous no win no fee firms? I watched a documentary about them and the effect that this has had on all of us.

In serious injury cases where clearly someone was at fault, I can understand it.
I have a spinal injury due to hospital negligence but I couldn't face going down the compensation route.

because i need a car in my job? thought that might have been obvious

and i wish i was confident my premium wouldnt go up!

this post has actually really scared me, i never speed, always mindful that some people can be arrogant dicks and just step out into the road (has happened to me a few times) and the thought that someone could just do that, be totally careless and negligent, but somehow put ME in the wrong and have it affect me in more ways than unwarranted guilt and distress is really sobering :(

im hoping ive read too many "mc d's sued for serving hot coffee" stories and courts dont just award compo willy nilly

but to then get a compo claim slammed on me and prob never be able to get insured again because i wouldnt be able to afford the premium hike. id lose my job so also my home and my kids would suffer massively

If you can't afford the premium hike that would result from a claim of this nature, you can't afford to drive. It's unlikely to be more than, for instance, the rise in the cost of petrol that we've had this year.

Oh ffs.
What would the claim be for? ... People should claim when they have a financial need as the result of an incident (need extra care or aids, too unwell to work etc), or when a company or individual were so appallingly negligent that a financial penalty is appropriate.

Damages for pain and suffering. It's a standard element of any personal injury claim. No civil damages claim has any element of punishment for appalling negligence - that's for the criminal courts to deal with by way of a fine or other sentence.

If he'd walked into a door in his own home could he claim damages for pain and suffering?

Yes, if it was due to negligence on the part of someone who has a duty of care towards him. If it was solely his fault, obviously not, unless his parents have some sort of home accident insurance in place.

It's very depressing that compensation is the first thing that gets thought about after a lucky escape.

It wasn't OP's first thought. RTFT.

Hulababy, there has been no change in the law on negligence claims. The basic principles are still exactly as first formulated in the 1940s. No-one is clamping down on genuine claims, although there have been some changes in procedures.

I really think people have allowed themselves to be brainwashed by the right-wing press's mantra about compensation culture, which in turn is heavily influenced by insurance company propaganda. I suspect a lot of opinions around here would change radically if PP and their children were seriously injured by negligent drivers and actually experienced a bit of reality.

Add, those are my long held opinions. I see nothing on this thread which would make me think otherwise.

They stepped out into the road at the wrong time because the boy's idiot father was not capable of looking properly before crossing with his 6 year old child. Wouldn't that be the fault of the dad (as the pedestrian in charge of the 6 year old) rather than of the driver?

If that is correct then yes, I certainly do see claiming for compensation as grabby and immoral. It would also make things a lot worse for a young driver who already feels awful.

That is what I think, and in the absence of more information I see no reason to change it.

I think people are being overly harsh to OP. I think it's a fair enough question to say 'is this worth looking into?' I was crashed into and still getting physio nearly a year later, so yeah I think I should get compensated for the damage to my car, myself and my time for appts, medication etc.

And people saying 'it's you're X's fault' - I can see an insurance company saying you both take 50/50 responsibility but what happens if a kid crosses the road, gets run over and dies? Would we still be saying, well it's their own fault they should have been more careful???

im hoping ive read too many "mc d's sued for serving hot coffee" stories and courts dont just award compo willy nilly

You certainly have. In Bogle v. McDonald's Restaurants Ltd in 2002, the UK courts rejected that claim.

OP, I havent read the whole thread but I am absolutely certain you could claim against the driver (and get the compo) despite not suffering financial loss, especially as the police were called.

However, it may not actually have been the drivers fault.

'Tbh you'd be hard pressed to find a solicitor that would take this on. In order for the solicitors to claim costs the money awarded has to be over £1000, so with a 50/50 split your son would have to have an injury worth over £2000, a bloody nose and bruising wouldn't be worth that.'

^^ This is not the case. The insurers are likely to settle for an amount for you plus costs (I.e. their costs/fees). Costs/fee are often the larger part of the payment from insurers. A £1000 settlement can easily have claimant solicitor fees of £3000.

Don't tell me to RTFT Judy, you either are or are or pretending to be some second rate compo lawyer.

I think the magic circle are safe.

So Judy i shouldnt drive because i clearly cant afford it?

is it only rich people who should drive so could shrug off this if it ever happened to them and have a nice little joke about it when they goto buy their next BMW because they cba to replace a wing mirror?

should i get rid of my kids just in case a big expenditure comes my way?

im as we appear to be actually agreeing!

The law has always stated that the claimants damages awards must be over £1000 for the solicitor to get paid. I know as I've spend many days wrangling insurers offers from £950 up to the £1000 - especially after the bollocking a colleague got for settling for £990 meaning the firm actually lost money as we didn't get medical fees, ATE policy fees etc back.

Solicitor costs are completely separate from damages and yes, often more than damages awarded. It doesn't change the fact that if the amount awarded as compensation (not costs) is less than £1000 solicitors do not have a claim for costs from the insurers.

judy that does actually put my mind to rest a little! i was genuinely worried that someone could walk into my car, while im driving safe and legal so their fault, and be able to drag me through courts etc

and regarding premiums, mine went up by £200 last year for having the audacity to continue to live where i do, so its safe to say a spurious claim would increase it a fair bit

actually judy as you do seem to know about this a fair bit (Im NOT being snarky) say a ped did, negligently step out into the road and even though im not speeding/negligent myself, try and claim from me, could i claim against them for their actual negligence? guess that would turn it into a stalemate situation?