Hen night spoiled by speed bump!Speeding minibus causes injury
Mrs P was looking forward to a great night out on the occasion of her neice's hen night. A minibus had been booked so that the whole party could be picked up and taken to their destination. Mrs P sat on the back seat directly over the rear wheels. When the minibus drove along a road with a series of speed bumps, the driver failed to reduce his speed and the minibus bounced over the first speed bump. Mrs P had the worst of it, being positioned over the rear wheels, and she was thrown up into the air and landed back down on her seat suffering nasty bruising to her coccyx.
The taxi firm denied liablity claiming that the driver had driven at a reasonable speed and suggesting that Mrs P was not wearing her seatbelt. Their argument was that injury had only occurred because the Claimant must have failed to wear her seatbelt. However, they never explained how injury could have been caused other than by the Claimant being jolted out of her seat. The issue of the seatbelt was a red herring. The Claimant was wearing a seatbelt, but seatbelts are designed to stop the passenger from being thrown forwards not upwards. The driver's insurers seemed to be ignorant of the basic principle that you look first at why injury occured - the seat belt issue is always a secondary issue. The insurers failed to consider why Mrs P was bounced up out of her seat in the first place.
Court proceedings were issued. The Defendant disclosed a statement from the driver, but he had no direct evidence that Mrs P was not wearing a seatbelt. In contrast, Mrs P could call on other passengers to give evidence to support her case that the driver had driven too quickly over the speed bump. Mrs P made an offer to settle her claim for £4,500 which the Defendant accepted. The Defendant was obliged to pay the Claimant's costs. Mrs P was prepared to go to court if necessary, but this was avoided when settlement was agreed.
Tim Beasley, Partner at our Birmingham office who conducted the case commented that the key to the case was obtaining the evidence as to the way the minibus had been driven and knowing the law relating to seatbelts.
If you are not wearing a seatbelt that can be contributory negligence, but it is for the Defendant to prove that you were not wearing it and even then they have to prove that wearing a seatbelt would have made a difference. If it would have made a difference, then the claim is reduced by a percentage. The percentage reduction is 15% if injuries if the Claimant would have been injured less seriously if the seatbelt had been worn and 25% if injuries would have been prevented completely by wearing a seatbelt.
In Mrs P's case, she was vindicated and was very happy with her settlement.
| To start your claim now please call us FREE on 0800 11 88 99 or complete the online form with a brief description of your accident and we will contact you shortly. |
| 
