A cyclist who suffered a serious brain injury after being struck by a motorist has been awarded almost £800,000 in compensation – five years after the “life-changing” incident.
In 2017, the cyclist, from Essex, had their “life turned upside down” when a driver failed to give way and pulled into their path. The cyclist was thrown from their bike in the collision and landed some distance from the vehicle, with their head and arm taking the brunt of the impact, the Daily Gazette reports.
The bike rider, who has remained anonymous, suffered a traumatic brain injury and serious arm and leg injuries in the collision, and has since undergone years of surgery and rehabilitation.
> Cyclist sues driver who left him with brain injury after crash on roundabout
The driver initially denied liability for the crash, with interim payments to fund the victim’s rehabilitative treatment secured by Colchester-based Ellisons Solicitors.
However, after seven medical experts were called to assess the cyclist’s claim for damages, an agreement – including a compensation package of just under £800,000 – was agreed with the motorist’s insurer shortly before the case was set to head to trial.
Stevan Stratton, of Ellisons’ personal injury team, told the Daily Gazette: “In addition to the significant physical injuries, restrictions and cognitive symptoms caused to the claimant by this collision, they also suffered with chronic pain and psychological difficulties. All of which made it extremely unlikely that they would be able to return to work.
“We also know that the conclusion of this case after so many years will hugely assist our client and their family in trying to move on from the trauma of this accident. We hope that they can now start looking forwards rather than back.”
> £90,000 compensation for Dorset cyclist left-hooked by driver
A spokesperson from the Colchester Cycling Campaign argued that “it is a shame” that the case took five years to reach a settlement.
“This case stresses the danger that drivers present on the roads purely because of the combination of the speed and weight of their vehicle,” the spokesperson said.
“This settlement should not be thought of as a lottery win. It will pay for the cyclist’s medical care for the rest of their life while compensating them for possibly being unable to lead a normal life.”
> Cyclist who dishonestly claimed £60,000 compensation after collision caught out by Strava posts
Earlier this year, we reported that a cyclist from Dorset, who was left with brain injuries and forced to take early retirement after a motorist hit him on a roundabout, was suing the driver for £200,000.
However, unlike the case in Essex, insurers for Jack Harris, from Weymouth, admitted liability for the 2019 crash but as of January had been unable to agree damages with cyclist Philip Smith.
Add new comment
6 comments
“This settlement should not be thought of as a lottery win. It will pay for the cyclist’s medical care for the rest of their life while compensating them for possibly being unable to lead a normal life.”
UK average salary (full time) is £38.6k so that's 21 years wages before accounting for any LIFE CHANGING injuries and medical care...
I don't think this should even suggest "compensating them"
Agreed. £800k for what sounds like permanent mental and physical disability and loss of career / livelihood is absolutely pathetic.
Yep, it's poor compensation considering...
He was waiting 5 years, perhaps he couldn't wait any longer.
Still paltry.
UK compensation is notoriously low, though that's not really how it works.
We need to know the age of the victim, salary etc, to work out their future loss of earnings (etc) element and their award for general damages (the injury). The 800k above will look worse as we don't know which bit is which.
There will be actuarial valuations but, for a simpler (not really simple) method, mutliplier tables for loss of earnings etc are used.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
Essentially you use something like Table 11 (depending on when they proposed to retire), use the -0.25% discount rate column, then read across to get the right age. You multiply your future losses by that. That's the 'simple' method with a shed load of other contingencies.
But, also, the consent order will have needed to be 'approved' by the Court. Settling out of court inevitably means a discount, but that is against the risk of losing or having a less favourable award.
It's also likely they used a no win no fee lawyer who charged 20% plus VAT = 24%. So received about £600,000.