Knocked down by reversing car

RainyDay

Stepping Stone wrote: »

I witnessed an incident similar to this a few years ago. I was in my car, waiting to leave a parallel space when I saw a cyclists being hit by a car reversing from a space.

The cyclists claimed and the insurers faught it. it was ruled to be an accident and no compensation was given because while you are obliged to yield to other vehicles when reversing, you are equally supposed to drive/ cycle with due care and attention and cycling behind a reversing car with centimeters between you and it isn't very careful or attentive. Both parties were wrong so the cyclist got nothing.

Not that he needed anything anyway. Grazing and bruising doesn't tend to make much of an impression on people used to dealing with catastrophic injuries. No medium, never mind long term damage.

Do insurers usually inform witnesses about the status of a claim and the reasons for payment or non-payment?

Stepping Stone

RainyDay wrote: »

Do insurers usually inform witnesses about the status of a claim and the reasons for payment or non-payment?

Not normally but if you go through the district court and it is ruled an accident and you end up in the high court with the insurance company fighting the claim, you do find out what the outcome is simply because you end up watching the whole thing. I am still waiting for my call to the supreme court (not joking, this guy just doesn't stop).

arybvtcw0eolkf

Stepping Stone wrote: »

Not normally but if you go through the district court and it is ruled an accident and you end up in the high court with the insurance company fighting the claim, you do find out what the outcome is simply because you end up watching the whole thing. I am still waiting for my call to the supreme court (not joking, this guy just doesn't stop).

The insurance fought a claim like that through the high court?.. Mmmm, right.

_taytothief

Pity it was only a Passat eh?

Tony Beetroot

_taytothief wrote: »

Pity it was only a Passat eh?

had it a bxe engine?

Tigger

Stepping Stone wrote: »

I witnessed an incident similar to this a few years ago. I was in my car, waiting to leave a parallel space when I saw a cyclists being hit by a car reversing from a space.

The cyclists claimed and the insurers faught it. it was ruled to be an accident and no compensation was given because while you are obliged to yield to other vehicles when reversing, you are equally supposed to drive/ cycle with due care and attention and cycling behind a reversing car with centimeters between you and it isn't very careful or attentive. Both parties were wrong so the cyclist got nothing.

Not that he needed anything anyway. Grazing and bruising doesn't tend to make much of an impression on people used to dealing with catastrophic injuries. No medium, never mind long term damage.

Stepping Stone

Mustafa Tiny Dust wrote: »

The insurance fought a claim like that through the high court?.. Mmmm, right.

Yes, they did. Aggressively too. The initial case was relating to the cause of the accident. The high court case was relating to the compensation that was being claimed.

The injured individual suffered minophysical injuries but claimed to have PTSD. They were rendered incapable of normal activities because of this and couldn't work, etc. I sat through a psychologist, doctors, former employers. The reason that this got as far as the high court, I assume is because of the sum being saught. It was argued that this person was essentially disabled and should be compensated as such.

There wasn't a strong enough case for compensation. Initial medical costs had been covered by the insurers. It is pretty common for these cases to go to the high court. I was called by both sides and spoke to both sides about the nature of their work. Insurance is a big business apparently.

CramCycle

Stepping Stone wrote: »

There wasn't a strong enough case for compensation. Initial medical costs had been covered by the insurers. It is pretty common for these cases to go to the high court. I was called by both sides and spoke to both sides about the nature of their work. Insurance is a big business apparently.

I would say the only reason it went that far is the sum, it is quite rare that a case would go that far on the basis that the payout would be far less than the legal costs for either side, even if the insurance company is in the right, if the claim is minor , they often will not fight as there is a risk they will have to cover legal fees etc. which on their own maybe more than the claim.

I have no doubt some do but, to say it is common I think is misleading.

The majority are settled by the insurer to mitigate risk to them, out of those that go further, a large volume would be settled on the steps of the court, which is good considering how busy it seems to be whenever I have went in, very entertaining stuff though, worth a bag of popcorn for a good show but you hear alot of cases coming in and both sides saying they have reached an agreement and the judge letting them go away.

Chemical Byrne

The reason that case went so far and was fought so hard is because the claimant completely lost the run of themselves and took the absolute piss with their claim. Soft tissue injury, stiffness and physios are one thing and completely plausible. PSTD from being knocked over is just taking the mick!

bryangiggsy

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

The reason that case went so far and was fought so hard is because the claimant completely lost the run of themselves and took the absolute piss with their claim. Soft tissue injury, stiffness and physios are one thing and completely plausible. PSTD from being knocked over is just taking the mick!

Pot and kettle comes to mind

CramCycle

bryangiggsy wrote: »

Pot and kettle comes to mind

MOD VOICE: You have said you have nothing further to add, so please don't, any issues please discuss with me via PM

PCX

Any personal injury claim for more than €60k would have to be heard in the high court.

realdanbreen

So OP, one week on from your mishap how are you feeling?

Chemical Byrne

I can straighten my arm but it is still a little stiff just before full extension.
I'm booked in to go to doc in morning to request referral to a physiotherapist.

BoardsMember

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I can straighten my arm but it is still a little stiff just before full extension.
I'm booked in to go to doc in morning to request referral to a physiotherapist.

Why do you need to be referred to a physio? Can't you just call one up and save yourself the cost/time off work/hassle of another doctor's visit?

Unknown Soldier

BoardsMember wrote: »

Why do you need to be referred to a physio? Can't you just call one up and save yourself the cost/time off work/hassle of another doctor's visit?

It's not wise to go to a physio right after an accident.

Due to aggravating any injuries.

Best to give it a week or more.

BoardsMember

Unknown Soldier wrote: »

It's not wise to go to a physio right after an accident.

Due to aggravating any injuries.

Best to give it a week or more.

I'll defer to your knowledge but would have thought it very much depends on the injury, and if the physio is not capable of making that call I'd be choosing a different physio.

Unknown Soldier

BoardsMember wrote: »

I'll defer to your knowledge but would have thought it very much depends on the injury, and if the physio is not capable of making that call I'd be choosing a different physio.

Go to a physio.

They can't help you.

Pay 50 quid.

Versus

They end up doing "something"

That was my experience.

realdanbreen

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I can straighten my arm but it is still a little stiff just before full extension.
I'm booked in to go to doc in morning to request referral to a physiotherapist.

Best to do that then and don't be distracting yourself with solicitors and insurance companies.

Daithi101

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I can straighten my arm but it is still a little stiff just before full extension.
I'm booked in to go to doc in morning to request referral to a physiotherapist.

Have you started taking the Difene that you were prescribed, that would have certainly helped in reducing any interior swelling of the muscle and lead to you being able to get full mobility back in your arm.

And as per the other commentors there is no need to get a referal to a physio from a doctor, any physio will see you. That is unless you dont have a good phsio already.

groovyg

Why do you need to go to a doctor to get a referral for a physio?
Thats just adding to the costs.

BoardsMember

Do you mind me asking if you have had to take much time off work for this? Does that cost you or are you paid regardless of whether you are in work for your normal hours or not.

realdanbreen

Chemical Byrne wrote: »

I was going past a row of cars parked perpendicular to the cycle path in passafe west last evening. A woman in a Passat reversed out without seeing me and I struck the car a glancing blow along the back of the boot and ended up on the ground using my right arm to break the fall. I was going probably 15-20kph and was wearing my hi vis and helmet luckily.

I photographed her reg but it seemed all ok at the time so I picked myself up and carried on. She was very apologetic and was shaken up. There is no obvious damage to the bike.

I landed on my arm and now this morning the inside of my elbow and down the inside of my forearm is killing me with stiffness. I can't straighten my arm without it causing pain.

I'm thinking of getting a doctor to assess it. Should I report it to the gaurds?
I'm in a bit of pain and its affecting me so think I will look into speaking to a solicitor.
I've never done anything like this before so I'm a bit clueless. What should I be doing here?

Have you recovered or are we going to have a day out in court?

blobbie

groovyg wrote: »

Why do you need to go to a doctor to get a referral for a physio?
Thats just adding to the costs.

If you are looking to claim the cost of the physio back against tax on a MED1 you need a doctor referral or else you won't be getting back the 20%.

groovyg

blobbie wrote: »

If you are looking to claim the cost of the physio back against tax on a MED1 you need a doctor referral or else you won't be getting back the 20%.

Is that not if you want to access to a physio through the public system?

I have spent a fair amount of money on physios for various different injuries over the years and never once got a referral from a doc. I've claimed tax back with out a problem. Going to the doctor to get a referral would just add to the cost.

magicbastarder

your employer would need a GP note for a MED1 form to claim back employer's PRSI, afaik - my wife had to go to the dentist for an impacted wisdom tooth recently, and then to her GP to get the GP to sign off on her absence from work - the dentist's cert can't be accepted for that.

blobbie

groovyg wrote: »

Is that not if you want to access to a physio through the public system?

I have spent a fair amount of money on physios for various different injuries over the years and never once got a referral from a doc. I've claimed tax back with out a problem. Going to the doctor to get a referral would just add to the cost.

Maybe you have been lucky but last year I had some (3) physio claims rejected based on http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/leaflets/it6.html and

What are qualifying health expenses?
Qualifying health expenses includes the following: -
....
physiotherapy or similar treatment prescribed by a practitioner
.....


Revenue asked me to provide referral letter which I didn't have as it was a recurrence of an old back problem from years ago. A bit of a catch22 situation as between time off to see doctor (I work for myself) and cost of doctor visit I would have been out of pocket by more than I would have received back.

In prior years for other physio visit claims I didn't need to provide any referral letter - maybe it was some sort of spot check / strict application of rules that let to my claim being rejected.

CramCycle

groovyg wrote: »

I have spent a fair amount of money on physios for various different injuries over the years and never once got a referral from a doc. I've claimed tax back with out a problem. Going to the doctor to get a referral would just add to the cost.

blobbie wrote: »

In prior years for other physio visit claims I didn't need to provide any referral letter - maybe it was some sort of spot check / strict application of rules that let to my claim being rejected.

Its a spot check thing, I got flagged last year, got all my expenses but for you blobbie it would appear to be luck of the draw on whoever reviewed your case. Once I sent in my receipts they never asked anything more about it.

galwaycyclist

MOD VOICE: Fair post but the quoted poster has no option to reply so it's been deleted

groovyg

MOD VOICE: Same as previous post

I don't think he's allowed post in this thread