£100,000 for an occupier’s liability case

Lyubov Nikolchova recently obtained favourable settlement for Ms Z, a lady who was taking her van to be serviced, when she was hit by an employee’s van in the parking lot. 

Background 

In April 2024 Ms Z took her caravan to the Defendant caravan company to be serviced. The details surrounding the accident were disputed between Ms Z and the Defendant, however, it was agreed that Ms Z was at one point in the parking lot unsupervised and one of the employees failed to see and hit her with his van. The Defendant’s liability response was significantly delayed and made a number of assertions, including that Ms Z was negligent in standing alone in the parking lot and, therefore, contributory negligent to the accident. There were disputed by us and Ms Z.

Ms Z was taken by ambulance to a nearby hospital for treatment. She sustained serious injuries in the accident, namely: hip fractures, requiring a total hip replacement and an elbow fracture, leaving one of her arms shorter. She also suffered PTSD and a relapse of depression.

Rehabilitation

Alex Brown, who initially had conduct of the case, met with Ms Z and her son shortly after the accident. The Defendant was put on notice of the claim in May 2024 and an Immediate Needs Assessment was agreed soon after.

During the case, Ms Z benefited from the support of a case manager and rehabilitation was funded directly by the Defendant’s insurer. Psychotherapy and physiotherapy input was arranged. The Defendant’s insurers claimed some of the ongoing symptoms must be related to Ms Z’s previous mental health history, the case manager advocated for Ms Z and secured additional funding. Ms Z eventually preferred acupuncture and chiropractic sessions over physiotherapy and arranged sessions herself.

Litigation

The team argued from the start that the Defendant was responsible for the accident 1) under occupier’s liability law as Ms Z had been a lawful visitor on their premises and there was a failure to take sufficient care of her safety, 2) employer’s liability law as the van was driven by an employee during the course of their work.

Expert evidence was obtained from lower and upper limb orthopaedics and psychiatry. The orthopaedics experts agreed that Ms Z suffered serious injuries in the accident, which continued to impact her driving, gait, and ability to walk long distances. The psychiatry expert was of the opinion that Ms Z suffered a relapse of depression and PTSD which were of moderate severity initially and continued at mild level. 

Settlement 

A commercial offer was made by the Defendant’s insurers in May 2025 of £100,000. At the time, Ms Z was advised that while the expert evidence was being finalised, the offer was reasonable. Ms Z choose to make a commercial counteroffer which was not accepted. A few months later, the expert evidence was finalised and Ms Z’s prognosis and treatment needs were clear. The Defendant’s insurers then re-made the offer on a part 36 basis, which carried potential costs consequences for Ms Z. She was advised to accept the offer as it was considered good on the basis of the finalised expert opinions. Ms Z accepted the offer in October 2025 and has been able to focus on her recovery and family since.

Contact Dean Wilson LLP

If you or a loved one has been injured in a similar accident, please don’t hesitate to contact us to discuss your case with our personal injury team. Our expert team will be ready to provide you with the legal support you need to secure the compensation you deserve. The team can be contacted on 01273 032328 or enquiries@deanwilson.co.uk.