# no seat belt



## lorr01 (29 Mar 2007)

hi

could anyone help me on this please.. a male friend of mine was driving his car and he went and picked up his mates and 2 of them sat in the back sea and the driver told them to put on there seat bealts and one of them in the back of the car did, and one didnt. they are all over 18, and he crashed the car and the lad with no seat belt dis- located his hip and had to have surgery, he is now thinking about suing his mate the driver for hospital expenses.

(a)is the driver at fault in this situation even though he told him to wear a sealtbelt and he wouldnt or
(b)is the passanger at fault and cud he claim of the driver..

not sure what or who is at fault in this situation

thanks a mill


----------



## jhegarty (29 Mar 2007)

who was at fault for the accident ?


----------



## bacchus (29 Mar 2007)

Taken from www.rsa.ie

*Legal obligations*

Unless exempted, every person in a car is legally obliged to wear a seat belt where one is fitted. That includes drivers and front and rear passengers. The driver is responsible for ensuring that passengers under 17 years of age comply with the law.


----------



## bobk (29 Mar 2007)

It doesn't matter whether he was wearing a seatbelt or not, the driver is responsible for the safety of his passengers.


----------



## ACA (29 Mar 2007)

> originally posted by *bobk*
> It doesn't matter whether he was wearing a seatbelt or not, the driver is responsible for the safety of his passengers


Bobk is correct - although any insurance company will mitigate their loss as much as possible by using this information. Roughly speaking, QDI, (for example) will reduce any offer by 25%, as this person contributed to their own injury by not wearing the seat belt.


----------



## pinkyBear (29 Mar 2007)

> The driver is responsible for ensuring that passengers under 17 years of age comply with the law.


It was my understanding that say if you got caught by the guards, that if a passenger under the age of 17 the driver is liable to have points put on their license, however if the passenger is over 17 the passenger is fined as it is their responsibility to ensure they have a seatbelt on.


----------



## lorr01 (2 Apr 2007)

pinkyBear said:


> It was my understanding that say if you got caught by the guards, that if a passenger under the age of 17 the driver is liable to have points put on their license, however if the passenger is over 17 the passenger is fined as it is their responsibility to ensure they have a seatbelt on.


ya that what i undrerstood aswell. the passanger was 21 years old and wouldnt wear a seat belt


----------



## ACA (2 Apr 2007)

Finally found something on the web to settle the points row on the national safety council website;

Q. Will a driver be liable for penalty points if passengers over 17 years of age are not restrained in a vehicle?

A driver will not be responsible for the compliance of a passenger (aged 17 and over) in relation to the use of a safety belt and will not be liable to incur a fixed charge or penalty points for any breach of the 1991 safety belt regulations committed by that passenger.
A fixed charge of €60, which increases to €90 after 28 days, or prosecution in court applies to any passenger aged 17 or over who does not wear a safety belt while being driven in a vehicle in a public place.

Despite all of this - if the accident was yr mates fault, the guy with the dislocated hip can still claim from yr mate.


----------



## liteweight (2 Apr 2007)

I've heard my daughter say to friends.."put on your seat belt or get out of my car!"


----------



## rob30 (2 Apr 2007)

driver is responsible for minors only.


----------



## deem (2 Apr 2007)

liteweight said:


> I've heard my daughter say to friends.."put on your seat belt or get out of my car!"


 
thats what i do too. however, its a bit hard with my dad who's 62


----------



## liteweight (2 Apr 2007)

deem said:


> thats what i do too. however, its a bit hard with my dad who's 62



Tell him how much damage he could do to YOUR head in an accident if he doesn't have a seatbelt on. That'll do it!


----------



## lorr01 (4 Apr 2007)

ACA said:


> Finally found something on the web to settle the points row on the national safety council website;
> 
> Q. Will a driver be liable for penalty points if passengers over 17 years of age are not restrained in a vehicle?
> 
> ...


thanks a million for finding that out for me.


----------



## lorr01 (4 Apr 2007)

ACA said:


> Finally found something on the web to settle the points row on the national safety council website;
> 
> Q. Will a driver be liable for penalty points if passengers over 17 years of age are not restrained in a vehicle?
> 
> ...


my mate skidded on ice he reckons and over turned the car, i dont no much more about the accident but the back seat passanger is suing for medical expenses, and he would not wear he seat belt when asked to put it on.


----------



## ACA (4 Apr 2007)

Unfortunately for you friend, duty of care still applies - the guy with the dislocated hip can claim for loss of earnings, physio, medication, hospital + GP visits and pain and suffering. Just had a mooch on the PIAB website, if he went thru PIAB, and/or a solicitor he could expect a minimum of €19600 for the pain and suffering element plus all out-of-pocket expenses!  The insurance company will try to lessen the pay-out of the pain and suffering element by citing contributary negligence, despite this the payout on this claim will be stiff, so prepare yr friend.


----------



## lorr01 (12 Apr 2007)

ACA said:


> Unfortunately for you friend, duty of care still applies - the guy with the dislocated hip can claim for loss of earnings, physio, medication, hospital + GP visits and pain and suffering. Just had a mooch on the PIAB website, if he went thru PIAB, and/or a solicitor he could expect a minimum of €19600 for the pain and suffering element plus all out-of-pocket expenses! The insurance company will try to lessen the pay-out of the pain and suffering element by citing contributary negligence, despite this the payout on this claim will be stiff, so prepare yr friend.


how are you,

thanks a million for looking up all that for me, ur very good.
il tell him all you said, i was in a car crash last yr myself and have had 19 operations on my arm already as i have no feeling in it since crash. a man came out in front of me and then left the scene but was caught and is now taking all responsibility. i had a discloated shoulder, a cracked rib, and very bad break to my right arm and very bad nerve damage, and othe injuroes to my back etc. im still seeing lots of back specialiss, nerologists, surgeons, phyios councellors and others,and am taking 29 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX a day and morphine patches, and am a qualified legal secretary but cant go back to that type work again. so have gone through alot torture so hopefully all my pain and suffering the insurance team will not try and lessen my pain and suffering and i get a fair justiable amount from the high court.

not that anything i do get will bring back the use of my arm.


----------



## ACA (12 Apr 2007)

If you are happy with the way that the insurance company is handling your claim, then there's no reason not to stay with them BUT, on the minus side, bear in mind that any offer they make will be less than if you were going thru PIAB with or without a solicitor on board. On the plus side you wait less time for your settlement - once both yourself and the insurance company have reached a figure that you can agree on, you tend to have your chq within a week. 

There is a 2 year limit on pursuing a claim thru PIAB. The application forms are on the web and it costs €50 to submit your application. You can get a solicitor to do it for you, (maybe your old boss for a set fee??) if you don't feel confident doing it on your own, (this is assuming that you wish to go down this road). Some people find the PIAB process to be very clinical and would rather settle, put the incident behind them and move on. It's different for everyone.

Either way, keep every receipt that you can for meds, physio, GP/hospital visits etc. as these will be added to any award for pain and suffering. If you stay out of PIAB, the insurance company should be making allowances for future losses but, as it would appear from your post that your injury is on-going and most likely permanent - I would have thought that this area would be the hardest to determine as you can no longer work in your trained field. I'm assuming too that any car would have to specially modified for you use - the impact on your daily life would be very hard for the insurance company to put into monetary terms. 

Why not have a chat with your former boss for a bit more advice?
Amanda


----------



## Vanilla (12 Apr 2007)

I'd be fairly confident that a former legal secretary will already have a solicitor acting for her. Anyone who knows anything detailed about PIAB would be unlikely to go without a solicitor.


----------



## ACA (12 Apr 2007)

> originally posted by *Vanilla*
> Anyone who knows anything detailed about PIAB would be unlikely to go without a solicitor.


You're probably right Vanilla. I haven't come across anyone going thru PIAB without a brief yet - but it will happen, I suppose eventually. 

I thought that the whole point of PIAB was to make awards more standardised, (so that people with similar injuries received similar award) and to simplify the process, so that anyone could claim personal injury without a solicitor, (and watch a large % of their award be gone straight away)


----------



## lorr01 (16 Apr 2007)

ACA said:


> If you are happy with the way that the insurance company is handling your claim, then there's no reason not to stay with them BUT, on the minus side, bear in mind that any offer they make will be less than if you were going thru PIAB with or without a solicitor on board. On the plus side you wait less time for your settlement - once both yourself and the insurance company have reached a figure that you can agree on, you tend to have your chq within a week.
> 
> There is a 2 year limit on pursuing a claim thru PIAB. The application forms are on the web and it costs €50 to submit your application. You can get a solicitor to do it for you, (maybe your old boss for a set fee??) if you don't feel confident doing it on your own, (this is assuming that you wish to go down this road). Some people find the PIAB process to be very clinical and would rather settle, put the incident behind them and move on. It's different for everyone.
> 
> ...


hi amanda

i have a solicitor on my case alright and i was at beginning of case going to be sorted by piab route but now the piab crowd said my case is to big for them to settle with a figure, so it is going to the high court. with all the complications ive had with injuries i wouldnt have managed without a solicitor, so the solicitor i worked with is taking the case on .
i wouldnt wish the pain im in on anybody and the impact on my life is terrible, but im certain the insurance company will not have much problem in settling with a figure.

to this day and its 2 year since last week i have never heard a figure of what i should get or am entitled to for my injuries so im not sure about what i should get yet!!


----------



## lorr01 (16 Apr 2007)

Vanilla said:


> I'd be fairly confident that a former legal secretary will already have a solicitor acting for her. Anyone who knows anything detailed about PIAB would be unlikely to go without a solicitor.


hi

ya i have the solicitor i worked for on my case but it to big a case for piab to settle so its going to the highcourt


----------



## ACA (16 Apr 2007)

Lorr01, would have thought that each injury would have to be evaluated seperately for compensation. Not 100% sure tho. Hasn't your brief given you any idea of what sum your looking at? PM me if you wish to discuss in more detail, Amanda


----------



## Vanilla (16 Apr 2007)

Bearing in mind that ACA works for Quinn Direct, and one of his/her interests is finding out secrets!  

So don't prejudice your case now...


----------



## ACA (16 Apr 2007)

Looks like you've finally taken off your serious hat Vanilla


----------



## lorr01 (23 Apr 2007)

ACA said:


> Lorr01, would have thought that each injury would have to be evaluated seperately for compensation. Not 100% sure tho. Hasn't your brief given you any idea of what sum your looking at? PM me if you wish to discuss in more detail, Amanda


hey amanda

no he never told me any figure that i should be entitled to.


----------



## lorr01 (23 Apr 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Bearing in mind that ACA works for Quinn Direct, and one of his/her interests is finding out secrets!
> 
> So don't prejudice your case now...


 its 2 years now since crash and i have no use of my right arm so there very little tings i can do, my life has been at a stand still since it happened, but im a genuine case and have lots scars to prove it, so i havent any secrets to hide!!!!


----------



## Vanilla (23 Apr 2007)

Hi lorr- what I meant was that you should be careful in talking to someone who works for an insurance company to make sure they would not be the insurance company dealing with your case.


----------



## ACA (23 Apr 2007)

100% correct Vanilla. 

But in fairness, just because I work for an insurance company doesn't mean I'm ALL bad! Anymore than ALL estate agents are liars and ALL solicitors are trying to make people pursue personal injury claims. Am I not allowed to give someone advice based upon my work/life experience? Isn't that what any of us do on this forum?


----------



## Vanilla (23 Apr 2007)

Hi ACA, what made you think I was suggesting that because you work for an insurance company you were 'bad'? I was only and very specifically pointing out that the OP should not prejudice her case.


----------



## ACA (23 Apr 2007)

Probably just me being over-sensitive Vanilla. Sorry no offence meant.


----------



## lorr01 (30 Apr 2007)

ACA said:


> 100% correct Vanilla.
> 
> But in fairness, just because I work for an insurance company doesn't mean I'm ALL bad! Anymore than ALL estate agents are liars and ALL solicitors are trying to make people pursue personal injury claims. Am I not allowed to give someone advice based upon my work/life experience? Isn't that what any of us do on this forum?


i came onto this site asking a question about my mates son who was involved in crash and the lad in back of car had no seat belt so thank you for advice given back to me. bt i was aslo involved in a hit and run case and felt i could caht about what happened me. 

i do not or did not wish to cause friction between other people in this forum, i didint no you worked in an insurance company aca, but im a genuine person and you gave me genuine advice i feel. 

thanks to you all


----------



## ACA (30 Apr 2007)

lorr01, you didn't cause any friction on my part - I just took Vanilla up wrongly. If you left click on someones name you can view their profile, not everyone has anything written there - its optional. I forget that not everyone knows that I work for an insurance company and should have made it more apparent from the beginning - sorry. Best of luck with your claim. Amanda


----------

