Spinal cord injury claim: £500,000 recovered despite a real risk of no compensation at all

Catastrophic injury case studies often focus on the amount of compensation recovered. However, this case demonstrates that success is not always measured by the headline figure. Sometimes, the real achievement is securing meaningful compensation for a catastrophically injured client when the legal and evidential hurdles are such that many law firms would decline to act at all.

RWK Goodman was prepared to take on Seth Marks’ claim despite the significant challenges it presented, ultimately securing an outcome that provided him with vital resources and support following a life-changing spinal cord injury.

Seth was 18 years old and living in rural Devon at the time of the accident. He was attending college and had been out socially with friends, including the driver of the vehicle involved in the incident.

Following an evening during which alcohol had been consumed at a local hotel bar and cannabis had also been used, Seth travelled as a rear-seat passenger in a vehicle driven by his friend. The driver, who held only a provisional driving licence, lost control of the vehicle during the short journey home and collided with a fence.

Seth was not wearing a seatbelt and sustained a high-level spinal cord injury, resulting in permanent tetraplegia and paralysis below the chest. He required extensive emergency treatment and a prolonged admission to a specialist spinal injuries unit, where he remained for almost two years.

The legal position was further complicated by the fact that the vehicle was uninsured, meaning that Seth’s claim proceeded against the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB) under the Uninsured Drivers Agreement.

This was a highly challenging case from the outset.

Through its appointed solicitors, the MIB argued from an early stage that Seth knew, or had reason to believe, that the vehicle in which he was travelling was uninsured. This was the central issue in the claim and, if proven, would have amounted to a complete defence, meaning that Seth would have recovered no compensation at all.

There was also a significant contributory negligence risk, with the circumstances giving rise to a number of potential findings against Seth, namely:

• failing to wear a seatbelt;
• travelling in the vehicle knowing that the driver had consumed alcohol and used cannabis; and
• travelling in the vehicle despite being aware that the driver held only a provisional licence.

Following careful analysis, it was clear that contributory negligence arguments were likely to reduce the compensation significantly, even before considering the MIB’s potentially complete defence to the claim based on Seth’s alleged knowledge of the lack of insurance.

Despite the severity of Seth’s injuries and their lifelong consequences, this was very far from a straightforward catastrophic injury claim. We undertook extensive investigative work, obtaining disclosure from the police, including CCTV footage, witness evidence, interview records and the forensic collision report. We also obtained expert engineering evidence in relation to the vehicle, identified and interviewed additional witnesses, and engaged leading counsel.

The claim had a very substantial theoretical value. Given Seth’s young age and his lifelong care, medical and accommodation needs, together with his future loss of earnings and other consequential losses, the gross value of the claim was estimated to be in the region of £20 million. However, allowing for likely findings of contributory negligence reduced its realistic value to approximately £10 million. We then had to factor in the very real risk arising from the issue of Seth’s alleged knowledge about the lack of insurance, which could have defeated the claim in its entirety.

Following extensive communications between the parties, the MIB put forward an offer of £500,000 to settle the claim.

There remained a significant risk that the claim could be defeated in its entirety. Against that backdrop, the offer represented a substantial and meaningful sum in terms of what it could provide for Seth’s future.

Following advice from leading counsel and RWK Goodman, Seth took the difficult decision to accept the settlement, weighing the risk of continuing with the litigation against the undoubted benefit that a sum of £500,000 would provide. The compensation has enabled Seth to pay for much-needed property adaptations, which have significantly improved his independence and quality of life.

Since the accident, Seth has become a passionate advocate for restorative justice. Through the Make Amends service, he chose to engage with the friend who had been driving the vehicle and has spoken publicly about the importance of accountability, understanding and forgiveness in helping victims move forward. He has also used his experience to raise awareness of road safety, spinal cord injuries and the positive impact that restorative justice can have on those affected by traumatic events.

Many catastrophic injury cases are defined by the size of the compensation award. Seth’s case is different. It is a reminder that, in the right circumstances, success can mean securing meaningful support where the prospects of recovery are highly uncertain and helping a young person rebuild their future after their life has been irrevocably changed.

Read more: ITV News spoke to Seth about the accident, his friendship with the driver and why he chose forgiveness: Devon man paralysed in drink-drive crash has forgiven friend who was behind the wheel