Home
» Claims Advice
» How to win injury compensation claims when liability is in dispute

How to win injury compensation claims when liability is in dispute

By Ian Morris | Updated April 19th, 2024

138 questions have been answered on this subject - ask us your question

Having a liable person or organisation to make a claim against is a key element of being entitled to compensation. For the majority of personal injury claims it is usually easy enough to see who is liable. In such cases, if you’re not at fault, a no win no fee solicitor will likely take on your case.

However, a denial of liability is not uncommon, even in what can appear to be a straight forward case. The good news is you can still often claim personal injury compensation if liability is in dispute.

What happens to an injury claim when liability is denied

When liability is denied, a solicitor will discuss the denial with the claimant. They will investigate what response can be made to force the denial to be withdrawn and replaced with an admission of liability.

Then one of four things will happen:

The claimant solicitor will review the denials and consider them to be so strong that they close the claim. Whilst this would be disappointing, you should bear in mind that you will not have to pay any costs for your claim as it will have been managed on a no win no fee basis. You also have the option of finding another solicitor for a second opinion.
They may take the view both parties share some blame and proceed with the claim under what’s known as split liability.
They may seek a barrister’s opinion to pursue the claim further and bring the decision on liability to a judge in court.
Otherwise, they will consider the denials weak and without legal standing. In which case they will work to force an admission of liability.

How split liability affects your claim

In some cases, a claimant may have to accept a percentage of the responsibility for an accident. This is called split liability or contributory negligence. In this situation you can still receive compensation but it will be lower than if the defendant was 100% liable.

For example, when asking if you have a valid slipping accident claim your condition at the time is relevant. The 3rd party responsible for where you slipped may admit the floor was dangerous and wet with no signs erected. Therefore admitting to an element of liability. However, if they can prove you were drunk at the time, they can argue this contributed to the slip. In such a case, the claimant may have to accept that they are 25% or 50% responsible for the accident. Which leads to a similar reduction in the amount of compensation offered.

Taking your claim to court

Neither side would wish to go to court if they didn’t feel that they were likely to win. Going to court is unlikely in most personal injury claims, but you should always be aware that it is a possibility.

It is frustrating when a defendant does not admit liability when there is compelling evidence to support a claim. However, the courts system is here for such situations. If you have a strong claim a judge will likely find in your favour.

If you are of the view that statements issued by the defendants are misleading and factually incorrect, you can attend court to contest this. You could well succeed with your claim if you can provide factually correct responses the Judge is minded to accept. If you can provide evidence to substantiate your version of events, you will succeed!

Proving liability for your injuries

Whether you go to court or not, to maximise and win any settlement you will need to prove the 3rd party is liable for your accident and injuries. This can only be done with evidence that the accident took place, of what caused it, and how you were impacted. Accident reports, witness statements and medical reports can all be used to provide evidence.

Liability for accidents at work

Employers will often deny liability if they believe they have fulfilled their legal responsibilities to provide a safe environment. For example, that they have given you the relevant training, guidance and risk assessments to work safely. To prove otherwise, the injured employee must be able to demonstrate the employer was liable. Crucially, that they exposed the employee to an avoidable risk of injury, rather than it being their own fault. Consider the following:

Did your employer give you the correct training?
Were you given an induction to the workplace?
Were you provided with personal safety and protective equipment (PPE) to complete your job safely?
Did your employer adequately maintain equipment and service machines?
Were you advised how to report accidents and how to access the accident book?
Did your employer ensure correct staffing levels and an adequate amount of first aid trained staff?
Did your employer act upon reports of potential risks of danger to employees?

Liability for road traffic accidents

Even if your vehicle was written off, it’s not guaranteed you’ll be eligible to claim injury compensation. As well as evidence of the damage to your car, you would need medical evidence of your injuries. Medical reports from a Hospital or GP can be used to force an admission of liability.

In cases of car accident claims where one car crashes in to the rear of another stationary vehicle, it is usually easy to apportion blame. But it’s important to note that admitting liability for a road accident does not mean admitting liability for any injuries. The defendant’s solicitors may not be denying there was an accident or that it was caused by their driver. They may, however, be arguing the force of the collision was not consistent with sustaining personal injury.

Low impact collisions

Unfortunately, insurers have started fighting claims where the speed of collision or force of impact is low – even if they admit to liability for the accident and vehicle damage. There is evidence to support both sides in this scenario. Evidence shows that whiplash and typical injuries associated with road traffic accidents can occur at very low speed. On the other hand, counter evidence states that such injuries cannot be sustained at lower speeds. As such, insurers are using so called ‘low impact collision’ as a defence.

Untraced or uninsured drivers

In the UK, victims of untraced drivers (hit and run incidents) can still pursue a claim. This is done through the Motor Insurers Bureau (MIB) scheme. The criteria to make such a claim requires the claimant to report the incident to the Police at the earliest opportunity. You’ll need to obtain a crime reference number and seek medical attention for any injuries sustained.

Passenger claims

For an injured passenger, it does not matter which party is liable or whether both parties are held partially liable. Passengers can make a claim for personal injury compensation providing you have medical evidence of your injuries.

Liability in claims against a local council

Local authorities and landowners rely on area inspections when it comes to identifying potential hazards that need attention. The courts have essentially stated that if a local authority inspects an area every 6 months and finds no hazard, and if there have been no reports from the public of hazards in between inspections, they will not be liable for any accidents that may happen.

Therefore, to prove that the council is liable it has to be shown the inspection was inadequate or didn’t happen. Or that they have not acted on reports of hazards.

To maximise your chances of success you will first need to prove that the accident happened. This can be done by gathering:

Witness statements
Video or CCTV footage

What you will then need to do is demonstrate that the incident is consistent with the nature of the injury you are claiming for. This should be possible by providing your medical records.

Then if it can also be proved the council failed in their required inspection duties and are therefore liable for your accident, your claim should be successful.

The reality is that it is becoming harder to successfully pursue slip, trip or fall claims against local authorities. The courts tend to lean towards defendants in such claims. If there is any scope to deny liability, no matter how tenuous, local councils will do so.

How we can help

The fact that a third party or local authority have denied liability should not make you give up on claiming. Our solicitors would be happy to advise as to whether or not they can take your claim further.

If you have any questions about liability or whether or not your accident scenario warrants a claim, please call our team on 01225 430285, or if you prefer, we can call you back. We know your rights and can help you to understand them. We’ve successfully helped many clients claim compensation for their injuries and we’d love to help you, too.

138 questions have been answered on this subject - ask us your question

Comments & Questions

Read on for questions and advice about claiming...

Hello. My nan had an accident in a shop earlier this year where she slipped on a discount sign that was laying in the middle of floor. The shop admitted liability on their part as they said that the floor should have been kept clear of clutter. However today she has just recieved a letter from her solicitor saying that she company in question is now refusing to accept liability and that they will not pay her any compensation. I was just wondering if they can do this after they had admitted they was already at fault? The accident resulted in her dislocating and fracturing her shoulder. She had to have an operation to replace her shoulder joint, and she spent about a week in hospital. She has had on going pain since it happened and is now to scared to leave the house to go shopping in case it happens again. Should we see a different solicitor to get a second opinion?

If the admission of liability was made verbally in the shop by a person working there, then the fact that the insurers have formally denied liability is acceptable. If liability was agreed in writing and has since been revoked, it is more concerning and you would need to ask your Solicitor as to the grounds for the withdrawal of the admission.

I was driving North on the M1 Motorway when a Lorry struck my rear offside wing with its nearside footplate. It was a Roadwork area with a 50mph speed limit with a concrete barrier on the hard shoulder. My speed was increased from 45mph to over 50 by the force of the collision. There were no independent witnesses but as the lorry struck me from behind the other insurance company has accused me of starting to change lanes. No such comment was made by the other driver all he said was sorry. I was on the inside lane and had been since the start of the roadwork area ‘Stay in Lane’ was the sign. Without my knowledge my Insurance Company closed the claim and accepted 50/50 with the other insurance company. I believe that I have been Misrepresented by my Insurance Company which I believe could be classed as Fraud. Can you advise me?

Without an independent witness to corroborate your version of events or without dash cam footage to confirm that you are telling the truth, there is very little that can be done in such a case.

As you believe that you have been the victim of a fraudulent allegation, you should contact the fraud department within your Insurance provider to discuss the matter and potentially refer the matter to the ombudsman service if you are not satisfied with their handling of this issue.

HI fell over a paving slab smashed my femur and broke my hip I was in hospital for 1 month but the council are not admitting liability though have sent them photographic evidence what can I do I’m heart broken I have a pin from hip to knee and had muscle removed to fit it…

Was the paving slab that caused you to fall raised or sunken by 25mm (1″) or more? If so, the claim may be something that could be taken further by a specialist Solicitor with expertise in claims for tripping accident compensation.

I work for a large supermarket as a baker. Whilst removing the bread rack from the prover the heavy metal door, which is on the same principle of a fire door so comes back and closes on its own, came back and hit my hand and as a result I broke my baby finger. It has required surgery to be pinned to straighten my finger and almost 3 months off work. My union are dealing with the case but in the first instance my employer has denied blame which I find quite upsetting. Any advice please?

Do you know what defence the employers insurance have raised? Why are they refusing to accept responsibilty?

I work for the nhs, I had a fall off a stool , provided by work, while putting notes on a high shelf, approx 7ft I am 5ft 1, I was quite badly hurt, they have denied liability say the stool wasn’t faulty, and it is still in use, which is lies it was removed the day after the accident and I’ve not seen it since, they have also lowered the shelf’s , while I was off work, they say I am the author of my own misfortune by climbing onto the stool, this is what we had to do to reach the shelf’s, I have witnesses to all this being true.

Have you had your claim pursued by a specialist personal injury Solicitor? If so, have you informed them of the witness you have and of the fact that the stool was removed from use the following day?

If you have not instructed a specialist Solicitor, perhaps you should now consider doing that?

Hi I recently made a claim against my employer through a personal injury Solicitor. I was advised today that they are denying liability and wondered if you could give me your views on this matter.

I was seriously assaulted by a young person in my care and in my case this incident was foreseeable and could have been prevented. 6 months down the line I am still suffering severe pain from the injuries I sustained.

The employer can deny liability if they believe that they have given you the relevant training, guidance and correctly risk assessed the young person and the risks that they posed to you during your duties.

You mention that the incident was preventable. What makes you say this? Remember, hindsight is not something you can use to succeed in a claim, but if you have evidence to show that the employer failed in anyway, you should present that to your Solicitor.

Hi,

I was involved in an accident in April, I was getting something out of my car on the passenger side and was stood between the passenger door and the car and when someone drove into me, smashed my door up, hit my throat on the roof and injured my leg. I could barely speak for 2 weeks. I’ve had to make a personal injury claim to retrieve my excess, i was fine after a month so not making an outrageous claim. But they are denying all liability saying i was sat in the passenger side and opened the door onto them, which makes no sense as I was on my own and standing at the time if the accident. They have paid for my repairs which was 1800, so what will happen if they still deny, they have until 8th August to investigate. There are no witnesses but a hospital record and photos of bruising to my leg. Will it go to court? Thanks for any advice x

The problem you are facing would appear to be a straightforward case of a 3rd party relying on the fact that you have no supporting witnesses to corroborate your version of events. In such cases, it is very hard for you – as the claimant – to prove what was reality in that the defendant was liable.

Given what has happened, it could well be the case that your Solicitor will have to play hard ball and take this all the way to the courts.

So i put in a claim against council as i fell when a drain cover was not there, and although i have pictures from jan till june of the drain it’s still not fixed. I also rang and told them about it in march as it still hadn’t been covered. They’re saying that because they have had no-one phone about it before that they are not taking liability. When i done it in jan my brother had only just moved there so i didn’t know anyone really but neighbours from the street had said it had been reported before i had fell, which they are denying, i’m not really sure where to go from here as i am still not in work. I damaged my knees and my arm which turned into frozen shoulder, anyway just wondering is this right what they’re saying and is there anything i can do or do i have to just leave it?

Have you had a Solicitor representing you in your claim for compensation? The water board and local authority will rely on reports of hazards and annual inspections to be aware of any hazards or items in need of repair and if the local authority can demonstrate that they have inspected the area within the correct time and found no hazard or defect, they would not have reported any issue to the water board and they would therefore not be liable.

However, if any of the residents of the area say that they did report the hazard, this could turn things around and help you with your claim. If you can obtain a ‘hazard witness statement’ from one of these residents in which they can state the details of the hazard and when and to whom they reported it, it would be of huge help to you. You may find our article on proving liability in tripping accident claims of use.

I also did visit hospital twice and numerous doctors appointments and physio so i have all evidence my side but they’re denying their side as they’re saying they didn’t know it was like that.

The medical evidence is irrelevant in terms of proving that the local authority or water board were negligent. Medical evidence is important for proving the extent of injury sustained – but that is only relevant once you have proven liability.

Hi. I was recently in an accident where by my car was hit by an articulated lorry as it decided to change lanes and come into my lane. The lorry driver took full responsibility and my insurance received payment for my car to be repaired. Since then I have claimed for personal injury resulting from the collision and the lorry driver now says he isn’t responsible for the accident. How can he claim that he isn’t responsible when he has already claimed responsibility and paid for the car repairs?

If the defendant insurer has already admitted liability for the accident and met the cost of the repair work needed on your vehicle, they would have to do the same should a claim for personal injury compensation follow.

The only caveat to this would be if they were to take a view that the speed/velocity of the impact was insufficient to cause bodily injury. However, if your car was damaged sufficiently to require repairs, it is hard to see how they can argue that the incident wasn’t serious enough to cause injury – especially given that you were hit by such a large vehicle.

In a personal injury case if the defendant denies liability and its proven 5 years later can i still make a claim?

If 5 years have passed since an accident, limitation for pursuit of a claim will have passed and you won’t be able to take action. However, if you previously attempted to claim and the claim was registered in the courts, the limitation issue may be irrelevant and you could possibly get this matter settled.

Hi there, I was in a car accident last year, I was hit by a driver that went through a red light. There was a witness and CCTV footage was found showing the crash. The 3rd party is still denying liability and my solicitor says we may need even more evidence. I’m not sure what further evidence we could possibly get. She says we may need to go to court. Should I look for a different solicitor?

I don’t think you need to switch Solicitors as it sounds like your Solicitor is doing the right things. If the defendant insurers are denying liability despite the apparent evidence that is available, the only option your (or any other Solicitor for that matter) would have is to initiate court proceedings to place your claim before an independent Judge.

It is frustrating when a defendant does not admit liability when there is compelling evidence to support a claim and in the long run, it does not benefit them and may indeed cost them more than simply working on a fair settlement for your claim. However, the courts system is here for such situations and it would appear (if your summary of the claim is taken at face value), that you have a strong claim and that a Judge would likely find in your favour.

I am due in court as I had an accident a while ago, the defendants who were not there on the day of the accident have given statements both of which are saying I was incompetent, would this stand in court? Also they have said that I was given 1000 hours of training which they supplied with a few dates on a piece of paper with no signatures to say when I was signed off. I have never signed no training matrix, also both of the statements say that they never had any problems whilst they were working but I beg to differ with that and they say I was rushing on the day again they were not on site to determine if I was rushing.

If you are of the view that the statements issued by the defendants are misleading and factually incorrect, you need to attend the court and provide responses to every incorrect element of their statements to the Judge sitting on the case. If you can provide factually correct responses in a manner that the Judge is minded to accept, you could well succeed with your claim. If you can provide evidence to substantiate your version of events you will succeed.

I tripped in the street on a damaged pavement and fractured my wrist. The council admitted it was their fault 3 years ago, but I have since had problems with my wrist and been diagnosed with crps. I was under the impression that the claim was coming to an end this year with all the evidence from consultants occupational therapists etc, but today my Solicitor rang saying the defendants are now not accepting liability and she needs to talk with me. Can this happen after 3 years?

An admission of liability can be withdrawn, but the defendant will have to be basing that on new evidence to support their view. Your Solicitor will speak to you, but it could be that the matter now has to go to court for a Judge to decide the outcome.

Hi, my work have denied liability – i had a fall down curved stairs that had no handrail, i fractured my tibia and femur. My work installed a handrail 3 days later, i was off work for 9 months, can they deny liability?

Have you been represented in this claim by a specialist Solicitor? If not, it may be worth having the employers denial of liability reviewed by one of our specialist accident at work Solicitors.

With regards to your accident, the lack of a handrail may not necessarily indicate that they were negligent and therefore liable for any injury you sustained. The fact that they had a handrail fitted 3 days after your accident could be seen as the employer acting correctly to ensure that nobody else would fall down the stairs.

Hi Ian,I work on the railway on a 0 hr contract. The company I work for is a sub-contracting agency and they had me working for a large contracting firm. The large contracting firm is not accepting liability for the injury I sustained when I dropped a large concrete block on my finger tip. The injury was such that the finger tip was removed later in Hospital.

Appropriate vehicles were not provided by the employers resulting in the accident. My lawyer reckons I have a solid claim and agrees the large company is at fault. This is his opinion that as it was their contract and the job was under their site managers instruction.,However they seem to believe my sub agency is at fault under a contract which was signed in previous years. My sub agency employer also denies responsibility.

My lawyer has given them 5 weeks, which ends next Tuesday or he is willing to take both to court (after a further 2 week cooling off period if nobody’s accepted responsibility).

They’re really both blaming each other. Both believe they have a good case in defence. What will happen in the end? Could it really go to court or will somebody accept liability and work to settle the claim appropriately? Also is this better financially for me it going to court? Many thanks

Given your current Solicitors view that you have a solid claim it is a good indicator that someone is liable and in this case, it can only be one of (or both!) two parties – the sub contractor for whom you work or the main contract holder for whom you were operating on the day.

If neither party is willing to accept liability the only solution would be to put it before a court and allow a judge to make a decision. Whilst it is not that common in the UK for personal injury claims to reach court, the court process is there to resolve issues such as the one you cite.

Hi ian, i had an injury at work my claim is at 50/50 at the minute, even if i accept this would i still receive some compensation?

The simple answer is yes! In claims where a claimants has to accept an element of contributory negligence with regards to how they came to be injured, they will still receive compensation. However, the amount received will be lower than if they were able to attach 100% liability to the defendant.

I’m dealing with the insurance company of a large store. There was ice on a parking lot and I broke my ankle and have been off work for a few months. The insurance company for the parking lot maintenance company sent me an email and it said please be advised that this is a liability issue and that they would get back to me as soon as they have the rest of my medical records. Does that mean they accept the liability or does it mean they don’t know who’s liable?

It is hard to be certain what they mean, so it would be worthwhile clarifying with them as to whether they are accepting responsibility or not.

I tripped over a manhole cover and the council said as the depth was between 10mm and 12mm they were not liable. They said they inspect the pavements regularly and they did not admit liability. I’ve a broken elbow, torn ligaments to my hand recovery us going to take months. All due to tripping over the lowered manhole cover. Seems most unfair.

Given the injuries you sustained when you tripped over the raised access cover, I can understand why you feel that the local authorities refusal to accept any liability is unfair.

However, if the hazard protruded by 10-12mm from the surrounding surface, it is unlikely that a court would find the highways agency liable in this matter. In previous case law, it has been decided that an actionable tripping hazard should exceed or fall below the surrounding surface level by 25mm or more. Further, in your case it sounds as if the local authority can demonstrate that they regularly inspect the highways and footpaths in their area and this would give them a solid defence should any claim proceed.

I was injured during physical training at work but my employer is denying liability. Surely in a training setting, whereby we should be being monitored there should be no dispute as to them being at fault.

When you say that your employer is denying liability, are you saying that you already have a claim in place and a Solicitor pursuing this for you? If not, the situation you describe is something that we would be happy to investigate for you.

We have previously succeeded with claims against employers where staff members were injured during physical training exercises, with NHS workers injured during training as to how to handle aggressive patients being one example.

hi I slipped in a supermarket in may 2017. I was advised by the the store first aider that there was a pool of liquid by me which I had skidded on. There were no wet floor signs and I slipped by the pharmacy desk where there were 3 cctv cameras in operation. The staff on duty asked if I wanted the incident reporting to their incident line and they did this in my presence whilst I was awaiting the ambulance.
I was taken to the AE department where I was diagnosed with a fractured elbow, likely fractured bone in my spine and severely sprained ankle, I spent 2 nights in hospital and I am still undergoing physiotherapy now.
The supermarket have denied liability and in their words, they have provided the appropriate documentation to demonstrate that they have safe systems of work in place, however they state that they have no CCTV footage of the event.
My solicitor has indicated that there may be no way of telling how long the liquid was on the floor. I have received the cleaning schedule from that day and there was only 1x housekeeper on to clean a superstore in conjunction with this on the incident report it states initially that they had retained the CCTV footage and then further down that they hadnt, giving no rationale for why they did or did not retain it. The incident report also states the area I fell in was not cleaned and the area I fell in is not made referance to on the cleaning schedule. I would be really grateful for any advice you could give me on this matter.

You have certainly suffered some very nasty injuries in this accident and the severity of them proves that what can initially appear to be an innocuous accident can lead to very serious injuries in slipping accidents.

The issue that is causing problems in your claim is a common one that affects many slipping accident compensation claimants in that the lack of a hazard sign being on display is not in and of itself enough to enable a claimant to succeed. Previously, the courts have been fairly lenient with the defendants in slipping accident compensation when it comes to a claimant having to prove that the spillage or item on the floor was there for a sufficiently long period of time that the defendant ought to have been able to notice it, place a sign out and arrange a clean up. It is for this reason that businesses such as supermarkets maintain a hand written log of cleaning inspections and housekeeping work. To summarised, the courts have basically said that as long as a business can demonstrate that it has an adequate cleaning regime and regular inspections of each area of their premises they will not be held liable if someone were to slip and fall. In essence, this is usually taken as the supermarket having to check each aisle of their store at least every 30 minutes. If they can provide a log that shows this, it is unlikely a claim will succeed against them. The courts have found that if a shopper were to drop an item and caused a spillage, it would be unreasonable to expect the store staff to notice, erect a hazard sign and begin clean up unless the item had been on the floor for more than 30 minutes. Of course, without CCTV, it is very hard to have the evidence to support your claim as it cannot be proven that the spillage was on the floor for 30 minutes or more.