If you were not at fault for the accident, then yes!<\/p>\n
You can make a Road Traffic Accident claim for your injuries if the driver you collided with was at fault for the accident. However, if your injuries could have been entirely or partly prevented by wearing a helmet, then that could affect the compensation amount awarded to you.<\/p>\n
You can still claim either way though.
\n
\nIn U.K. legislation, courts do look to share blame if a person is deemed to have not responsibly protected themselves, and this is looked at when calculating compensation awards. Where they find that you were in some way at fault for making your injuries worse because of not wearing a helmet, your compensation may be reduced accordingly.<\/p>\n
This is known as contributory negligence<\/strong>.<\/p>\n To start with, the defendant must be the one responsible for the accident happening. However, in contributory negligence, the victim’s behaviour – like not wearing a helmet – could contribute to injuries that otherwise may not have existed, or would have been less serious had you have worn a helmet.<\/p>\n For helmets, this usually only applies to head injuries. If a motorcyclist didn’t wear a helmet and was hit by a vehicle and sustained a broken leg, then the compensation award should not be affected as the leg would have still broken anyway (I imagine!).<\/p>\n Any deduction made should only apply to the extent of injuries that could have been prevented by wearing a helmet. This rule applies to other safety instruments like seatbelts too.<\/p>\n Where injuries might have been less severe if a seat belt had been worn, damages could be reduced by something like 15%. Only if ‘damage would have been prevented altogether’ does a higher reduction of commonly 25% be looked at.<\/p>\nHow does it work?<\/h2>\n
How much could a claim be reduced by?<\/h3>\n