Summary
The Claimant was undertaking a wheel alignment process during the course of his employment at a Multiservice/MOT Centre. The vehicle upon which he was working was raised on ramps. The vehicle began to roll forward and, in his attempts to prevent it falling, the Claimant sustained a serious leg injury.
Factual Findings
Having been instructed to investigate this incident in advance of any Letter of Claim being received, initial enquiries established that the Claimant was working in conjunction with an Apprentice, changing four tyres on a Customer’s vehicle and thereafter undertaking a wheel alignment process.
The vehicle was placed onto ramps in order to conduct the wheel alignment and, according to our witnesses, during this procedure, per standard practice, the automatic transmission was left in neutral. Contrary to standard procedure the engine was left running.
Amongst the checks undertaken was a steering alignment test, which required that the Apprentice climb into the vehicle, whilst still elevated on the vehicle’s ramps, and that he turn the steering wheel, whilst the Claimant operated the laser testing equipment. Having completed these tests, the Apprentice applied clamps to both the brake pedal and the steering wheel, before climbing out of the vehicle.
Once the checks had been completed, the Claimant indicated to the Apprentice that the clamps should be removed from the vehicle. The Claimant lowered the ramps and the Apprentice leaned in through the driver’s side window, first removing the brake clamp. The vehicle began to move forwards. While the Claimant attempted to prevent it, sustaining injury in the process, the vehicle rolled off the front of the ramps. Given the severity of the Claimant’s injuries, a formal claim was expected.
Whilst both the Claimant and Apprentice maintained in their accounts of the incident circumstances that the customer’s vehicle always remained in neutral, if this had been the case, then even with the ignition on, there should have been no drive to any wheels. The vehicle should not have been propelled forwards. As such, the Claimant’s/Apprentice’s accounts of the incident circumstances were proved to be impossible.
Over the course of two separate visits, we questioned the witnesses closely. Based on our research and understanding of automatic transmissions, we set out in detail how their accounts could not be correct. The Apprentice, at our second visit, suggested that he must have inadvertently placed the vehicle into Drive whilst applying the steering/brake clamps. We again challenged that on the basis that an automatic gear selector requires that a ‘button’ be depressed as the selector is moved, preventing inadvertent engagement.
Whilst we were unable to determine precisely how the incident did come about, we were able to disprove the accounts provided by the Claimant and the Apprentice.
Outcome
Given our early interventions and the fact that through detailed witness interviews, we were able to discredit the version of events put forward by the Claimant, no formal claim was received, and the file was closed with no payments made.
Speak with us for more information or to arrange a claims defensibility survey for your business.