Forensic Access Newsletter - "Benchmark"
January 2009
Private Disputes - A Burning Issue
Access to forensic expertise in non-criminal cases
As well as working for solicitors and barristers we also undertake work for private individuals. Quite often, these cases involve an individual contesting their rights against large corporations who have a good deal of money available to them. We were very pleased to help in this case of a private individual taking on a multi-national car manufacturer.
Did a defect in the car cause the fire?
We were contacted by Mrs. L after she had been served notice to pay several thousand pounds of a remaining purchase agreement to a car manufacturer. However, her car had been involved in a serious fire in the garage at her home, which had also destroyed one other car parked in the garage and damaged two more, parked on the driveway. Mrs. L claimed that the fire had started in the car, due to a fault with its electrics. Ever since buying the car she had had problems with the electric windows, the sunroof and the reversing camera, as well as other problems with the engine. If Mrs. L could prove that a defect in the car had caused the fire, then the manufacturers were not entitled to the sum sought and she could sue them for damages for the loss of the car and for consequent loss of business.
The manufacturer had used the services of an experienced fire investigation company well used to working for the insurance sector. He had examined the car but was unable to determine the cause of the fire. He concluded that the fire could have been started by either of the cars in the garage or by a fault in the garage’s electric circuits.
All the evidence destroyed
Mrs. L contacted Forensic Access and we appointed our highly experienced fires expert Mr. Ray Jenkins. However, Ray faced one major problem with this case: the car had been destroyed by the insurance company following their own investigation into the case! All Ray had to work on were the reports from witnesses and from the manufacturer’s expert. He also conducted some research into causes of fires in cars such as this, and found that cars from another manufacturer (with features similar to the car in question) had suffered a spate of fires. However, there were no records to show that this particular make had suffered the same problem. On the basis of Ray’s report, Mrs L decided to sue the manufacturer.
Three possible causes: arson, garage electrics, car electrics
The case went to court and three possible causes of the fire were discussed: an arson attack, a defect in the wiring in the garage and a defect in the electrics of the car. It was up to Mrs. L and her team to prove, on a balance of probabilities that the fire had been caused by a defect in her car.
The Judge discounted arson: neither the Police nor Fire Service had seen any evidence of arson. He took evidence from Ray and the manufacturer’s expert about the electrical circuits in the garage. But he came to the conclusion that they were unlikely to have caused the fire (for a number of reasons).
Ray Jenkins: fire started in the car
When it came to the discussion of the car causing the fire, Ray gave evidence. He was of the opinion, on the balance of probability, that the fire had started in the car and that the faults previously reported in the car, which had been virtually ignored by the local dealer, could well have resulted in the car catching fire. He also commented that neither of the other investigators had taken into account the evidence of eye witnesses when coming to their conclusions; evidence that the Judge considered very important in reaching his final decision.
Judgement against car company: substantial damages awarded
The Judge found in favour of Mrs. L and awarded her a substantial amount in damages. The case has been appealed through several courts, but the judgment still stands.
Ray’s objective and in-depth evidence, taking into consideration previously ignored, but important, eye witness accounts, certainly helped Mrs. L win her case.
< End >
|
