Posted on

£110,000 damages for mesothelioma claim

£110,000 damages for family of worker killed by asbestos-related cancer

The deceased man, Anthony Justice, had been employed by Universal Asbestos Manufacturing Company Ltd, based in Watford, and had worked on renovation projects in Scotland in 1967 and 1968. He had been employed, for three months, as a pipe lagger’s mate in boiler rooms. He emptied bags of asbestos into a spraying machine and swept up asbestos dust at the end of each day.

He was treated at Watford General Hospital in 2013 due to becoming increasingly breathless and only able to walk about 15 yards. His health continued to deteriorate and, in May 2015, he was diagnosed with mesothelioma. He died in July 2015.

On 20 March 2017 at the High Court, Judge Sir Robert Francis QC upheld a claim for damages against Mr Justice’s former employer by his daughter, Debbie Smith.

Sir Robert said he had ‘no doubt that Mr Justice was exposed to asbestos at some point during his life’. Mr Justice had given an account of his working life in a statement before he died, and Ms Smith was a ‘credible witness’.

The judge said Universal Asbestos was ‘a well-known employer’ in the Watford area and he was satisfied that Mr Justice had worked for the firm. He also accepted that he had worked as a lagger’s mate on the dates claimed and had ‘inevitably’ been exposed to asbestos.

Universal Asbestos and its successors are no longer in business, so the £110,000 compensation will be paid by the FSCS.

LNB News and Lexis Nexis

Posted on

Wallace-Challoner v Thomas Cook

The claimant who was aged six at the date of the onset of illness and is now aged 10, suffered a gastrointestinal illness, including symptoms of sickness, fever, diarrhoea and abdominal pain following a family holiday to Egypt in September 2012.

On 24 September 2012 the claimant developed an illness with symptoms of abdominal pain, diarrhoea and nausea. As his symptoms were severe he was treated by his parents with liquid medication and tablets. He did not see a doctor, and made a full recovery from the infection on 5 October 2012.

In totality, the claimant’s symptoms persisted from 24 September until 5 October 2012. There had been no recurrence of symptoms and none were expected in the future. He was not absent from school because of the symptoms.

The medical expert advised that he developed infective gastroenteritis while on holiday in Egypt. It was likely that this resulted from ingesting water from the hotel swimming pool or food or drink which had become contaminated as a result of poor standards of hygiene at the hotel.

Posted on

B Wallace v Thomas Cook

B Wallace v Thomas Cook

The claimant, who was aged 12 at the date of onset of the illness and 16 at the date of the approval hearing, suffered an acute gastrointestinal illness, including symptoms of fever, diarrhoea, abdominal pain and vomiting, during and after a holiday to Egypt in September 2012.

The claimant’s symptoms started on 21 September. She experienced symptoms of diarrhoea, abdominal pain and, later, vomiting. Her appetite became very poor and she was unable to eat. Her symptoms were so severe that she remained largely confined to her bedroom for a period of three days.

The claimant returned to the UK on 28 September. At this point she had started to improve. Her symptoms of gastroenteritis persisted from 21 September until 21 October, a period of around 30 days or so. There was no recurrence of her symptoms and none is expected in the future.

The medical expert advised that the claimant developed infective protozoal gastroenteritis while on holiday in Egypt. It was likely that the gastroenteritis resulted from ingesting water from the hotel swimming pool or from food or drink which had become contaminated as a result of poor standards of hygiene at the hotel.

Source – Lexis Nexis

Posted on

Stainland v Thomas Cook

Stainland v Thomas Cook

The claimant, aged seven at the date of onset of the illness and 11 at the date of the hearing, suffered an acute gastrointestinal illness, including persistent symptoms of diarrhoea and vomiting, following a family holiday to Egypt in September 2012.

The claimant’s gastric symptoms started on 23 September when he began vomiting and suffered diarrhoea. He was taken to hospital in Egypt. He continued to vomit on the flight home. On his arrival in the UK he was taken to hospital. His acute symptoms were consistent with a diagnosis of acute infective gastroenteritis. There was no finding of Cryptosporidium.

Following the claimant’s recovery from the acute symptoms of his illness he continued to suffer ongoing gastrointestinal disturbance, episodic diarrhoea and vomiting. These episodes lasted for 24 hours before resolving. The attacks happened about once a month. His persistent gastric symptoms were consistent with post- infective irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The expert diagnosed symptoms of IBS triggered by the gastric infection.

It was likely that the claimant’s gastroenteritis resulted from ingesting water from the hotel swimming pool or from food or drink which had become contaminated as a result of poor standards of hygiene at the hotel.

As a result of his persistent gastric symptoms, the claimant missed some school. The expert advised that although he will not suffer any complications in the future, his existing episodic gastric symptoms are likely to persist in the long term.

Source Lexis Nexis

Posted on

Good news for injured people

Good news for injured people

New discount rate for personal injury claims announced

The Lord Chancellor has today announced changes to personal injury compensation payments.

When victims of life-changing injuries accept lump sum compensation payments, the actual amount they receive is adjusted according to the interest they can expect to earn by investing it.

In finalising the compensation amount, courts apply a calculation called the Discount Rate – with the percentage linked in law to returns on the lowest risk investments, typically Index Linked Gilts.

Today’s decision by Elizabeth Truss to lower the Discount Rate from 2.5% to minus 0.75% was made in accordance with the law and in her capacity as independent Lord Chancellor.

The law makes clear that claimants must be treated as risk averse investors, reflecting the fact that they are financially dependent on this lump sum, often for long periods or the duration of their life.

Compensation awards using the rate should put the claimant in the same financial position had they not been injured, including loss of future earnings and care costs.

Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary Elizabeth Truss said:

The law is absolutely clear – as Lord Chancellor, I must make sure the right rate is set to compensate claimants.

I am clear that this is the only legally acceptable rate I can set.

The Discount Rate has been unchanged since 2001.

Today’s decision, as well as seeing compensation payments rise, is also likely to have a significant impact on the insurance industry and a knock-on effect on public services with large personal injury liabilities – particularly the NHS.

But in the announcement to the London Stock Exchange this morning, four key pledges were made:

  • the government has committed to ensuring that the NHS Litigation Authority has appropriate funding to cover changes to hospitals’ clinical negligence costs
  • the Department of Health will work closely with GPs and Medical Defence Organisations to ensure that appropriate funding is available to meet additional costs to GPs, recognising the crucial role they play in the delivery of NHS
  • the government will launch a consultation in the coming weeks to consider whether there is a better or fairer framework for claimants and defendants, with the government bringing forward any necessary legislation at an early stage
  • Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond will meet representatives of the insurance industry to assess the impact of the rate adjustment

The consultation, which will be launched before Easter, will consider options for reform – including whether the rate should in future be set by an independent body; whether more frequent reviews would improve predictability and certainty for all parties; and whether the methodology is appropriate for the future.

The new discount rate will come into effect on 20 March 2017, following amendments to current legislation.

To discuss how this may affect your claim call me on 01507 609027 or complete the online claim form.

Gov.uk

Posted on

Avoid being “mopped” up after a serious injury

Avoid being “mopped up” after you have suffered injury

The following is an article from last week’s Law Society Gazette. It’s a sign of the times I’m afraid as yet more of your cases are set to be dealt with by unqualified and untrained “claims handlers” (some might say paper shufflers). Their lack of experience can result in important aspects of cases being overlooked and the injured person receiving less compensation than they should. That they say the work is “pretty straightforward” belies the fact that cases which often appear “straightforward” usually aren’t if the right questions are asked.

It is also clear that these types of firms are under huge financial pressure which in turn means their “claims handlers” are under huge pressure to settle your claims quickly so the firm gets paid quickly which usually means your claim is “processed” (they are often referred to as “sausage factories”) too quickly such that cases are often settled for less than they should be. Unfortunately their priority is cash flow and not ensuring you receive the compensation you are entitled to.

I don’t regard you as merely “market share” waiting to be “mopped up”! The use of this language says it all really.

I deal with every claim as an individual and not as an automated process.

I put your interests first and not my cash flow!

I also have almost 20 years experience in personal injury claims.

Start of article: One of the country’s biggest personal injury firms says it will build a model ‘fit for purpose’ in the post-reform sector. Minster Law, which has 650 people working from two sites in Yorkshire, will be one of the firms most affected by the changes to road traffic accident claims.

But managing director Michael Warren says the firm has the financial clout to build new systems and reinvent its automated processes for handling claims.

Minster ceased to be part of the BGL Group last summer and was brought under the ownership of South African-based parent company BHL.

The investment vehicle has written off Minster’s £40m debts and injected £10m cash through a loan facility for the firm to upgrade technology. Minster’s finances had been on a downward spiral after the 2013 civil justice reforms and last year it reported losses of £35m. Warren said the firm is likely to report a small profit in 2015/16.

The plan now is to automate as much of the claims process as possible: ‘There are complexities and it is difficult to see a day when we don’t need top-end fee earners, but for the majority of the business we do it is pretty straightforward and the sector has chosen to make it complex. It is going away from a traditional law firm to a technology-based company.’

Minster retains links with BGL, which owns comparison site comparethemarket.com, through a seven-year contract that ensures it refers work. The arrangement means most clients coming to the firm are backed by before-the-event legal expenses insurance, Warren added.

Warren said the firm will shed several senior figures this year, with the incoming payroll being ‘lawyer-light’.

‘Whatever these reforms look like the expectation is that others will fold,’ he said. ‘There is a potential market share grab over the next few years, and with the investment in technology and the work in BHL, it gives us a great start to mop up some of this.’

Posted on

Council must pay damages to pothole injury victim

Council must pay damages to resident injured by pothole, Court of Appeal rules

The claimant, Lee Crawley, was running in January 2012 in Barnsley when he fell into the pothole. He suffered ‘considerable pain’ and couldn’t weight bear on his ankle for 10 days.

The pothole in the road had been reported to Barnsley Metropolitan Borough Council by a resident the previous day, at the end of the working week, but was not repaired until two days into the following week.

The council said it had taken all reasonable care to ensure the safety of the highway, and Mr Crawley’s first claim before a District Judge was turned down.

In March 2016 the ruling was overturned by Judge Graham Robinson, who found the council to blame. He said it was unreasonable that a pothole complaint made on a Friday would suffer a delay of at least two working days before being dealt with. Call centre staff should have been trained to evaluate the seriousness of potholes and instructed to contact the emergency standby team if necessary.

The council appealed that decision, saying that it had ‘a perfectly satisfactory system in place’ for dealing with potholes, and arguing that Judge Robinson had placed ‘too high a duty’ on the council and created a dangerous precedent for the future.

On 2 February 2017 at the Court of Appeal, judges ruled that the council breached its duty as highway authority.

However, Lord Justice Briggs said the council’s resources were ‘legally irrelevant’ to its duty to ensure the safety of road users. Regardless of weekends or bank holidays, the council was obliged to make ‘out of hours arrangements’ for potholes to be evaluated and dealt with within 24 hours.

Lord Justice Irwin agreed, saying: ‘Lack of resources cannot justify a failure to provide a reasonable system. It may be perfectly reasonable to have a reduced staff and activity over a weekend. But there must be some means of responding quickly to complaints from the public of serious and dangerous defects in the road.’

Lord Justice Jackson disagreed, but the council’s appeal was dismissed by a majority.

The amount of Mr Crawley’s compensation payment has yet to be finally assessed.

LNB News and Lexis Nexis

Posted on

Lawrence v Thomas Cook

Lawrence v Thomas Cook

The claimant, who was aged three at the date of the onset of illness and seven at the approval hearing, suffered an acute gastrointestinal illness, including symptoms of fever, diarrhoea, abdominal pain and vomiting.

She went on a family holiday to Egypt in September 2012. The claimant’s symptoms started on 22 September 2012. She experienced symptoms of diarrhoea, abdominal pain and extreme tiredness, followed by sickness. Two days later her mother was so concerned about her welfare that she was taken to hospital. She was put on a drip and kept in hospital overnight, and subsequently discharged with medication to help with the vomiting and diarrhoea.

The claimant was ill for the rest of the holiday. In total, her symptoms persisted from 22 September until 2 October 2012. There was no recurrence of her symptoms and none were expected in the future.

The medical expert advised that the claimant developed infective gastroenteritis while on holiday in Egypt. It was likely that the gastroenteritis resulted from ingesting water from the hotel swimming pool or food or drink which had become contaminated due to poor standards of hygiene at the hotel.

Lexis Nexis

Posted on

Serious road accident injury

Road accident in Lincolnshire

Serious Road Accident Injury

The claimant, Sandra Mehmetemin, suffered a badly broken ankle along with other injuries in a vehicle collision in 2009.

She has been unable to resume her job as an NHS administrator since the accident, and underwent six major operations on lower leg and ankle fractures. She is still in constant pain, with ‘significant permanent disability’, and relies on crutches or a mobility scooter.

She claimed damages against the other motorist involved in the crash.

Defence barrister Patrick Blakesey had queried the amount Mrs Mehmetemin was claiming and questioned whether her husband had needed to give up his job in order to look after her.

On 21 January 2017 at the High Court, Sir Robert Nelson awarded her more than £420,000 to cover the costs of past and future care, including that provided by her husband.

Sir Robert said a specialist had described Mrs Mehmetemin’s ankle injury as being ‘as bad as it gets’, and that her ability to carry on her normal life is ‘greatly affected in almost every sphere’.

The total damages payment came to £963,793.97, including £80,000 for her pain, suffering and loss of amenity. The figure also includes compensation for lost earnings, specialist equipment costs and medical treatment.

LNB News 31/01/2017 & Lexis Nexis

Posted on

Broken bones and fracture claims

Broken bones, fractures claims and multiple injuries claims

If you are looking for a solicitor who can assist you to make broken bones and fractures claims and multiple injuries claims, then I can help you receive the compensation you are entitled to.

As an experienced broken bones and fractures claims and multiple injuries claims solicitor I know that broken bones and fractures are not simply painful and inconvenient. I recognise that they can be debilitating, difficult to treat and that, in more severe cases, they can require surgery followed by a course of rehabilitation. These injuries can lead to long term health problems and can have a tremendous impact on your physical and mental health. This often makes their injuries more difficult to treat and their recovery can take longer.

In the most severe cases, injuries can be so serious that you need to take a great deal of time off work, you need to work in another occupation due to your injuries or you simply become too ill to work.

Common injury claims include one or more of the following:-

  • broken ankle injury claim;
  • broken arm accident claim;
  • broken finger injury claim;
  • broken foot injury compensation claim;
  • broken knee cap claim;
  • broken leg injury claim;
  • broken neck injury claim;
  • broken tooth injury claim;
  • broken wrist injury claim;
  • nose fracture claims;
  • missed fracture claims;
  • scaphoid fracture claims.

Why you should engage the services of a specialist injury claims lawyer?

In order to ensure that you have the best chance possible of receiving everything that you are entitled to, you must engage the services of a broken bones and fractures claims and multiple injuries claims lawyer. I am an expert in this complex area of the law and will be able to:-

  • advise if you might be entitled to compensation;
  • assess the impact and extent of your injuries;
  • use my considerable experience of making successful personal injury claims to ensure that you receive everything that you are entitled to;
  • work hard to ensure that you receive interim compensation payments if you need them.

How much compensation could I receive?

The amount of compensation you may receive depends on a variety of factors. Every case is different and I will be able to advise on the factors that apply in your individual case.

Your compensation package is likely to include payment for any earnings that you have lost whilst unable to work, costs associated with your rehabilitation and the provision of any specialist equipment or home adaptations you might require.

Importantly, the compensation package that you receive should be sufficient to meet your current needs and any needs that you will have in the future.

How much will it cost?

If you have suffered a fracture injury or multiple injuries then call me on 01507 609027 to discuss your situation or complete the online claim form. You will be heard compassionately and with understanding. I will advise you on whether you will be able to take your Personal Injury case forward as well as what this will involve, with no obligation. If you choose to use me then I undertake all fracture injury claims or multiple injury claims on a No-Win-No-Fee basis meaning there are absolutely no hidden charges. I’m a local solicitor, serving the local community of Lincolnshire, in particular Louth and Grimsby. I am devoted to my community and those living within it. Let me help you get the compensation you deserve.