50-year-old former Hillingdon teacher Joyce Walters has recently been awarded a personal injury compensation of £150,000.
Ms Walters made her personal injury at work claim after she developed medical issues with her voicebox brought on by repeatedly shouting at her students during her years of teaching.
An English teacher for foreign-language speakers at a Hillingdon college, Ms Walters taught in a classroom positioned in close proximity to a courtyard regularly used by primary school students, which resulted in a very noisy classroom.
Due to the high levels of noise from the children emanating from the courtyard, Ms Walters was constantly in need to raise her voice to make herself heard to her students. She also stated in her personal injury claim that her voice was stressed even more because her non-native English speaking students needed her to enunciate in a clear manner to aid in their comprehension.
While Ms Walters did file a complaint with the Hillingdon council, there had been nothing done about the level of noise in the courtyard. After developing a nodule on her vocal cords due to her continued shouting, Ms Walters can no longer speak for long periods of time without losing her voice. Additionally the former teacher has to now go through an extensive regimen of speech therapy to return her voice to its normal function.
While Ms Walters stated that she truly enjoyed her time spent in the classroom and in fact missed it very dearly, her voice problems simply do not permit her to return.
Ms Walters did lodge a personal injury claim against the town council, however, which has resulted in a record-setting £150,000 compensation award.
Vocal cord nodules are benign, whitish-grey, and comprised of keratin, according to Southampton University Medical School’s Dr Gill Jenkins. Usually the result of a high frequency of vocal cord collisions, such nodules can be treated through surgical procedures, in many cases.
One man recently suffered a work accident claim when a fiery explosion engulfed him, resulting in horrible facial burns.
58 year old David Lightfoot of Cockermouth, Cumbria had been given the task of some welding work on a chemical plant silo that was filled with nearly 400 tonnes of terephthalic acid, a highly inflammable component regularly used in the manufacturing of plastics and related industries.
Mr Lightfoot’s personal injury at work occurred shortly after he began his welding duties, as a ball of fire bloomed right in front of him, engulfing his head in flames.
Mr Lightfoot reported that not only did the flames sear the flesh of his face badly, he was also forced to jump off the platform and drop 10 feet to the ground in order to avoid even more seriously burning himself in the resultant conflagration.
The unfortunate worker was left with permanent facial scars as a result of the incident, for which the Indorama Polymers company has already admitted liability.
Relating the particulars of the accident claim in a recent interview, Mr Lightfoot described how one of his colleagues aided him in extinguishing the flames while he ran to douse his face in water.
At first, Mr Lightfoot barely felt any pain whatsoever due to being in shock. Once he had been brought to hospital, in A&E his face swelled up “to the size of a pumpkin” whilst the man felt what he could only describe as an “incredible” amount of pain.
Mr Lightfoot remained in hospital for over two weeks due to the severity of the injuries he sustained. Now, he says that even two years after the work accident, he still experiences pain. Cold days are especially painful, Mr Lightfoot said, due to the tightening of his skin from the cooler weather.
The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers has made indications that it will welcome a recent agreement by the Lord Chancellor to review the personal injury compensation discount rate.
Used as a method to calculate how much should be deducted from the compensation of an injured person, the discount rate is routinely used in cases when the injured party of a personal injury claim receives income from investing their cash award.
The rate’s current 2.5 per cent level has been in place since 2001. The original calculations were based at the then-current figure of index-linked government stock and the yields they generated.
According to the president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers Muiris Lyons, since that date ILGS yields have undergone a gradual decline. Mt Lyons also believes that, for the past three years, the average gross yield on ILGS has been significantly less than 1 per cent.
Mr Lyons stated that due to the a failure on the part of the previous Government to conduct reviews of the discount rate to keep up with changes in the UK economy, the injured have faced erosion of their personal injury compensation as a result.
Mr Lyons added that the APIL hopes that when the Lord Chancellor reviews the situation, he will be quick to process and redress the current imbalance in an effort to reduce any further impact this will have on injured people in the future.
A non-profit campaign designation, the APIL has been campaigning for rights for the injured for two decadeshas been fighting for the rights of injured people for 20 years. Consisting of 4,700 member lawyers, which are mostly comprised of legal executives, barristers, and solicitors, have professed dedication to enhancing and protecting access to justice, changing relevant laws, and campaigning for an improvement to services provided to the injured.
A dentist accused of having a false motor accident claim
in an effort to fake his own death so that he could claim almost £1.8 million in insurance payouts recently had his day in court.
Greek national Emmanouil Parisis, who was known as Neil McClaren during his tenure in the UK, shared the dock with both his sister-in-law and his wife. The three share the fraud charge after the 46 year old McClaren was reported as killed in a traffic accident claim
. After his alleged “death,” court documents state that both he and his two co-defendants entered into a conspiracy to make a claim on McClaren’s life insurance.
The initial road accident claim
was made while McClaren staged his death in an elaborate ruse that involved a motor vehicle collision in Amman, Jordan in 2009. Then, the allegations show, the father of four adopted a new name and relocated to Scotland.
Exeter Crown Court recently heard that the fraud is alleged to be concerned with 15 separate policies for life insurance from NHS organisations and finance groups alike.
These groups include such members as National Westminster Life Assurance Ltd, Genworth Financial Assurance, the British Dental Associations’s Benevolent Fund, NHS pensions, and Virgin Money.
McClaren, his 41-year-old sister-in-law Nikoletta Theodoropoulou, and his wife Anabella, 40, categorically denied six charges of fraud that were committed between the 1st of January 2008 and the 22nd of June of this year by making false representations that Emmanouil Parisis’ life had ended in order to make life insurance claims.
Answering “not guilty” each in turn, the three alleged fraudsters followed along with the aid of a Greek interpreter so they could understand the court proceedings. The two women were released on bail while McClaren was remanded into until an additional pre-trial hearing in the immediate future.
Members of Parliament have recently been told that an uptick in personal injury claims, some of which are fraudulent, have resulted in UK motorists facing huge car insurance premium hikes.
The Transport Select Committee recently heard figures that, partly due to accident claims, premium hikes would continue into the future indefinitely. Over the past year this phenomenon has already resulted in a 40 per cent increase to premiums for all but young drivers, who lived to see an increase of 51 per cent on average.
An average premium, according to released statistical data, was as high as £791 this October. Last year’s premiums were only £568 in comparison.
EMB Consultancy representative Duncan Anderson stood before MPs in order to make his claim that if personal injury compensation claims continue to increase at their present rate, the costs passed on to the consumer will result in even higher premiums.
Claims due to bodily injury have increased at a 30 per cent rate, Mr Anderson stated. Moreover other types of claims were growing by approximately 5 per cent yearly.
Costs associated with claims may rise anywhere from 15 to 20 per cent, continued Mr Anderson. Of course these costs will carry over into higher premiums yet again. ”
Edmund King, current president of the AA, told the Committee that such rises were simply impossible to sustain for any given length of time.
The lion’s share of the blame rests solely on claims management firms that seem to be the main culprit behind the inflation of insurance costs lately. Behaviours such as seeking exorbitant personal injury claims damages were but one tactic deployed by such management firms.
One after another, a cavalcade of witnesses told the Committee that these firms were raking in the cash on relatively minor accidents by claiming whiplash or some other personal injury basis.
NHS Trusts in the West Midlands have had to pay out £33 million in damages to medical negligence victims since 2007, sources show.
West Midlands news source the Express and Star has reported that the litigation authority for the NHS has recently released data that show personal injury compensation figures. From 2007-2008, the figures show that £8.7 million was spent on compensating medical negligence victims, while the 2009-2010 figures indicate a rise to £12.6 million in compensatory damages.
In a surprising turn of events, the Dudley Group of Hospitals was indicated to be the most expensive trust, paying out £14.2 million to injured former patients over the last three years. In comparison Mid-Staffordshire Trust, which has been recently rocked by scandal, paid out a comparatively paltry £2.4 million, though the figure is not inclusive of an additional £1 million that industry experts expect to be made to the families of the victims of substandard care at the hands of Stafford Hospitals.
A Healthcare Commission investigation discovered that significantly serious hospital failings may in fact be responsible for the unnecessary deaths of between 400 and 1,200 patients from 2005 until 2008. Such failures to provide adequate care include reports of reception staff with no medical training making A&E assessments all in an alleged attempt to cut hospital costs.
Thanks to a public inquiry now underway in order to investigate the scandal, not only are there in excess of one one million pages to be examined as evidence but a large number of witnesses are now slated to be interviewed. However, Martin Yates, NHS Trust former chief executive, has stated that he has no intentions of speaking at the inquiry due to the fact that the scandal has resulted in his development of post traumatic stress disorder.
After one of its employees filed a work accident claim due to an incident where he lost consciousness from a dose of nitrogen gas, on e re-cycling firm faces a £13,000 fine.
Birmingham native Stephen Barnes was operating a machine that disassembles refrigerators as a part of the re-cycling process. In order to minimise the potential of explosions during the procedure, the machine Mr Barnes was operating uses nitrogen gas.
When a refrigerator became lodged within the machine, Mr Barnes received a dose of nitrogen upon his climbing into a chute to clear the blockage. Overcome by the gas, Mr Barnes lost consciousness and was rushed to hospital after colleagues rescued him. As a result of the incident Mr Barnes underwent treatment for gas inhalation while in hospital.
Upon the Health and Safety Executive’s inspection of the Ovterton Recycling facility, located in the West Midlands town of Lye, it determined that the firm had neglected to carry out a proper risk asessment. They determined that Overton Recycling failed to identify the dangers its workers faced when climbing into a confined space such as Mr Barnes did. Moreover the re-cycling firm neglected to assess the nitrogen levels present in the refrigerator breakdown machinery’s chute.
After it admitted it had breached both the Management of Health and Safety Regulations and the Confined Spaces Regulations, the company now faces fines of £13,000, with an additional £6,107 in costs as well.
Mr Barnes has made a full physical recovery after taking three days off of work, but since the incident he has suffered occasional mood swings, sleepless nights, and flashbacks. At this time, there is no information as to whether Mr Barnes is seeking personal injury compensation as a result of his accident claim.
After one of its drivers suffered a personal injury at work, one foam manufacturer has been sent to court, insider sources say.
The Health and Safety Executive recently revealed that the driver of a lorry suffered a personal injury claim in which he broke his back in the course of his duties at the Stoke on Trent factory for foam manufacturer Reticel.
Wolverhampton native Colin Ball suffered both several spinal fractures and a head injury during an accident where he was knocked backwards by a large pile of insulating material and then colliding with a trailer.
Health and Safety Executive inspector Lyn Mizen commented on Mr Ball’s injury claims, stating that if the foam manufacturing firm had simply implemented a sufficiently suitable and safe work system in regards of risk management of sacked warehouse materials, the incident could have been prevented very easily.
Instead, Ms Mizen found that Reticel was in breach of the 1974 Health and Safety at Work Act. Ms Mizen specifically cited Section 3(1) of the regulatory code.
The incident, which occurred in October of 2009, has led to the foam manufacturing company to be assigned a fine of £6,238. Additionally, Reticel received further instructions to pay costs totaling £11,762 as well.
In related news, for the 2009-2010 season, employees in West Midlands workplaces suffered nearly 2400 major injuries.
Many industry experts have commented that companies and firms that neglect to properly institute workplace safety regulations due to being reticent in regards to the cost of such work programmes are shooting themselves in the foot; the costs of such preventative measures pale in comparison to the hefty fines and cost assessments that the Health and Safety Executive routinely assign to companies in the wake of an investigation following a personal injury at work of one of their employees.
One man has sustained injuries after a serious work accident claim occurred while he was digging through a power cable, sources say.
The man, who has remained unnamed at this time, was working in a Warwick alleyway in April of 2009 when the accident claim occurred. While he was digging through the pavement, which was comprised of concrete, with a hand-held mini breaker, he struck a live power cable that was carrying 11,000 volts of electricity. The severe consequences the man suffered included second degree burns to his neck and face due to the power lead giving off a devastating flash.
Deciding to prosecute Magna Heating Company Limited, the firm the worker was employed by in regards to the accident, The Health and Safety Executive were forced to fine the company just £1, even after the company pleaded guilty to being in breach of health and safety regulations. While Magna Heating did fail to take any steps in order to prevent injuries due to cutting underground cables, since the company is now in liquidation the Health and Safety Executive had no choice but to fine them the nominal amount for the work accident claim.
While any report that the injured worker has made a personal injury claim against the company for his injuries, industry experts say that even though some companies may go bankrupt, injured workers do have some recourse in the event of an accident. This is due to the fact that if the company had proper insurance cover at the time of any accident, any personal injury compensation sought by an injured party can be handled by the insurer directly.
As the current economic landscape in the wake of the banking crisis and resultant global recession has resulted in many firms and businesses being shuttered, industry experts say that this is good news for anyone suffering a personal injury claim at work.
One recently filed work accident claim has detailed how an Essex man caught fire while working for one cement company.
While he was employed at Lafarge Cement UK Plc in October of 2009, Mr Paul Ridings suffered terrible personal injuries at work while he was performing maintenance on a faulty energy reader. A live wire was exposed when Mr Ridings inadvertently moved a connection that was loose, which caused an electrical explosion and resultant fireball. Mr Ridings suffered serious injury after being caught in the fireball as his clothes immediately combusted from the intense heat.
After being admitted to Broomfield Hospital’s Specialist Burns Unit, Mr Ridings then spent nearly three weeks in total in the facility for treatment. Suffering terrible burns to his hands, face, arms, chest, and neck, the man’s injuries were so severe that he was required to have several skin graft surgeries performed during the course of his treatment.
After an investigation by the Health and Safety Executive, the explosion was found to have been caused by maintenance failures to the facility’s electrical system. After an appearance at Basildon Crown Court, the company pleaded guilty to breaching the Health and Safety Act. As a result Lafarge Cement now faces a fine of £130,000, in addition to being held responsible for legal costs as well. After the incident, an inspector for the Health and Safety Executive released a statement in which they said that it was only through extreme luck that Mr Ridings was not slain in the highly dangerous incident.
According to industry figures, approximately 1,000 workers suffer injuries in incidents involving electricity in the UK on a yearly basis. As a result of their injuries, many of these workers decide to pursue personal injury compensation claims.
While Lord Young’s recently published report is filled with recommendations on ways to mitigate the fear of litigation that seems to permeate the business landscape in the UK, his efforts may reduce the number of people who have access to justice for their personal injury claims, one expert states.
The October 15th report, which was entitled “Common Sense, Common Safety,” is comprised of many recommended actions to take to reduce the appeal of filing overly litigious accident claims in an effort to mitigate the costs of civil litigation in the UK.
Managing partner of injury solicitors First Personal Injury holds the belief that if the suggestions Lord Young makes were to be adopted, the result will be a restriction of judicial access. Mr Jefferies feels that the proposed reforms would be unfavourable to firms such as his own, which would result in not only running them out of business but also in accident victims not gaining the personal injury compensation in which they are entitled.
While Lord Justice Jackson has made the recommendation that lawyer success fees, that are currently paid by the losing party in any lawsuit, should be paid by the client instead. Lord Jackson suggested that raising the client damages by 10 per cent would make such a change possible.
However Mr Jefferies feels that the amounts clients receive will decrease sharply from current levels if that success fee is paid by the client’s settlement figure. Mr Jefferies expressed concern that clients may run short of funds, resulting in a reduction of their standard of living or a lack of money to pay for medical care, if they are not given their full compensation amount. The entire point of the law, Mr Jefferies also stated, is that in personal injury or medical negligence cases the party found to be liable lifts them back up to a pre-negligence position.
In order to avoid resorting to making car accident claims on their insurance, nearly one out of every four motorists have instead paid out of pocket for any damage they may have caused in an accident, a new survey has discovered.
Approximately 25 per cent of people who have been the cause of an accident told the survey that instead of making a traffic accident claim on their car insurance, they instead paid the costs of the damage to the other driver’s car directly.
The most often cited reason motorists decided to pay out of pocket for any damage caused in road accident claims turned out to be a desire to ensure their insurance premiums did not increase. 11 per cent of respondents also stated that a desire to preserve their no claims bonus was the most important factor to their decision.
Slightly over one out of every five drivers additionally stated that it was simply not worthwhile to claim on their policy because the excess was too high on their insurance.
However 2 per cent of respondents stated that since they were not insured at the time they became involved in a car accident, they had no choice but to pay for any damage done themselves.
Even among those who actually did file a car accident claim, 42 per cent of them stated they were considering instead paying the other driver off in the event of another accident sometime in the future to ensure their premiums stayed the same.
Twenty per cent of drivers who were at fault during a traffic collision admitted to lying in order to make the other driver seem to be the responsible party. Additionally 4 per cent of respondents stated that they had pranged and run, whether or not the other vehicle was occupied at the time.
A widow from Salford has recently been awarded a large medical negligence compensation claim on the heels of her husband’s death after he had been hospitalised for a routine procedure to replace his hip.
After both Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust and Trafford Healthcare Trust were found to be negligent in providing a basic level of after care to her husband that would have safeguarded her life, Mrs Patricia Harper received personal injury compensation for her husband’s death. Chris Harper died at the age of 60 due to a blood clot the week following his hip replacement surgery.
The hospital staff faced accusations of failing to respond in a timely manner in the time after Mr Harper had awakened from his surgical procedure. Mr Harper reported a feeling of breathlessness and was suffering from chest pain after his operation. Additionally the hospital staff were found to have neglected to provide specialised medical stockings to Mr Harper that are designed to prevent clots. It was also reported that Mr Harper faced a wait of three days for physiotherapy, something that is routinely given the same day as the surgical procedure.
A Trafford Healthcare Trust spokeswoman released a statement explaining how Mr Harper had been provided care from a separate health trust that had been leasing both operating theatre space and hospital beds at Trafford General Hospital. The spokeswoman continued by stating that all the procedures that were involved in the operation had been examined closely. She concluded her statement by remarking that all the organisations involved in the incident had learnt some hard lessons therein.
Additionally a Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust spokesperson released a statement in which great regret was expressed in regards to the circumstances that led up to Mr Harper’s untimely death.
A pensioner has made plans to see an accident solicitor in the wake of a recent accident claim involving a trip-and-fall injury at a bus stop that resulted in fractures to both of her wrists.
In a report recently published by the Staffordshire Sentinel, Mrs Jean Ryder sustained the injuries while she was attempting to climb aboard a bus at a Burslem bus stop.
Mrs Ryder has stated that the personal injury claim was a result of the bus stop being left lit poorly in the wake of roadworks being carried out by the local council. Mrs Ryder also described the bus stop being so strewn with construction equipment so as to resemble nothing so much as a building site.
Due to the loose gravel and lumps of concrete everywhere, Mrs Ryder stated that she fell to the ground while attempting to step up into the vehicle.
The elderly pensioner, herself a grandmother, suffered breaks to both of her wrists that required her arms to be set in plaster for over four weeks.
Ms Ryder stated that the injuries she incurred have impacted her everyday life in a serious manner, as the simple tasks of eating and drinking have become a struggle for her.
The City Council for Stoke-on-Trent has commented that investigative efforts have begun into both the roadworks and the contractors responsible for them.
A spokesperson for the Council also stated that it sympathises with Mrs Ryder, expressing their condolences for her injuries.
Legal experts agree that if local highway departments neglect their duty to carry out proper inspections and fail to repair sections that are knowingly in need of remediation, any pavement tripping accidents that result in injuries may result in result in liability on their part.
One car accident claims cheat has been nabbed for his role in a crash for cash scheme that saw him pocketing thousands in personal injury compensation for injuries sustained by nonexistent passengers.
One Mr Kashif Mohammed made personal injury claims for people who had no involvement in any of the accidents in which he claimed them as injured parties.
Mr Mohammed has stated that a claims company actually encouraged him to “inflate” his damages. The company is currently under investigation as part of a related probe into the incidents.
However Mr Mohammed admitted to three counts of fraud relating to three separate traffic accident claims wherein he claimed compensation for “ghost” passengers that were nowhere near his car at the time, let alone in it.
The claims company even went so far to as supply people to serve as actors in order to represent the individuals Mr Mohammed claimed damages for, Newcastle Crown Court heard.
The prosecutor for the case stated that the defendant has admitted he made injury claims for the passengers who were allegedly riding in his vehicle on three separate occasions. The names of the people he gave were family members who had never been inside the vehicle, and Mr Mohammed was paid more than £10,000 on claims for which he had no entitlement.
The first accident claim was submitted in June of 2008 after a collision between a Volvo and a Rover. As driver of the Volvo, Mr Mohammed won personal injury compensation of over £8,000 for two family members who were not present at the time.
In January of the following year, a worker employed by Mr Mohammed reversed his delivery van into Mohammed’s VW Sharan. Again Mr Mohammed made a claim in which a relative was falsely present, claiming an additional £2,550.
Finally the third accident claim occurred in July of 2009 when Mr Mohammed braked abruptly in his Ford Galaxy, which caused the driver behind him to collide with the Galaxy’s rear end.
After one pupil was left with permanent eye damage and a fractured skull after an A-level results celebration, a headmaster faces fines of £20,000 for his role in the accident claim.
Telling Mr John Summerfield that due to his ‘acts of folly’ the headmaster demonstrated an incredible lack of sound judgment when he took some mildly intoxicated students up to the roof of Mereyside’s Sacred Heart Catholic college. One student suffered a personal injury claim when he fell through a skylight on the roof to the floor below.
The 65 year old Summerfield now faces an order to pay over £20,000 in personal injury compensation costs for his part in the injury. Last month a jury of his peers convicted the headmaster of being in breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act when he broke school rules that forbid access to the roof by anyone. The Crown Court of Liverpool found that Mr Summerfield ignored the risks inherent in his actions despite the good intentions of his actions.
The judge was informed that during the school’s celebration party, Mr Summerfield escorted a dozen sixth form students through a handful of locked doors in order to access the roof. The students were warned by Mr Summerfield to avoid the skylights whilst they examined some renovation work from above, but 18 year old Joel Murray stumbled onto one. Joel plummeted 8 feet down to land in the hallway below.
The student broke several ribs, damaged both eyes, perforated an eardrum, and fractured his skull. The court was informed that Joe’s injuries would haunt him for the rest of his natural life.
The accident claim occurred two years ago last August in the wake of the students receiving the results of their A levels. While none of the students were determined to be legally drunk at the time of the incident, the court was told that the possibility that the students might have been feeling the initial effects of alcoholic beverages could not be denied.
As Bonfire Night rapidly approaches, many accident claim industry experts urge all Brits across the country to not only try to avoid blowing their own hands off in a fit of fireworks-induced frenzy but also to ensure that their home insurance policies are up to date and with proper personal injury compensation cover.
In excess of 6,600 people are injured in and treated for accidents related to fireworks on a yearly basis. Have of these recorded injuries occur in children under the age of 16.
Home owners could be in for an unpleasant jolt to their wallets if an accident occurs on their property and their personal liability cover is not enough to handle the personal injury claim of the injured party or parties.
Many industry experts have spoken out on the dangers that are looming this week when we go out to remember the 5th of November. Julie Owens, home insurance head for price comparison site moneysupermarket.com commented that with thousands of Bonfire Night fans making plans to watch fireworks for an evening of excitement. Ms Owens urged Guy Fawkes fans that safety is incredibly important due to the highly dangerous nature of fireworks. Even a simple sparkler can cause terrible damage, she added, as the seemingly-innocuous family favourite can grow as hot as 2,000°C.
If you are planning to put on a home fireworks display, the insurance expert continued, you should check your home insurance policy before someone ends up terribly burnt on the bonfire. Apart from the obvious pain and injuries suffered by the victim, said Ms Owens, the monetary cost to you may be quite high if your personal liability cover comes up short.
After a protracted legal battle, a work accident claim has finally led to a payout for a former employee of food manufacturing giant Nestle after she underwent a leg amputation procedure due to the accident.
50 year old worker Susan Ashe was operating a small forklift truck as its driver when the accident claim occurred in April of 2007 at Nestle Confectionery UK’s York premises.
Due to a leaky roof, Ms Ashe found it necessary to negotiate the forklift in a circumnavigation of several bins that had been placed strategically in order to collect the rainwater. The personal injury claim occurred when Ms Ashe, while attempting to avoid the bins, lost control and collided with a barrier.
Throughout the haze of pain from the collision, Ms Ashe recalls seeing that one of her feet was facing an impossible angle. Soon later, once she was in hospital, she was told that there would be no alternative for her except to amputate the limb just blow her knee.
Ms Ashe then entered into a long legal battle with her employer. Finally she has received settlement, which remains undisclosed in regards to its sum, as a personal injury compensation from Nestle. Ms Ashe will be using the funds in order to adapt her home to be more accessible for her, since her mobility has been much reduced after the amputation surgery.
A spokesperson for the candy and sweets company commented on the entire incident by stating that Nestle takes the safety and health of its workers and employees extremely seriously.
In related news, figures recently released from the Health and Safety Executive revealed that for the 2009-2010 financial year, employees suffered over 230,000 reportable injuries whilst in the course of their duties for their respective employers.
After being the recipient of injuries that have been called “catastrophic,” a man has been awarded High Court damages of almost £14 million in a medical negligence claim related to a kidney donation to his father.
Sitting in London, Mr Justice Spencer was told that the 38 year old – identified only in High Court documents as XYZ – lodged a personal injury claim after a February 2008 transplant operation.
During the removal of the man’s right kidney, his left kidney suffered an irreversible failure. As a result XYZ then was in need of an immediate transplant himself, which he was lucky enough to receive from his sister. Elizabeth-Anne Gumbel QC told the High Court that XYZ paid a dear price for coming to the aid of his father.
The Trustees for Portsmouth Hospitals NHS admitted liability in the personal injury compensation case based on the determination that the surgeon who conducted the procedure was reckless in addition to negligent. The surgeon is also to be subjected to General Medical Council proceedings for his actions.
Concerned with compensation assessment matters, the four-day-long hearing is due to the Trust’s disputation of a portion of the injured party’s claims, especially those in regards to his medical expenses and future projected earnings losses. Compensation for both amounts are considered to be potentially substantial.
Ms Gumbel stated that in order to give his father a higher quality of life for his retirement, XYZ was motivated to make kidney dialysis treatment for his father unnecessary. While this kidney donation was achieved with success, she added, the claimant did it at great cost to himself due to the life-threatening, torrential haemorrhaging that occurred throughout the course of the surgical procedure.
Ms Gumbel also added that the life of XYZ has been truncated by approximately 10 years as a result. Additionally the man now faces another transplant sometime in the inevitable future, considerable problems to his health, and also has experienced the traumatic nature of undergoing dialysis himself as well.
As Halloween ends and November begins, motor vehicle operators in Scotland were made aware of data that makes the month the most dangerous in regards to the prevalence of motor accident claims.
Shocking new figures released by the Scottish Government revealed that a typical November sees more than 1,500 casualties caused by traffic accident claims. This exceeds the monthly average rate by more than 100 injuries sustained in motor accidents, the research figures show.
One injury specialist from personal injury lawyers Accident Claims Scotland urged motor vehicle operators to be more careful on Scotland’s roadways during the coming month.
Mr Martin Haggarty spoke upon the dangers of driving without attention and care for the other motorists and pedestrians that share the road, stating that inattentive driving is the primary cause for motor accident claims. What’s worse, continued Mr Haggarty, is that those most often victimised by bad drivers are blameless and responsible in their own motoring.
November brings both weather that is steadily worsening as well as days that are constantly becoming shorter and shorter, two factors considered to be key for the statistical hike in motor accidents, which range from a simple case of whiplash to paralysis or even death.
Based on official figures for the years 2004 through 2008, an average of nearly 17,000 road casualties occur across the length and breadth of Scotland every year. The figures also show that the safest month for driving in Scotland is April, where the average number of motor accident victims only number 1,278.
In related news, one study recently determined that hundreds of road accidents could be avoided if instead of setting the clock back an hour in the autumn.
The study argues that if the UK would adopt the Central European Time scheme, which advances the time throughout the year by one hour, the end result would save lives by decreasing the amount of time spent driving in dangerous peak darkness hours.