Injury Lawyers UK Ltd -
- Links - Main Site | Personal Injury News | Claims Process | Useful Links
Registered Offices -
For an immediate call back text “claim” to 07883 504919
Contact us using the form above or call and speak with one of our Legally Trained
Specialists about your Personal Injury Accident.
Our experts, with a minimum of 10 years experience, will explain everything to you and give you an honest opinion on your No Win No Fee Claim.
We obtain the maximum compensation for your Injuries claim -
Personal Injury News & Case Law Updates
Personal Injury Claim Update
Work Accident Update
Employee and member of public Killed by Faulty Crane
A Hydraulic crane which was inadequately
maintained has killed an employee and on
a building site in Battersea in a tragic work accident.
The crane was 165ft high and collapsed only
weeks after it was found to be faulty an inquest heard on 5th March 2012. All 24 bolts on the crane had been replaced
de to wear and tear and them being found to be "looser than
expected". One of the men was
working on his car near to the site when the crane fell. Thought are with the families of the two men.
It would seem that the accident was caused by
lack of maintenance of the crane which ought to have taken place. The fact that 24 bolts were replaced shortly
before the accident would seem to demonstrate that the assessment of the crane
was inadequate.
If you have been involved in a work accident and would like to discuss your options in relation to both your rights and also making a claim please do contact us on 0800 1123 156 or text "Claim" to 07883504919.
Cycle Crash Injuries treble in the
last 5 years.
The number of cyclists badly injured in
collisions with cars and lorries has almost trebled in five years according to
a study at one London Hospital.
Cases rose from 24 in 2004 to some 69 in 2009
the tragic figures demonstrate further that those hit by HGV's were more likely
to suffer fatal injuries.
While riding your bikes on London Roads or anywhere else for that matter please ensure that you always were appropriate high visibility clothing, a helmet and don't take unnecessary risks. Ensure that you give HGV's and other large vehicles space to see you and don't over or undertake them if you can avoid it.
If you have been involved in a bike accident
and wish to make a claim for personal injury please do contact us on 0800 1123
156 or text "Claim" to 07883504919.
Cameron to Consider Minimum Impact
Speed for Whiplash Claims.
David Cameron has again recently set about
reducing the rights of injured victims of accidents to make a claim against
insurance policies. The Prime Minister
has suggested introducing a minimum impact speed of 15mph for accidents
resulting in whiplash claims.
He is reported to also be putting forward
further options to reduce and crack down on whiplash claims. All of the options are featured in a private
members bill by the former justice secretary Jack Straw last year.
Under the reforms drivers would be required
to obtained more detailed and expert evidence of their injury and the fees paid
to solicitors would be slashed therefore reducing victims access to the legal
system.
Effectively every driver on the road, by law,
is required to purchase and hold insurance for their vehicles. The purpose of such insurance is not solely
for large insurance companies to make profits but instead to compensate those
involved in accidents which result from negligence of their policy
holders. If rises in premiums truly were
linked to claims then insurance companies profits would surely be falling
significantly?
We all pay insurance premiums, often for many
years, and any limit by government other than through the courts would be
unjust on the part of the Policy holder and the ones paying their premiums for
exactly the reason being discussed - incase someone is hurt in the accident and
to replace the car they were driving at the time.
Mr Cameron stop taking away our rights
against private companies to compensate us under a contractual obligation they
have. It is for the industry as a hole
to clean up and prevent fraudulent claims. Insurance companies themselves pass their own customers to Solicitors to
make claims for whiplash, if they were so concerned this would most certainly
not occur.
£100million boost for Accident &
Emergency
Casualty units are to be upgraded in London
as part of a £100million boost to hospitals announced today.
Andrew Lansley, health secretary gave the
boost by announcing fresh concessions on the Health and Social Care Bill. More
than 40 projects will benefit from the reforms.
London's Air Ambulance to Carry
Blood Supplies
Today it was announced that London Air
Ambulance Service will start to carry blood supplies as the first Emergency
Service to do so in the UK.
It is reported that there are some 100
incidents each year where the air ambulance attend accidents where blood is
requested on arrival at Hospital. Having
these supplies on board will help more patients survive by carrying out blood
transfusions at the scene of accidents.
Client Update
Mr M has today started his claim for personal
injury resulting from a work accident. Whilst bending over to pick up a box in an isle of a warehouse he was
hit by a forklift truck knocking him to the ground. As a result he has lost 3 teeth and injured
his neck. His work accident claim will
be made due to his employers being held vicariously liable for the negligent
driving of the forklift truck driver.
Client Update
2/3/2012
Mr J has just started his claim for personal injury due to his car accident. He was hit from behind by a van and has suffered whiplash to his neck and back. As a result of the car accident he has also lost some time of work for which we will recover his lost earnings as part of his car accident claim.
Miss K had a work accident last week, she contacted us and we have already been able to help her with Private Physiotherapy to help her recover from her injuries as a result of her work accident. Her accident claim is being made as she had to lift heavy items at work as a result has injured her lower back.
Mr A is assisting his children make a claim for personal injury as a result of their car accident. They were passengers in their mothers car when the car accident occurred. as a result they both went to the Dr's due to pain in their necks and back. We should have their car accident claims dealt with very quickly and their car accident compensation will be paid into an account at court for them to use when they are 18!
Article.
I've had an accident at work. What should I do?
As you can imagine, work accidents are a common place. Not all accidents result in a claim sometimes work accidents are just that - Accidents. However all work accidents must be recorded within the accident book and no matter how minor you think it was at the time only time will tell. Recording work accidents in the accident book at work has two purposes, it allows your employers to make changes to procedures so as to prevent a more serious accident next time. The second is to ensure that you are able to clearly record the circumstances in which the work accident occurred.
If you choose to make a work accident claim the accident book will prove vital in determining exactly how your work accident happened. So ensure that the circumstances of the accident and what caused it are accurately recorded.
The injuries sustained in work accidents
which result in a work accident claim range from very minor to the most
catastrophic injuries. Depending on the
severity of the injuries sustained in your work accident you should
immediately, or within at least two weeks, go to either A&E or your GP the
purpose for which is two fold. The most
obvious is for treatment. Secondly they
will record again how your injuries occurred so there can be no dispute later
on.
When you return to work after your work
accident, ensure that the management investigate the same, don't let them
simply blame you!!!! They often do so that they deter you from making a work
accident claim. Often work accidents
occur due to their negligence, watch out for changes in procedures if the don't
occur and the risk of another similar accident occurring still exists point it
out to them. It often means they have
not undertaken a new risk assessment to ensure your safety at work.
Contact a Solicitor! Here at Injury Lawyers UK Ltd we handle work
accident claims all the time. Lets just say we are the experts you need to
assist yo with your work accident claim. To contact us call 0800 1123 156 or text "Claim" to
07883504919. Click here to complete our
online claim form.
Article
1/3/2012
Legal Services Act 2007 - How it affects you!
The Legal Services Act 2007 came into full
swing late last year and the effects are starting to be seen throughout the
legal environment. The main changes are
the introduction of a new Solicitor Practice structure called an Alternative
Business Structure or ABS for short.
Applications are already being made by some
of the larger corporations to become regulated to offer restricted legal
services and assist you with any legal issues you may have. The ABS structure allows corporations and
individuals who are not legally qualified to invest in Solicitors practices for
the very first time. The appointment of
Non Lawyer managers will also become a common practice. At all times however the main Principle of
the firm must be a Qualified Solicitor who is regulated by the Law Society and
The Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA).
This means that with the outside investment
of private individuals the solicitors practice has be benefit of both business
strategy and growth. It will also allow
companies which offer a very good service to their clients to go on to assist
them in house with their legal issues. It will allow greater scope for choice and give clients the freedom to
use a larger firm that maybe they would have considered in the first instance. Many Claims Management Companies will convert
to an ABS so as to be able to help their clients in house without having to
utilise a Panel of Solicitors meaning a more continuous relationship with the
company.
Watch out for some familiar names when you
require the assistance of a solicitor in the future.
Client Update
28/2/2012
Mr & Mrs P have started their claim as a
result of their recent car accident. They were hit on the side due to the other party pulling out of a side
road. Their car has unfortunately been
written off. They are making a car
accident claim for Personal Injury as they have suffered significantly since
last week with their neck and back. They
have been to the Dr as a result of the injury they have sustained in their car
accident. As part of their car accident
claim we have arranged Physiotherapy for them in order to help them recover
from their injuries.
Mst C was with his mother when she drove into
the back of the car in front causing him to hit his head on the door and he has
been complaining of pain in his neck and headaches since. His father his helping him make a claim he
has been assured that the claim will not affect his wife's insurance policy in
any way. Making a car accident claim
against someone you know is often worrying. Don't forget it does not cost you a penny or your friend. A car accident claim for personal injury does
not affect the drivers insurance policy in any way. The Car accident itself is
what has the negative affect NOT the number of claims following the same. We have explained this to Mst C's
Father. Imagine if you hit a double
decker bus with 100 people on it, if your insurance company penalised you 100
time for every person on the bus you would never get insurance again.
Article
I had an accident and now someone is claiming
Personal Injury. How does this affect
me?
First of all don't panic!!! Accidents happen
all the time and most of us who are responsible have car insurance for this
very reason. Imagine over the last 10
years how much you have paid for your car insurance!! Well this is why you have
done so.
Claims for Personal Injury do not really
affect you in any way. If the accident
was your fault then your insurance policy has already responded to pay for the
damage to the vehicles. You would have
also more often than not had to pay your Policy Excess when getting your car
fixed or it was deducted from the value of the same.
Unless your No Claims Discount was protected
you would also have lost in the region of 25% of the same at this time
already. NOTHING further will be charged
to you or deducted due to a claim for personal injury!!!!
If you have had a car accident and wish to
make a personal injury claim please contact us on 0800 1123 156 or text
"Claim" to 07883504919.
Article.
Slips & Trips Explained
Have you been involved in an accident where you
have either slipped or tripped in a public place? Often it is hard to know if you have a claim
or not or indeed what to do next.
There are two types of personal injury claims that generally arise in this type of accident. These will be dealt with below.
Occupier's Liability - If your accident was
in a shop or a public building or someones house your claim will be dealt with
under the Occupiers LiabilityAct 19XX. Under Section 2 of the Occupiers Liability Act the occupier, often the
owner or leasee of the property have to ensure that you are "reasonably
safe" whilst on their premises. What is "reasonable" is something that is to be considered on
a case by case basis. Generally however
there are guidelines in place to guide owners on what they need to do to keep
you safe on their premises. For example
the case of Ward -v- Tescos involved a customer that slipped on split yoghurt
in Tesco and made a personal injury claim as a result of the injuries she
sustained. The outcome was a set of
guidelines for such stores to use in ensuring that they keep their customers
"reasonably" safe on their premises. Complying with these Guidelines will afford them a common law defence to
any claims that may arise. This is
provided of course they are able to prove the procedures= were in place at the
the time of the accident and being followed. The guideline in brief are:
A regular inspection system of the isles and in particular those at the entrance, fruit and veg, flower and fridge freezer isles.
Our solicitors are very experienced in this
area and have years of experience in overturning purported defences as detailed
above. If you have been involved in an
accident in a shop or somewhere you feel the occupier owned you a greater duty
of care call us today on 0800 1123 156 or text "Claim" to 07883504919.
If your accident occurred on a Highway, ie.
in a street which is maintained by the local council your claim will fall to be
dealt with under the Highways Act 1980 and in particular Section 41 of the
same. This clearly states that the
highways authority must inspect the highways and keep them reasonably free from
defects likely to cause injury. Recent
amendments to this Act make it an obligation to grit such roads also inn inclement
weather.
In order to claim for personal injury as a
result as a slip or trip in the street you must first demonstrate that the
defect that caused you to fall is an "actionable" defect. What this means is any trip hazard has to be
either in excess of 1 inch on the footpath and over 2.5 inches in the
carriageway, and be dangerous.
If however the Local authority can prove that
at the time of the accident and in the proceeding year they inspected the area
on a regular basis and indeed repaired defects as they occurred they could be
afforded a Statutory Defence in accordance with Section 58 Defence. More often than not the Local Authority will
plead this defence.
Our solicitors are experts in considering these type of defences to ensure that all is done to progress your claim if there is a gap in the defence which can be established. If you have tripped, slipped or fallen in a street and wish to make a claim for personal injury please to contact us on 0800 1123 156 or text "Claim" to 07883504919.
18/3/2011
Client Updates
Over the last number of weeks we have helped a number of clients commece their claims for personal injury, whether these be work injury claims, road traffic accident claims or slips & trips. Some of the details are below:
Mrs K from London - Mrs K was a passenger in her husbands car when it was hit from behind by another car as the husband slowed down. She sufferred whiplash as a result of the same and is now making a personal injury claim for compensation.
Mr H from Reading - Mr H tripped whilst at work on something which was on the floow which should not have been placed there. He sustained significant injuries requiring operations and may have to have further operations in the future. He is now making a work injury claim for compensation not only to obtain compensation but in order to be able to obtain private medical treatment for his future requirments.
Mr R from Warickshire - Mr R was involved in an accident at work and tripped due to debris on the floor and an unsafe system of work. Our specialist solicitors are now helping him make his work injury claim.
16/2/2011
Health & Safety at Work Update
Company Fined After Man Suffers Horrific Burns to Legs
A company in Sevenoaks has been fined £20,000.00 after a teenager has sufferrred significant burns to his legs at a depot on 26 October 2009. The teenager, 18 at the time of the accident, was in a shed at the site spraypainting a lightening tower.
As he walked accross the shed to get to his locker and find a change of clothes, he walked close to a gas burner which was being used to heat the workshop. Inadvertantly prior to this in the process of spraying the tower he had spilt thinners on his trousers. His clothes caught fire and he ran outside where he was helped by colleagues who hosed him down.
An Investigation by the HSE found the spray shed had several Health & Safety issues and failings. Paint containers should have had their lids on and been stored in fire resistant boxes. The company should have also have been aware that the mixing of paint and thinners in the shed would have lead to a potentially explosive atmosphere. Given this a gas burner with an open flame should not have been used in the same space.
This led to the accident at work and the significant injuries sufferred by their employee. The company had executed a risk assessment but had not implemented the measures identified. A further action plan dated 3 years after the risk assessment reiterated the same measures. This ulitmately led to the company pleading guilty of breaching Section 2 (1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 leading to their fine.
Lichfield Food Firm Prosecuted after Conveyor Incident
A supplier of prepared salads has been prosecuted after a man broke his are in a moving conveyor belt. The accident at work was considered at Tamworth Magistrates Court where it was heard that Mr Hussain was cleaning a conveyor, which had been installed approximately 6 months prior to the accident which caused his injuries at work.
Mr Hussain, 29 had his forearm broken in four places and his thumb and index finger were also fractured when his right arm managed to get pulled between the rollers of the conveyor belt. As a result of his accident at work he spent 19 days in hospital and has had 2 operations with further surgery being required.
The Court was told that the cost of actually fitting a guard to the machine was just £600.00. It was held that this was a preventable accident that has caused permanent and debilatating injuries at work. The company was fined £10,000.00 and ordered to pay costs.
Why not read our recent article on the importance of Health and Safety Regulations at Work and the increasing publicity regarding the "Red Tape" society we live in and many more. Click here
13/2/2011
Client Update
Over the last number of days Freeinjuryclaim.com have started dealing with a number of new claims for clients with varying degrees of injuries sufferred as a result of all types of accidents. Here are just a few claims commenced today on behalf of new clients.
Miss B from Walthamstow - Sufferred Brain damage as a result of a Hit and Run on Forest Road in 2010 and spent one month in hospital due to her injuries and continues to suffer significantly. Our No Win No Fee Solicitors are now persuing a claim for personal injury for her against the MIB under the Untraced Drivers Agreement. The police were never able to identify the car involved in this accident which has left Miss B with long lasting physical injuries and permanent brain damage as a result.
Mrs J from Walthamstow - Tripped in the street on a defect caused by wearing in the road due to busses leaving a 4 inch depression causing her to fall and injure her shoulder. Our No Win No Fee Solicitors are now pursuing a claim for her against the local authority for breach of their statutory duty to maintain the highway. Mrs J immediately took photos of the accident location and has monitored the same over a number of months in order to demonstrate that the local authority have failed to maintain the area.
Mrs M from Farnbrough - Sufferred a significant ankle injury whilst at work in an operating theatre due to working in a very confined space and too much equipment making it difficult to move around. Our Specialist No Win No Fee Solicitors are now assisting her with a claim for personal injury and will be providing her with the appropriate rehabilitation services in order to assist her on her way to recovery and obtain the appropriate accident compensation.
Miss H from Swinton - Was in her mother's car when they were involved in a Road Traffic Accident. After reassuring her that making a claim against her mother's insurance policy will not affect her No Claims Discount or Premiums we are now on our way to obtaining rehabilitation services for her and the maximum Personal Injury Compensation possible on a No Win No Fee basis.
12/2/2011
Case Law Update
Night Club Owners Duty of Care
Everett & Anor -v- Comojo UK Ltd (T/A The Metropolitan & Ors)
CA 18/1/11
The Court of Appeal recently heard a case to determing the relationship between the management of a nightclub and it's guests. The court were asked to decide whether the guests were sufficiently proximite to justify the imposition of a duty of care to the guest, as the risk of one guest assualting another was foreseeable. Whilst there was accordingly a duty of care owed by the management of the nightclub for the actions of thirdparties on its premises, the scope and standard of that duty of care had to be just, fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The court of Appeal Held that as between the nightclub management and it's guests, there should not be a higher degree of foreseeability than is required pursuant to the Occupiers Liability Act 1957.
Damages
Okoro -v- Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis (2010)
QBD 17/1/2010
Richard Seymour QC (sitting as DJ of the High COurt) held that the Claimant in the above matter had been subjected to wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and assusalt in respect of his arrest and detention for four hours by the police in circumstances where evendence showed the arreast could not have been justified. The Claimant was awarded Damages of £2000.00 for the arrest, false imprisonment and assualt and a sum of £11,000.00 for pain suffering and loss of amenity in respectr of a wrist and knee injury sustained in the course of his arrest and detention.
4/2/2011
Case Law Update
Accidents Abroad
Gouldbourm -v- Balkan Holidays Ltd (2010)
EWCA CIV372 [2010] All ER (D) 135 (Mar)
Mrs Gouldbourm made a claim for personal injury as a result of an accident she sufferred whilst on holiday on 17 January 2004. Whilst on a Ski Trip which she booked through the Defendant Company she fell on a ski slope during the course of the six day package holiday in Bulgaria.
She claimed that the accident was due to the negligence of the Ski Instructor who was provided to her as a part of her holiday pakage booked prior to her departure. Her allegations were that he failed to adequately assess her abilities before allowing her to ski down a Red Run, an intermediate level run. The accident took place after just a day and a half skiing, and she was allowed down the slope despite struggling on the nursery slopes earlier on the same day. The Claimant failed at First Instance. The judge held that the proper test was whether the Ski Instructor excercised reasonable care and skill as measured against local Bulgarian Standards which was a "sink or swim" approach as oppossed to the more Western European aproach which is client centred.
The matter went to the Court of Appeal where it was asked whether or not recognised international standards could be applied to the case rather than local standards in claims bought in line with Regulation 15 of the PakageTravel, Pakage Holidays and Package Tour Regulations 1992 (SI 1992/3288). Under the regulations the defendant remained liable for the proper performance of the contract they entered into with the Claimant at the time of booking.
The Claimant failed with her claim with the Court of Appeal dismissing the appeal. The Judge below was entitled to reject any case based on the FIS Rules, and to find that the Claimant had not established a breach of the Bulgarian Standards.
Quantum of Damages
Clarke -v- Maltby (2010)
EWHC (QB)
Judge Owen J was asked to assess the level of Personal Injury Compensation for the Claimant in the above claim. On 24th September 2004 the Claimant, Mrs Clarke was a front seat passenger in a car being driven by the Defendant Mrs Maltby. As a result of a car crash Mrs Clarke sustained multiple and life-threatening injuries. She sufferred a brain injury in the accident as well as an acute psychiatric reaction. The main issues to be considered by Owen J was to determine whether the degree of brain injury had an impact on and affected Mrs Clarke's ability to practice as a Solicitor and to asses Special Damages for her loss of earnings as well as her claim for personal injury in terms of General Damages.
The Claimant made a substantial recovery from her injuries sufferred in the road traffic accident in terms of her physical injuries, her case was that she had become increasingly aware of a reange of problems which included mental fatigue, cognative disfunction, disinhibition, temper, memory impairment, compromised and inappropriate speech and word finding among other things. At the time of the hearing before Owen J the Claimant's ongoing symptoms were all said to be attributable to to brain injury and were therefore unlikely to resolve. As a result her career as a Banking Transactions Solicitor was no longer possible. The Defendant rejected this and whilst accepting she suffered from some ongoing fatigue and weakness in memory and executive function they argued that the Claimant had a retained earning capacity of £120,000.00 - £130,000.00 gross annually as a fixed share equity partner of a regional firm of solicitors.
The judge rejected the Defendant's claims of exageration and accepted the Claimant's medical evidence. She was awarded nearly £1million pounds in Personal Injury Compensation as a result of the Road Traffic Accident.
3/2/2011
Case Law Update
Scout Association -v- Barnes (2010)
CA (Civ Div) 21/12/2010 (Ward LJ, Smith LJ, Jackson LJ)
The Claimant was a 13 Year Old boy in the Scouts and was involved and playing in a game called "Objects in the Dark" When he sufferred a head injury by hitting his head against the wall. The game involved the lights of the Scout Hut being turned off and the children moving around to be the first to locate objects.
At first instance the claim was allowed full without any contributory negligence in that the turning off of the lights caused a significant increase in the dangers of playing the game. The game was dangerous to the extent that the Defendant had breached their Duty of Care. The Defendant appealed on the basis that the judge did not take into account the "wider implications" of the finding or the social benefit of the activity. The Appeal was dismissed.
Held by the Court of Appeal: Appeal denied. Jackson LJ (dissenting):(i) The Judge below did not take into account the social value of the Scouting movement in determining whether the Defendant had exercised reasonable care, if he had he would have reached a different conclusion. (ii) The increased risk of turning the lights off does not outweigh the social benefits. The increased excitement encourages people to join or remain in the Scouts. Smith LJ:(i) It is clear from the judgement that the social value of the activity was a factor the judge took into consideration. (ii) The judge thought that the added excitement of turning the lights off did not justify the risks of personal injury. (iii) The fact the judge did not add a few words to his judgement, specifying that he had taken the social benefit of the activity into account, should not undermine his conclusion. Ward LJ: The Court of Appeal should respect the judgement of trial judges who have a better feel for the case; here the trial judge applied the law correctly to the facts.
Thretfall -v- Hull City Council (2010)
EWACA Civ 1147
The Claimant was a Street Scene Operative and whilst working for the Defendant in a team maintaining the gardens of vacant council houses and removing rubbish and debris left behind on the premises by the previous tennants. The accident was caused by a sharpe object in a bin bag full of rubbish. The Claimant cut his hand and made a claim against his employers for compensation for his work accident. There was no way of determining the nature of the sharpe object except that it was in the bag. The Claimant claimed that the qulity of gloves provided to him was not high enough and better quality gloves ought to have been provided. The claim failed at first instance, the judge held that the risk of laceration in the Claimant's role was not forseeable and was very low indeed. The Claimant failed.
Held By Court of Appeal: Appeal accepted. The risk assessment performed by the Defendant was defective Regulations 4 and 6 of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 were not satisfied by the risk assessment. Legal Practitioners should always plead both regulations. The risk assessment should have specifically dealt with the risk of laceration and the type of protective gloves required. The manufactoers description of the gloves provided by the Defendant clearly identified that they were suitable only for minimal risks. The risk to the Claimant was not minimal.
Miss A from Southend received £3250.00 due to a Work Accident and says “I was very happy with the way you worked on my claim. I was worried I might lose my job but thank you for reassuring me. Work have even changed the way we all work now”