Archives

Injuring your knee is usually very painful. As an area of the body that’s prone to injury, you can get anything ranging from some straightforward muscular swelling like a pulled muscle or a stretched ligament to the agony of a torn or ruptured ligament leaving you unable to walk properly for a long time, and even needing surgery.

The problem is that it is too easy to twist your knee to such an extent where you end up rupturing ligaments and needing reconstructive surgery.

A torn ligament may not be so bad, and can be repaired surgically but may be prone to tearing again and will leave you in a lot of pain for some time – but if the whole ligament ruptures, you will likely need a hamstring or patella graft (or similar) where pieces of the hamstring or patellar tendon are taken and fitted in the place of the ruptured ligament (hence the term ‘reconstruction’)
Read More

As a pedestrian, a motor vehicle is a dangerous piece of machinery. The consequences are often devastating when a pedestrian and a vehicle come together in an accident.

Placing fault for an accident involving a pedestrian and a vehicle often depends on the individual circumstances. The main questions to be asked would be what was the speed of the vehicle? When or how quickly did the pedestrian step into the road? And was the driver aware of their surroundings?

Even though a pedestrian could step out suddenly, not giving the vehicle time to react, the law is very pedestrian friendly. With that I mean that the law seems to be built around placing the blame or most of it, on the motorist.
Read More

Contributory negligence can be explained by a hypothetical scenario. Say Joe Bloggs sustained an accident at work whereby he caught his hand in machinery which should have been turned off but the off switch had jammed. Say it came to light that Joe Bloggs forgot to put down the safety screen which was company practice even if the machinery was turned off.

Joe Bloggs may still be able to recover compensation but in this scenario it is likely that the Defendant (i.e. the employer) would allege an amount of contributory negligence as it was Joe Bloggs who failed to put down the safety screen.

It could still be argued that it was not a safe system of work and that the machinery or the off switch was defective causing the accident. The Defendant may argue that Joe Bloggs was partly at fault for his own accident. Contributory negligence is often dealt with in terms of a percentage. The Defendant may argue that Joe Bloggs is 90% at fault for the accident whereas Joe Bloggs himself may suggest that his actions or failure to put down the safety screen meant he was 20% at fault for the accident. You can see that it all depends on the circumstances of the particular case.
Read More

It’s actually quite common for people not to be happy with their medical report – particularly in road accident cases. So why is this? Is the medical expert you have been sent to no good? Are your solicitors just not listening to you? What can you do?

To address something first, let me tell you the point of the medical report. We lawyers are, unfortunately, not medical experts. To win a claim for compensation, you need to commonly satisfy two key elements – that the injury was caused by a breach of duty, and that the injuries were caused as a result of the incident or accident. In legal speak – liability and causation.

We need a suitable medical expert to examine you, discuss your injuries and suffering with you, and look in to your medical past. The expert, who is independent and has a duty not to you, but to the courts, to provide their impartial medical opinion, writes a report containing all the facts needed for a lawyer to prove that your injuries were caused by negligence and value the claim. So if you are a genuine client, what could go wrong?
Read More

If you’re reading this, I’m going to assume you are already aware of what foot drop, or drop foot (as it is also referred to) is. But just in case…

What is Foot Drop?
As a brief description, as I am lucky enough to have this deceptively simple sounding condition, foot drop is the inability to raise your foot up and move it left due to some form of problem a peripheral nerve; in my case, the Common Peroneal Nerve. It may sound like something small – but unfortunately, with this condition, you cannot walk properly without a corrective splint.
Read More

Bouncy castle accident claims may be more common than you think. Unfortunately many accidents on bouncy castles can and do cause severe injuries – and these injuries are often to children or minors. Of course, bouncy castles can be a good source of entertainment for children but they are not as safe as we may suspect them to be.

One major issue seems to be with the variety of age groups that use bouncy castles. The danger here is that young children (such as at the ages of 2 to 10) are using the same bouncy castle at the same time as young teenagers (aged 13 to 16) for example. This is a recipe for disaster.

As we are all aware, children grow up at different speeds and some children aged 13 to 16 can be as heavy and as big as adults. This in turn causes a big danger to the younger more vulnerable children as they could be crushed or injured quite easily. Despite this danger being very clear and obvious, some children are still put into this dangerous situation.
Read More

Although it is never a good idea to get in a vehicle when the driver has been drinking, it does not mean that you cannot make a claim for personal injury if the trip ends in an accident – and let’s be honest, this is more likely than not.

The normal guideline is that as a passenger, you are an innocent party and cannot be at fault for the accident. This therefore entitles you to receive 100% of any compensation that is awarded.

However, getting into a vehicle knowing the driver has been drinking does have consequences for a claim for personal injury. The insurers of the driver of the vehicle will more than likely argue contributory negligence for passengers making a claim for personal injury in these types of circumstances.
Read More

Claims against the hospital – commonly medical negligence claims – are bound to be more sensitive that most personal injury claims.

We are fortunate in our country that we have access to the National Health Service (NHS) but we are still entitled to make a claim if we have sustained injury or have been adversely affected as a result of medical negligence. A first thought is that it can seem harsh to sue the NHS, given that it provides medical treatment free of charge and in theory it is only there to help people who need treatment.

On the other hand people pay taxes and in effect it is these taxes which run the NHS – so ultimately it is a debate in itself whether it is a free service. Another point is that the NHS, as with a private company, has insurance in place for the sole purpose of paying out compensation to injured victims. The fact is that there is no shame in making a compensation claim; if you have sustained a genuine injury as a result of medical negligence then it is your right to claim. The insurance the NHS has is actually more of a self insured department called the NHS Litigation Authority.
Read More

Supermarket cages (also known as roll containers, roll cages, roll pallets etc) can be a danger to you, whether you work in a supermarket or simply shop in one. Unfortunately many accidents involving supermarket cages have happened in the past and continue to happen to date.

The Research Report 009 titled “Safety of roll containers” describes a roll container as follows:

“Roll containers are half pallet-sized platforms, with four running castors and with a wire cage used to contain goods during transport. They may be used to transport goods in a lorry between a warehouse and a retail store for instance or within a supermarket to transport goods from the store room to the sales floor.”
Read More

The two words in the title of this blog are often used by insurance companies in personal injury claims; they can be seen as accusatory and are often misunderstood, and many people bringing a claim see them as two very big words.

Contributory Negligence is often used by insurers or Defendants (any person who a claim is brought against) in order to try and reduce the damages that they will have to pay to the innocent victim.

The way it works is that the Defendant will admit that they were at fault for the accident BUT allege that the Claimant (the injured person bringing the claim) was at least partly responsible for their injuries. To clear a common misunderstanding a Defendant cannot use this to say that the accident was the Claimants fault – there is no such thing as 100% Contributory Negligence. In fact the law was altered as long ago as 1945 to stop this happening.
Read More