Angela Fitzpatrick

Government changes to the way personal injury compensation claims are funded will fundamentally tip the scales of justice in favour of the guilty party according to No Win No Fee personal injury lawyers.

Claim Today Solicitors a national personal injury firm says that from today, April 1st 2013, victims of accidents that were someone else’s fault will be liable to pay insurance charges and legal fees from out of their compensation.  Up to now the guilty defendants covered these fees and charges but they will now eat into the victims pay-outs instead.

One key element of these charges is an insurance policy against paying the defendant’s legal costs. This is a vital financial safeguard that makes the NO Win No Fee system work.  In catastrophic injury cases this premium can run into tens of thousands of pounds.  This will now have to come out of the victim’s damages that are meant to pay for care and rehabilitation.

Additionally a big reduction in the costs victim’s lawyers can claim from the defendants insurers will also hit the number of cases that are dealt with by solicitors. Many complex cases will be economically unworkable on a NO Win No Fee basis.  Some victims will find themselves without representation and at the mercy of the guilty party’s insurers for the level of their compensation payments. Others will simply get no compensation at all.

Angela Fitzpatrick Head of Personal Injury at CTS said, “This is a tragic day for all innocent accident victims and for our justice system.  The civil law is supposed to restore the lives of innocent victims to their original condition at the expense of the guilty party.  Now thanks to the changes to the NO Win No Fee system that rolls out from today the innocent will be punished and guilty let off the hook.”

The post Government Makes the Innocent Pay and Helps the Guilty Get Away appeared first on .

Trees: An accident waiting to happen

                                                                                        
Sam Zaffar

If you have trees growing in your front garden this year it may be worth getting them checked by a tree surgeon to guard against falling branches injuring members of the public says Sam Zaffar.

Due to the extreme weather conditions we have experienced in recent months, many trees in the UK are stressed and prone to dropping branches. You may have noticed branches, large and small, scattered about the ground where you live. Some fall in high winds while others will simply drop to the ground because they have died.

Whilst this is a natural phenomenon there may still be a cost to an individual who owns a tree that sheds a branch, which damages a person or their property.

Liability of Tree Owners

Occupiers and anyone with responsibility for trees must take reasonable steps to manage and reduce risk and this includes identifying and inspecting those trees that might cause injury or place property at risk. When hazardous trees are identified suitable remedial action must be taken to reduce risk.

Thus, looked at pessimistically, trees can be seen as ‘an accident waiting to happen’ – often accompanied by a related perception that such an ‘accident’ would bring with it consequent exposure to liability (criminal or civil) for the unlucky owner of that wayward tree.

Legislation

In broad terms through a combination of the common law (the torts of nuisance and negligence) and statute (the Occupiers’ Liability Acts of 1957 and 1984) persons with control over property have a duty to manage that property reasonably and thereby achieve a reasonable level of safety related to things on that property. Duties under the Occupiers Liability Act 1984 states under (s2) that the occupier owes a “common law duty of care” to visitors and those who enter his land or premises and this duty of care extends to trespassers.

If an accident or injury arises (e.g. from a diseased tree or branch falling over) then the question becomes, in liability terms, was that owner careful enough in how they managed that tree on their land? “Occupier” is generally taken to mean any person occupying or having control of premises, in this case land.

An equivalent duty also exists under the criminal law; here the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974 requires ‘reasonable safety’ to be achieved by persons controlling property as part of their business. This duty to provide for safety applies not just to safeguarding employees, but also providing safety for visitors and passers-by.

In addition to existing statutory requirements the Courts expect owners in control of places to which the public has access, such as parks and gardens, to take greater care than those in control of more remote woodland. The Courts expect occupiers to be prepared for children to behave less carefully than adults and thus consideration must be given to whether children might suffer injury from climbing trees which may have weak or damaged branches.

It is especially important to consider this when designing and managing sites such as recognised play areas, where parents can reasonably expect children to play unaccompanied. The Courts expect occupiers to make regular inspections of trees that, by reason of their position, could place people or property at risk. It is also expected that they should, if necessary, obtain specialist guidance on the interpretation of symptoms and assessment of tree safety and to take reasonable steps to reduce risk where appropriate. If specialist advice is sought, it should be followed: failure to do so could be interpreted as negligence.

Inspections of Trees

It is necessary to have in place suitable and sufficient systems and procedures to ensure that the risks are identified and controlled. A general principle to be observed is that, in areas where people or property could be at risk from tree failure, routine inspections should be carried out frequently enough to detect any hazards that may have recently developed.

The proximity of trees to people and property is a major factor in deciding how rigorously they need to be inspected (if at all) and what sort of remedial action (if any) is appropriate if significant hazards are found.

Hazards from large old trees sometimes develop quite rapidly, for which reason an inspection frequency of one year or more is generally advisable where such trees occur on high-usage sites. Inspections should also be made immediately after any exceptionally severe weather event that might have caused damage to trees. Also, on the basis of expert advice, it may be necessary to make detailed inspections of particular trees at prescribed intervals if they have been found to show signs of progressive deterioration in their condition.

Risk Assessments of Trees

No tree is entirely safe, given the possibility that an exceptionally strong wind could damage or uproot even a mechanically ‘perfect’ specimen.

A risk assessment will help establish what needs to be done and should consider the following:

• Location of the tree -in relation to people, property and adjacent thoroughfares
• Scale of harm likely to manifest if the tree did fall – what is at risk – people, buildings, vehicles. is it right next to a road? Is the road busy? Is it on a bend (poor visibility)? Is it close to a school?
• Nature and type of any damage, decay or fungal attack – what practicable steps could be taken to safeguard the tree?
• Likelihood of tree falling – e.g. was it old and diseased or exposed to high winds and vibration?

• Age and condition of the tree – including species as some trees are better able to withstand decay

Bringing a Claim

To succeed in proving negligence, you must show three things:

1. Duty of care. That the Defendant owed a duty to ensure the safety of the public and their property.

1. Breach of duty. The key question here is “Did the duty owed fall below the standard of care to be expected by the reasonable Defendant?” There must be a reasonable foreseeability of the harm. If you cannot prove that (on the balance of probabilities) the Defendant could reasonably have foreseen that this tree would fall in a strong winds and cause damage to persons or property, you are going to have problems. The Defendant can show they could not have foreseen this if they carry out inspections of the trees on a regular basis.

1. Causation – Did the breach cause the loss or harm suffered? If there is no breach, there can’t be causation. In the event you prove a breach, you would have to show that the ‘chain of causation’ was not broken so that the defendant could be held liable for causing the harm through their breach.

A plausible defence is that it was an Act of God – in this instance there is no claim unless you can show the Defendant knew or should have known that the tree was dangerous.

For further advice on pursuing a personal injury claim due to falling trees or tree branches, do not hesitate to contact Claim Today Solicitors’ specialist Public Liability Team on 0121 3742296.

The post An Accident Waiting to Happen appeared first on .

Angela Fitzpatrick

Unnecessary amputations for diabetics may be as a result of negligent care, says Angela Fitzpatrick.
Diabetes UK has warned that thousands of diabetes patients end up having a foot amputation because of slow treatment. The Charity claims that up to 80% of foot amputations could be avoided and that patients are suffering because many areas do not have services in place to quickly deal with foot ulcers and infections.

It is estimated that by 2015, the number of diabetes-related amputations is expected to rise to 7,000 a year.

Diabetes affects the circulation and many infections are more common in people who suffer from the condition. When infection occurs it is more likely to cause complications such as reducing blood flow to vessels in the feet and nerve damage which reduces sensation. This inhibits the healing process and in the most unfortunate cases amputation might be the only way to stop the infection spreading.

A report produced with the Society for Chiropodists and Podiatrists and NHS Diabetes points out that people with diabetes are more than 20 times more likely to have an amputation than the rest of the population.

It recommends that all hospitals have a multi-disciplinary footcare team as recommended in national guidelines. Unfortunately it is estimated that 40% of hospitals don’t have these teams in place.

Diabetics with foot problems may need treatment as a matter of urgency and the failure to receive the right care quickly can have severe consequences. If you or a member of your family has had an amputation that you feel could have been avoided you may be entitled to compensation.

Claim Today Solicitors we have dedicated professionals who are able to advise injured patients if they believe they have suffered unnecessary complications and you can call them on 0800 15 77 055 for an informal discussion about your case.

The post Unnecessary amputations for diabetics may be as a result of negligent care appeared first on .

The post Hello world! appeared first on .

Angela Fitzpatrick, Head of Personal Injury

A national firm of personal Injury solicitors has called the Government’s proposed changes to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme a betrayal of our emergency services.

Claim Today Solicitors represents some members of the Police Force when they are injured in the course of their duty.  Angela Fitzpatrick head of personal injury at CTS said“These cuts will hurt those who put themselves in harm’s way to protect the public. Police officers who are assaulted on duty will be subject to the same limits on compensation as the rest of the public.At a time when police officer numbers are subject to savage cuts and crime figures are not falling the remaining police men and women will bear the brunt of the fallout with fewer rights to compensation. It’s a disgrace.”

The cuts mean victims who have suffered injuries such as, permanent facial scaring, partial loss of a finger as a result of an assault will in future have to make do with an apology and support from already under resourced crime support units.

Worse still are the plans to reduce the level of compensation available for all claims below the value of £11,000. This would include anyone who suffers serious facial disfigurement, loss of taste/smell fractured hip, and a fractured skull.

The post Personal Injury Lawyers Slam Cuts in Criminal Injury Compensation appeared first on .

Mr B (33) from south London was as a ticket inspector for First capital Connect on the lines running from London to the south coast. He liked his job and he’d done it well for years. Until one day everything came crashing down on him.

He was sitting having his lunch in a station office at a small rickety table with a fridge perched on top of it. On top of the fridge an electric fan was running.

Was it an accident waiting to happen? Yes it was. The table collapsed, the fridge and the fan fell toward Mr B and he leapt to avoid the crush, he landed awkwardly on his shoulder and hit his head. Despite his efforts the fan hit him anyway and cut his hand.

Knocked out

Mr B lay unconscious in the debris for some time but no one came.  When he woke up he has to call an ambulance himself. He was taken to hospital and treated for concussion. His shoulder was so badly damaged doctors told him he would be out of action for months.

He was off work for six months and had three unsuccessful operations. After this long ordeal he continued to suffer terrible pain but he went back to work anyway.

First Capital Connect, were unable to give him any lighter work so he had struggle on in his normal job.  “It was hard to keep my balance walking up and down speeding trains every time I tried to steady myself using my hand I got a terrible shooting pain in my shoulder. It was agony”, said Mr B. Soon his injury was worse and he had to go off sick again.

Sacked on the sick

While off work and waiting on a fourth operation the train company sacked him. Mr B was gutted “I did offer to take holiday to cover this time off but even after my 10 years’ service they weren’t interested.  They just didn’t believe my pain was real”.

It was fourth time lucky for Mr B as his last operation was a success. No longer in pain he set about looking for a new job and after weeks of trying he landed a place through an agency as a meter reader. Great news but not as much money as his last job and no pension either.

Mr B turned to Claim Today Solicitors to make a claim against his old bosses for pain and suffering and loss of wages while he was off. CTS were sure there was no doubt that the employer was at fault for the accident they had failed to provide a safe working environment after all.

Mr B was surprised to hear from his solicitor that his losses included the wages and pension that he would have got if he’d been in his old job.

Louis Carter senior personal injury solicitor at CTS explains that by their actions the company had dramatically increased the compensation that the man needed to restore his lifestyle to where it was before the accident.

Louis Carter said “The law allows an innocent victim of an accident to claim to be put back in the position as if the accident had not happened.  In this case the client lost a proportion of is income up to retirement and reduction of the pension he could expect after he retires and all because he was dismissed for being off sick after an accident at work that wasn’t his fault.”

After some tough negotiations with First Capital Connect the case was settled by Claim Today and Mr B received £90,000. “I’m over the moon with the compensation it makes up for worry and pain I’ve suffered since the accident.  I’d definitely recommend CTS to my family and friends.” he said.

The post CTS Win Fare Deal for Ticket Inspector appeared first on .

Professional car cleaning is fast paced work it has to be in order keep prices down. The pressure is always on for each team finish their bit of the process quickly and pass it onto the next group.

Our unfortunate client, a 44 year old father from Slovakia, was kneeling beside an automatic car vacuuming the inside while colleague worked on the other side. Without warning the car lurched and collided with the side wall of the car park.

Our client’s upper body remained inside with his legs dragging underneath the runaway vehicle. As the car hit the wall his pelvis and lower back were crushed against pillar. Though his subsequent injuries were severe and painful he thinks pillar saved his life as it stopped him for going under the wheel.
Our experts think it is unlikely that the man will work again and that his suffering will last a life time. Claim Today Solicitors are seeking a settlement that reflects his situation.

Associate Director Vicky Blodwell said, “This dreadful accident should be a warning for everyone, there is no such thing as a totally safe occupation. The absence of safety procedures and appropriate work practices can make any job lethal.”

The post Car Wash Catastrophe appeared first on .

Our client gave chase in another car after being shown the getaway route by witnesses from the scene. When they caught up with the van they found it on its side in the road. The police were already in attendance but the thief had absconded.

As he rushed up to the vehicle to claim ownership and to check in with the officers our client did not notice a police dog on the loose. Unfortunately the dog had picked up his scent from the van and putting two and two together assumed he was a criminal. The rest is easy to imagine.

The dog rushed to do its duty and bit our client with full force on his left calf. The dog would not let go until his handler pulled him off. The pain the young man experienced was excruciating. The Alsatian has a bite pressure of nearly 4001b psi so of it’s no surprise. Our client was rushed to hospital where he was treated for his wounds. The dog handler later visited him there to apologise.

Claim Today Solicitors’ Jascaran Chahal who represented the man in his claim against the police said “This was an open and shut case, the police accepted liability after a short exchange of words between us. They then made an offer of £2000.00, which our client was happy to accept.”

The post Crime Victim Bitten by Police Dog Wins Apology and Pay-out appeared first on .

The foreign student who had only recently arrived in the UK was working for a well-known pizza chain to make some dough to get him going through college. He‘d been delivering the hot and tasty treats to customers on his scooter for just a few weeks when the unusual accident occurred.

The ambulance was approaching the delivery man on the opposite side of the road when it did a sudden U-turn into the path of our man sending him flying onto the pavement. The man was left with a painful open wound and his leg was broken in three places.

Fortunately an ambulance was of course at the scene and he received some medical treatment immediately. However, his injuries were severe and it was another 40 minutes before a second ambulance arrived with the equipment needed to lift him into the vehicle.

Since the accident he has undergone surgery and extensive rehabilitation therapy to aid his recovery. Sadly though he has been unable to work or attend college and now just wants to go home.

CTS legal executive Ali Chishty says “This is one of the strangest accidents I have ever dealt with. Our client has suffered terribly, both physically and emotionally, we are working hard to settle his case as quickly as possible so he can go back home and get on with the rest of his life.”

The post Pizza Delivery Disaster appeared first on .

The post Whiplash Claims Fall by 4.2% but it won’t be Reported in the Papers appeared first on .