Simmons v Davies
This case involved a man riding his motorcycle into the rear of a line of traffic that was halted suddenly due to the negligence of the driver at the front of the queue of traffic. He suffered a catastrophic brain injury and multiple orthopaedic and internal injuries such that he could not go back to work and needed a full support package of treatment rehab and care to help rebuild his life
After a fight with this driver’s insurer they accepted it was his fault. The Insurer only accepted this when the case was ready for a trial before the Judge.
Once this was resolved I secured an interim payment in excess of 100k and helped to pay for all of his needs. The case settled again close to a trail date which had been set for a Judge to work out what compensation he was to recover and I secured a seven figure settlement for my client.
Read More Here
Pinkerton v Elliot
This case involved a young boy who was aged 15 when he was knocked off his bicycle and suffered a fractured leg and facial fractures from a head injury and brain damage. The insurer accepted responsibility after the case was fixed for a trial on the issue of liability but refused to accept he had suffered anything more than the fractured leg and facial fractures they didn’t accept he had a brain injury. Evidence was obtained from the family and various experts in brain injury. The case proceeded to a 10 day trail where a Judge heard from all of these witnesses including Doctors for the Insurer and ultimately we secured compensation amounting to 1.5 million.
Kuti v Hussain
Mr Kuti was crossing a dual carriageway where the approaching traffic was travelling at about 40 mph and the traffic lights were on green in their favour. A car struck Mr Kuti in the carriageway and he was flung over the bonnet and he suffered a severe head and brain injury as well as multiple fractures he was in a coma for over 4 weeks and was unable to return to full-time employment. Three firms of solicitors refused to take on his case after they had seen the police report into the accident as the driver behind the car that hit Mr Kuti blamed him entirely for the accident.
I was able to secure a seven figure settlement for him at a joint meeting with the driver’s insurer and their legal team a week before the date for the trial on the issue of who was to blame was due to commence. This case took about a year to conclude from my first meeting with Mr Kuti and his brother.
Read More Here
Verdon v Euticals Ltd
Mr Verdon was working a chemical plant on Merseyside when he was exposed to the potentially fatal chemical Methyl Iodide which is used in pesticides. The chemical penetrated Mr Verdon’s clothing as he wasn’t proved with appropriate safety equipment by his employer and he suffered brain damage which left him in a coma and unable to walk or talk as he had before the accident. I was able to force the insurer of the chemical company to accept responsibility for this accident after they were taken to court by the Health and Saftey Executive. Detailed medical reports were obtained from various experts for both sides.
The insurer argued Mr Verdon’s problems were all psychological and my experts were able to show that the chemical methyl iodide had damaged to his nervous system resulting in him needed to use walking sticks to get about and damaged his ability to speak normally. After a meeting with the insurers an offer was made which resulted in Mr Verdon receiving compensation for his inability to ever work again, his need now for ground floor accommodation and future help with ongoing medical care and support which in compensation amounted a figure in excess of 1million pound.
RK v RS
Case of RK v RS settles for £900,000 plus a PPO of £40,000 pa to cover the cost of his care and support package and the cost of a deputy
This case involved a young lad who had just got a place on a course to become a surveyor
This was a difficult case the driver was a friend who lost control of his car and Mr K flew out of the window suffering head and brain injuries
He is someone whose intellect has not been effected by the brain injury but he is no longer able to plan and initiate things he has memory difficulties and organic personality disorder
His behaviour was so difficult to deal with he would regularly threaten his lawyer ( me !) , his case manager and treating team and support workers and had running battles with his Financial Deputy as he was constantly seeking access to his damages which were paid on an interim basis by the insurer of the driver to help fund his ongoing lifestyle, rehab and support.
This was a challenging and complex case as his family struggled to cope with him and those trying to support him including me had difficulties on maintain his mood and keeping his equilibrium.
He would contact the defendant insurers direct and complain about his legal team he would try to negotiate his own settlement and he went to the court if protection to both seel an order that he had full capacity ( which was not supported by his medical experts ) and to change deputy in the hope he could get more out of a new deputy and access to more of the interim funds.
With the relevant multiplier his full settlement in total amounted to approximately £2.5 million.
Tinsley v Sarkar (2005)EWHC 192 QB
Mr Tinsley was left with devastating brain injury when he was knocked off his bicycle as he negotiated a roundabout. His injuries were so severe that he was sectioned under the mental health act as someone who was a danger to himself and the public if he were out and about. The Doctors who were initially involved in his case were so concerned they believed if he was released into the community he would commit a serious crime and they didn’t want to support his repeated requests for his freedom and his release into the community into his own home. The insurer of the driver accepted blame for the brain injury and what followed was a long battle to secure Mr Tinsley’s release and to set up a care package with a team of brain injury support workers, and other medical experts who could provide him with ongoing private funded treatment from a neuropsychologist and neuropsychiatrist.
The Insurer and their experts argued he should be locked up and the key thrown away. They maintained any costs of the care for this man should be held the responsibility of the NHS and the government.
The case went to a 10 day trial at the High Court before HHJ Leveson and after hearing arguments from multiple experts he determined that the client should indeed be given a place in a specialist brain injury unit and not simply placed in a mental hospital and that the costs of this should be met by the insurer as it was due to the negligence of the driver that Mr Tinsley’s life had been so destroyed by his brain injury. The costs were calculated by the Judge and set at 3.5 million to cover my clients lifetime
AC v DC
Iveta Knause accident involving a Latvian National