Injuries Direct - Personal Injury Claims

Inmates of a London prison are preparing to make compensation claims after an outbreak of salmonella.

Over 300 fell ill with diarrhoea and vomiting at Wandsworth prison in the south-west of the capital last September.

The prisoners claim that the Prison Service was to blame for the outbreak, which lasted for approximately seven days.

Notices were put up outside the prison when the bug first struck, telling people that visiting time was restricted.

At the time the bug was unknown but the Health Protection Agency (HPA) later confirmed that it was salmonella.

The agency then declared that a full report into the illness was to be issued last month, however as of yet this has failed to materialise.

Compensation claim solicitors representing a number of the inmates have said they cannot act until the report has been published.

One said: “What hasn’t been confirmed is how it happened. That’s what the report is about – was there negligence on anyone’s part?”

Rumours that suggest egg sandwiches were to blame are yet to be confirmed.

New laws could require dog owners to obtain insurance to protect others from attacks.

The government’s proposals aim to give greater protection to members of the public from the threat of dangerous dogs, and will give them the right to easily make a claim for compensation if they are injured by a dog bite.

Currently the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act bans four breeds of the animal – the Pit Bull Terrier, the Japanese Tosa, the Dogo Argentinos and the Fila Brasileriros – from all public places.

However, it will now be discussed whether these dogs should be banned from private property as well. This would mean that postal workers and others that need to go to people’s houses would be better protected.

Ministers are worried about an increased trend in keeping the dangerous animals as ‘status dogs’ – used to intimidate and threaten people. Approximately 100 people are admitted to hospital following a dog attack.

Local councils and the police could now be given powers to force dangerous dog owners to muzzle them, or to have them neutered.

Another proposal is to make it compulsory for third-party insurance to be taken out for dog owners, which will ensure that victims of attacks are compensated accordingly.

The postal union CWU has welcomed the proposals. General Secretary Bill Hayes said: “Thousands of our members are attacked at work every year. This reform cannot come soon enough.”

A Sunday league footballer has been jailed for breaking an opponent’s leg during a match.

Mark Chapman, 20, is the first player to be jailed because of a tackle. He will serve six months.

His victim, 26-year-old Terry Johnson suffered a broken tibia and fibula and has had a metal rod screwed in with four bolts inserted into his leg. It is unlikely that he will every get to play again.

Mr Johnson has also been unable carry out his job as an electrician, meaning he has faced a struggle to support his partner and two young daughters.

During the match between the players’ teams Long Lawford and Wheeltappers, Mr Chapman had been criticised by team mates for showing a lack of effort.

Close to the final whistle, as Mr Johnson was protecting the ball as it went out of play. While he was doing this, Mr Chapman closed in and used a ‘stamping motion’ with his right foot with studs showing as he went into the side and back of Mr Johnson’s right leg.

It was revealed in court that although Mr Chapman had no previous convictions, he had been disciplined for his behaviour on the football pitch a number of times.

Sentencing Mr Chapman to six months in prison for grievous bodily harm, Judge Robert Orme said: “This is a deliberate act, a premeditated act. A football match gives no-one any excuse to carry out wanton violence.

“The result of what you did was that Mr Johnson suffered a badly broken leg – it horrified those who saw it.”

It is likely that Mr Johnson will now be entitled to make an injury compensation claim, to recover damages for his injuries, his inability to continue playing football and for his loss of earnings at his paid job.

Arsenal football club will not be pursuing a claim for compensation for the horrific injury to teenage midfielder Aaron Ramsey on the weekend.

Ramsey had his leg broken in a brutal tackle by Stoke City’s Ryan Shawcross during Saturday evening’s fixture. He is likely to miss many months of football as a result.

However, an operation to repair his broken tibia and fibula has been described as a success by Arsenal’s chief executive Ivan Gazidis.

The incident means the third serious injury that the north London club has suffered in the last five years.

When asked if Arsenal would make a compensation claim, Mr Gazidis said: “We are not thinking about that. It’s devastating for the club, what happened. I still feel a little bit of the heart was ripped out of club.”

Shawcross was called up for the England side to play Egypt on Wednesday night but did not end up getting to play.

Although he was given an automatic 3 match ban for the red card he received, it is unlikely he will receive any further punishment after replays showed that his tackle did not intend to cause any physical harm.

England under-21 manager and former defender Stuart Pearce said: “Having worked with Ryan and having watched the incident again I am pretty sure there was no intent there to really go and do damage.”

A family who made a no win no fee compensation claim but ended up losing will not appeal the court’s decision.

The mother of Henry Webster, who was a victim of a brutal hammer attack at his school in Wiltshire, has said that she feels “exhausted” from the battle of trying to claim compensation.

A court ruled last month that despite the attack taking place on the grounds of Ridgeway School in Wroughton, that they were not liable for the injuries that Mr Webster suffered.

The judge also ordered the family to pay the school’s legal costs for defending the case, which amounted to £750,000. However, because of the no win no fee agreement with their solicitors, they were covered by after the event insurance to pay this total.

Mrs Webster said: “We have had three years of sheer hell and we’ve decided not to appeal against the decision because it’s taken too much of a toll on us personally.”

Her son was attacked by a gang of Asian youths in January 2007 following growing racial tensions at the school. He suffered a skull fracture along with numerous other injuries.

As well as his claim for personal injury compensation, his mother and father also made claims for the trauma of witnessing their son’s horrific injuries.

Cumbria County Council has spent £600,000 over the last four years fighting numerous compensation claims for road pothole damage.

The cold weather over the winter has further worsened the problems of the already fragile Cumbrian roads, which see thousands of tourists visiting the Lake District drive over them every single year.

National campaign group the Taxpayers’ Alliance has criticised the issue, saying that more money should be spent to maintain the state of the county’s roads.

Over half of the £600,000 total was paid in injury compensation to people who had been hurt as a result of driving over a pothole.

Complaints made to Cumbria County Council have soared in recent months. In January alone, the council’s highways hotline received 865 phone calls regarding the pothole problem.

Last month also saw council chiefs set aside £3million in order to begin the process of repairing the roads.

The roads have also caused damage to vehicles, with tyre fitters reporting a huge surge in the number of repairs they are being asked to perform.

Chief executive of the Taxpayer’s Alliance Matthew Elliot said: “This is an exorbitant amount of money to spend on compensation claims and legal fees. If the council had maintained the roads properly in the first place then they could have avoided frittering away hundreds of thousands like this.”

The family of a toddler who stabbed herself in the mouth with a used syringe are attempting to make a no win no fee compensation claim against Starbucks café.

Keeley Price was just 10-months-old at the time when the incident happened. She was with her mother Kelly and grandmother Linda Shipley on a trip to the Bullring shopping centre in Birmingham, and had stopped at the Starbucks café for a drink.

It was here that the toddler found the syringe and jabbed it into her mouth. When Keeley’s grandmother realised what had happened, she grabbed the syringe from the toddler only to prick herself on the hand in the process.

Both then had to endure a six-month wait for tests to be carried out to see whether they had contracted any infections, such as Hepatitis B and other blood-related diseases.

Mrs Shipley said: “Kelly was at the counter getting the drinks and I sat down in an armchair with Keeley in my arms. She was reaching over my back and from the upholstery found a syringe and did what babies do at that age, put it in her mouth.”

She added: “I was horrified and immediately took it out of her mouth but in doing so pricked my hand, drawing blood.”

When she complained to the manager at the Starbucks, the incident was added to their accident log book but no apology was offered.

“She couldn’t get us out of the shop fast enough,” said mother Kelly. “We didn’t get any first aid, there was no apology and no offer of a taxi to take us to the hospital.”

The Starbucks later told the family that they would not accept responsibility as the café was cleaned on a regular basis.

Mrs Shipley said: “that’s not accurate because I lifted up the armchair cushion and underneath found food debris – it obviously hadn’t been cleaned for a while.

“It was six months before we got the all clear, but in that time we were worried sick and imagining the worst. We didn’t know what was in the needle, it could have been Hepatitis, HIV, anything.”

The family have now secured the services of a no win no fee compensation solicitor to help them with their claim against the café chain. The case is due to be heard at Birmingham County Court in the near future.

Investigations into the safety of pushchairs have intensified following numerous complaints about children injuring their fingers on dangerous hinge mechanisms.

Currently, British company Maclaren face a multi-million compensation claim against them from parents all over the world whose children have lost parts of their fingers in the contraptions.

However, new research shows that the problems of dangerous hinges could be more widespread than once thought, and that other makes of buggies could have similar issues.

Head of the Consumer Focus Body investigation team Gemma Bowen said: “Our initial investigations have made it clear that the safety of the side hinge mechanism is an issue that is wider than just one make of pushchair. We want to hear from anyone who has got a finger caught in one of these hinges, or worse.”

Suspicions have been growing that Maclaren have been trying to cover up the possible dangers that their buggies pose. In the US the company were ordered to provide safety covers for the hinges on their buggies though initially, this action was not taken in Britain.

Now this is being looked into following doctor and parent reports that suggest injuries have been caused by the pushchairs over a number of years. Currently parents in this country can only get hold of the safety covers if they apply to Maclaren directly by email. However there is no system in place to provide these automatically to owners of the buggies.

The daughter of company director Ian Harmer lost part of her finger in a Maclaren buggy hinge. He said: “It was horrific. She is now left with a shorter finger for the rest of her life. It was incredibly stressful.”

The owners of a dog that attacked a postman and left him severely injured will not be prosecuted.

It is unknown whether the injured postman, Keith Davis, will make a claim for compensation for the attack which left him needing surgery in the week leading up to Christmas in 2008.

Judge Gareth Hawkesworth ruled that as the attack took place in a private cul de sac, the owners could not be charged under the Dangerous Dog Act 1991.

Roberts Stewart, 44, and his daughter Emma, 22, were therefore acquitted from being responsible for a dog that had caused injury at a hearing at Cambridge Crown Court.

Prosecutors had argued that the attack was on an unadopted road near the home of Mr Stewart which was a public place. However the judge ruled that the road was private and therefore the rules did not apply.

Now, the Communication Workers Union (CWU) is trying to have the Dangerous Dog Act 1991 amended to include attacks that happen on private property.

A spokesman for the CWU said: “It must be amended so it applies to both public and private property because about 6000 members of the CWU are attacked by dogs every year. Thousands of our members visit people’s property daily – if they’re attacked the union will always look to prosecute and get compensation.”

An ex-footballer of Premiership side Bolton Wanderers has been awarded £32,500 injury compensation.

Marcus Hallows’ career was sadly cut short after a leg-breaking tackle during a game for Altrincham FC in March 2005.

He was brought down by Ashton United defender Danny White while he was making a run for the goal. He suffered an open fracture of the shin and broke his right tibia and fibula as a result.

Mr Hallows, who played for Bolton Wanderers reserves in 1995/1996 made legal proceedings against Mr White’s club Ashton United and, after a series of hearings, a judge has ruled that he was entitled to sports injury compensation.

£32,500 was awarded for the loss of earnings he suffered due to not being able to play football. He now instead works as a sales manager for a construction company, and occasionally as an Elvis impersonator.

Chairman of Ashton United David Aspinall has complained that they will not be able to afford the compensation payout, but also cannot risk appealing and possibly incurring an additional £10,000 in legal costs. He also argued that the judgement could have repercussions for clubs around the country, many of whom are in financial difficulty as similar claims will end up being made.

The judgement will be handed down from court on March 5th, when Marcus Hallows will make a statement regarding his compensation award.