Personal Injury Case Study: Achieving Fair Compensation for a Soft Tissue Injury
Background:
The client was involved in a road traffic accident. After initially dealing with the claim themselves but struggling to deal with the insurers and obtain rehabilitation for their injuries, they sought legal representation. The client had sustained soft tissue injuries to their shoulder with ongoing symptoms to include pins and needles in their arm and recurring headaches. Despite this, the insurers had attempted to settle the claim early making a premedical offer which was unsatisfactory.
Challenges and considerations:
After obtaining initial medical evidence confirming the injuries, the orthopaedic expert recommended further investigations to include an MRI scan. The insurers refused to fund the treatment and so proceedings were issued so as to secure an interim payment for the further investigations. This was a necessary step given the insurers reluctance to engage; the scan being required to enable the expert to conclude on his opinion and prognosis.
The first interim payment allowed us to proceed with the MRI and initial treatments. The orthopaedic surgeon’s final report indicated that the client would benefit from physiotherapy, predicting a full recovery by the end of the year (a prognosis period of 2 years and 8 months). Again, the Insurers refused to release funds for this treatment, necessitating a second interim payment application, which again was successful.
The defendant sought to discredit our evidence, suggesting that a pre-existing condition in the client’s opposite shoulder might explain their ongoing symptoms. We countered, emphasizing that our expert’s findings were unchallenged and directly linked the injury to the accident. Despite the court setting case management directions and listing the claim for trial, the defendant failed to engage; did not challenge the expert evidence by raising questions or seeking their own evidence, or file a counter schedule of loss, and therefore the claimant’s expert evidence and schedule of losses were deemed to be uncontroverted evidence as per Griffiths v Tui (UK) ltd (2021).
The settlement:
Months before trial, the claimant had made a settlement offer which the defendant ignored. Three weeks before the trial, they counter offered at a lower sum. This was rejected and we stood firm on our offer. The defendants made three further increased offers, but the client continued to stand firm on their original offer and after several days of negotiations, and two weeks before trial the Defendants accepted the claimant’s initial offer.
Conclusion:
Our experience and knowledge allowed us to accurately value the case for both personal injuries and losses and to provide the appropriate advice to the client. The accepted offer avoided the claim proceeding to trial and resulted in the insurers paying increased costs due to the timing of their acceptance.
This case underscores the importance of expert legal guidance. By obtaining the right medical evidence and securing interim payments for necessary treatments, we achieved a fair settlement for our client. It highlights the challenges clients face when dealing directly with insurers and the value of knowledgeable representation.
Rogers & Norton’s talented and knowledgeable Personal Injury team have many years’ experience handling all types of Personal Injury and clinical negligence claims, ranging from modest accidents to cases of the upmost severity that have had a life changing impact on the claimant, to fatalities with large dependency claims. For more information, visit our Personal Injury service pages or to arrange an appointment for a free initial discussion, please contact us by calling 01603 666001 or emailing enquiries@rogers-norton.co.uk.