PI Brief Update

Case Report: H v P - Mary Kay, Spencers Solicitors

22/02/22. Case Name: H v P
Accident Date: 31/10/2019
Settlement Date: 16/07/2021
Total Gross Settlement: £500,000.00
Background: RTA

On 31 October 2019 the Claimant (aged 50) had been driving along the M60 on his way home, when a settee cushion flew over the central reservation from a vehicle travelling in the opposite carriageway. The vehicle in front of the Claimant's vehicle managed to stop, as did the Claimant.

However, the vehicle behind the Claimant (the Defendant) did not stop in time and collided heavily with the rear of the Claimant's vehicle; shunting it into collision with the central reservation and the vehicle in front.

LIABILITY

Liability for the accident was admitted by the Defendant’s insurers.

INJURIES

As a result of the accident the Claimant suffered multiple injuries to his head, back, neck, hand/thumbs, shoulders, knees and chest. The Claimant also suffered significant psychological symptoms and concussion.

The Claimant suffered with headaches, fatigue, poor concentration and reduced attention. He suffered with tinnitus and an aversion to light.

He attended A&E later that evening. He was examined and discharged with head injury advice.

The Claimant returned to the hospital 2 weeks later as he was suffering from persistent headaches and was referred to the Brain Injury Clinic for review.

The Claimant suffered significant cognitive problems including poor memory, impaired concentration, poor processing of verbal/visual information. These problems impacted on all areas of daily functioning. He was under the care of the Brain Injury Clinic.

The Claimant had a congenital right-hand defect; having only his thumb and one digit. He had previously undergone several surgeries. Despite this he was able to grip and use his right hand with ease prior to the accident.

The Claimant sustained injuries to both his thumbs in the index accident and underwent surgery on both his hands. His grip was significantly affected and was very disabling.

The Claimant’s mobility was severely affected due to the injuries to his knees and he was significantly disabled by pain.

The Claimant required a high level of assistance with activities of daily living which was provided by his wife and his family. He was dependent on his wife for help with all domestic and personal activities and struggled to care for their young son.

The Claimant suffered with low mood, anxiety, finding his limitations frustrating, particularly regarding surgery and slow progress. He has struggled with his confidence. He has avoided exposure to social situations, for example shopping and picking son up from school.

REHABILITATION/CASE MANAGEMENT

Due to the injuries sustained, the Claimant’s solicitors arranged for an initial needs assessment. This identified that the key features affecting the Claimant’s function were: mobility, assistance, travel/vehicle use, cognitive function, and childcare. It was recommended that the Claimant access community-based rehabilitation and a support programme as soon as possible. It recommended that this be coordinated by a case manager working closely with a specialist multi-disciplinary team to provide him and his family with guidance and support.

A comprehensive rehabilitation programme was put in place involving intensive Occupational Therapy and psychological support overseen by a Case Manager.

The rehabilitation package was funded wholly under the Rehabilitation Code.

MEDICO-LEGAL EVIDENCE

The Claimant instructed a Neuropsychiatrist, and a Neuropsychologist, to examine the Claimant and to prepare medico-legal reports.

The Consultant Neuropsychologist concluded that the Claimant had suffered a head injury and several other physical injuries as a result of the accident. In the Expert’s opinion the Claimant was suffering from Post-Concussive Syndrome.

The Claimant continued to experience significant physical and psychological symptoms but there was an improvement as a result of the rehabilitation programme (which involved intensive Occupational Therapy and Psychology input).

EMPLOYMENT

The Claimant was employed as a Specialist Electronics Engineer. He was required to travel the country as part of his job. This was highly skilled work requiring a high level of dexterity and concentration.

The Claimant was unable to return to work following the index accident. At the time of settlement vocational rehabilitation was planned to assist in his return to work.

QUANTUM

An initial offer of settlement of £175,000 gross was made by the Defendant’s solicitors which was not accepted.

The Defendant’s solicitors made an increased offer of settlement in the sum of £500,000.00 which was accepted by the Claimant.

No specific breakdown was provided; however, the Claimant’s solicitors estimate the following:

General Damages – £75,000
Past Losses - £62,000
Future Losses - £363,000

Solicitors for the Claimant: Mary Kay of Spencers Solicitors Limited
Counsel for the Claimant: Andrew Axon, of Parklane Plowden
Solicitor for the Defendant: Keoghs

Image ©iStockphoto.com/esp_imaging