Category Archives
Stockslegal
New Criteria For Criminal Injury Compensation Authority Claims
The Criminal Injury Compensation Authority (CICA) is a government run authority that victims of violent crimes can call upon to award them compensation. The Authority has recently upgraded and changed some of its eligibility criteria in a bid to cut its annual bill but if the victim of a crime is still eligible then they still have the right to submit a claim to the CICA. The scheme is meant as a last resort and a decision regarding payment may be delayed while the victim continues to try and claim from their assailant or even their employer. You can download the new criteria by clicking here.
The crime must be reported to the police by the victim or a friend or family member. If no police report is filed and no investigation undertaken then the CICA will not intervene and any application will be rejected immediately under these circumstances. The CICA does not judge on whether a crime was committed, or by whom, but they may pay compensation to victims that have reported the crime to the police.
There is a two year statute on claims for injuries. This means that the victim has two years to submit their claim following the date of the accident. If the victim is aged under 18 at the time of the incident then they will have two years from the date of their 18th birthday. There are some mitigating circumstances that allow for this period to be extended but this does not include claims that the victim was not aware of the scheme or the two year deadline.
Minor injuries are not covered by the scheme. As such, if the injury portion of the awarded compensation would be less than £1,000 then the claim will be rejected. The CICA says that they are a scheme that is set up to compensate the sufferers of serious injuries. This means that cuts and bruises will not usually be enough to justify a CICA compensation package. Mental and emotional injuries are considered when calculating this figure.
When it comes to loss of earnings, the CICA scheme will not usually pay for the first 28 weeks of time off work. The amount that may be awarded for this element of the crime is also capped. This all means that a victim may not receive the full compensation that they believe they are owed and they may still fall some way short financially once compensation has been awarded.
The behaviour of the victim is considered as part of the CICA scheme. This includes behaviour before, during, and after the incident and the CICA will even look into a person’s criminal record. Those with an unspent criminal conviction will not be considered for the scheme – changes that were introduced in November 2012.
There are critics to some of the changes and eligibility requirements. For example, there are groups that argue even minor injuries can lead to long term emotional and mental damage and so even minor injuries with a compensation value of less than £1,000 should still be considered by the Criminal Injury Compensation Scheme.
MAKING A CLAIM
Making a claim for your personal injuries with Stocks Legal is really easy. You can speak to an experienced personal injury solicitor today by calling 0800 988 9055 or you can use our online claim enquiry form by clicking here. There is no obligation and you have nothing to lose by speaking to us.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mike Topper is the litigation manager at Stocks Legal Personal Injury Solicitors. Mike is highly experienced in all types of personal injury cases. He is highly focussed on client care and getting the maximum compensation that is available for his clients and their families. He rightly sees personal injury claims as a real must for the English legal System as without a proper compensation structure, many injury people can be left with no support or ongoing medical treatment.
If you have any questions arising from this article to can contact Mike by calling 0800 988 9055 or by sending him an email by clicking here.
The Importance Of Using An Experienced Criminal Injury Solicitor
Personal injuries leave victims unable to earn money and dealing with physical and mental injuries. Depending on the type and extent of injury this can also lead to a loss of earnings as well as the payment of medical and other expenses. Fortunately, it is possible for victims of many types of personal injury to be able to claim compensation in order to help meet these costs. Even victims of violent crime have a means of claiming compensation.
Claiming compensation for injuries sustained during a violent crime provides victims with financial support. They receive a sum according to the type and severity of injury that they sustained as well as an element that is designed to meet the financial costs associated with injuries. The actual amount of compensation that a person does receive will depend on a number of factors.
Violent crimes can include assault and aggravated burglary, as well as arson and even assault in the workplace. They may occur in the home, on the street, or while on another person’s property. If they are viewed as a crime by the police, and reported to the police, then they will usually carry the possibility of compensation being awarded to the victim.
Most personal injury claims must be submitted within three years of the incident or when the victim discovers the extent of their injuries. However, violent crime claims through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority need to be submitted within two years so it is vital that the victim starts their claim as soon as possible. Before any claim is made, though, the first and most important step is to report the crime to the police.
A criminal injury solicitor will help ensure that all paperwork is completed properly. They will collect all of the relevant information, data, and evidence, and when dealing with the CICA, where it is not strictly necessary to instruct a lawyer, they can also help to ensure that you receive a fair settlement figure. It is important that victims receive a fair amount of compensation because it is used to ensure that they are able to concentrate on recovery rather than rushing back to work or struggling to meet medical bills.
MAKING A CLAIM
Making a claim for your personal injuries with Stocks Legal is really easy. You can speak to an experienced personal injury solicitor today by calling 0800 988 9055 or you can use our online claim enquiry form by clicking here. There is no obligation and you have nothing to lose by speaking to us.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mike Topper is the litigation manager at Stocks Legal Personal Injury Solicitors. Mike is highly experienced in all types of personal injury cases. He is highly focussed on client care and getting the maximum compensation that is available for his clients and their families. He rightly sees personal injury claims as a real must for the English legal System as without a proper compensation structure, many injury people can be left with no support or ongoing medical treatment. If you have any questions arising from this article to can contact Mike by calling 0800 988 9055 or by sending him an email by clicking here.
MDU Paid Out £28m In Meningitis Claims
The MDU has released details showing that they have paid out approximately £28m in four years to settle GP cases involving patients that have suffered or are suffering from meningitis. The report comes following the news that a new vaccine has been withdrawn because there is not enough conclusive evidence on exactly how effective Bexsero is for patients. The total awarded was spread over only 17 cases and the group said that around 70% of cases they receive are discontinued without further action, because GPs are not necessarily found negligent.
There are, in fact, a number of different types or strains of meningitis, including viral and bacterial meningitis. The latter is considered the most severe form with around 1 in 10 sufferers losing their fight against the illness and many being left with long term damage including the loss of limbs or brain damage. Sufferers of viral meningitis may become extremely ill but it is more likely to present as a mild illness.
A vaccine for meningitis B, called Bexsero has been developed but the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has ruled that it will not recommend the use of the vaccine. They have said that the cost of the vaccine is too high considering the lack of Conclusive evidence that the vaccine works.
The MDU is a leading medical defence body that represents GPs in cases of medical negligence. They have released figures that show they paid out £28m between 2008 and 2012 to patients with meningitis. They say that GPs will typically only see one or two cases in their working career making it very difficult to diagnose. This payment was made to 17 cases and included a £2.5m payment to a child that was not referred to hospital having presented with symptoms of meningitis.
Where patients have not received the proper level of care or have been given incorrect treatment it is often possible for them to submit medical negligence claims. The size of the claim will vary, typically according to the severity of injuries and illness suffered as a result, loss of earnings, and the amount and cost of care that the patient will require.
Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority Have Two Year Statute
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) has undergone a number of changes recently, predominantly to cut funding provided by the government. The CICA does still exist and still offers a means for victims of violent crime to be able to seek compensation even if they do not know their attacker, or if their attacker is unable to meet the compensation claims. One area where claiming from the CICA does differ to other personal injury claims is that there is a two year deadline for making these claims.
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, or CICA for short, is a government run scheme designed to ensure that victims of violent crime are able to claim compensation for their injuries, for loss of earnings, and to assist in meeting other financial payments. It is possible, though usually not advised, for victims to complete the claims process themselves and there are no court fees associated with the scheme.
The scheme was established primarily to deal with violent crimes and the victims of these crimes. As well as assault and physical violence, it is possible for victims of abuse and those attacked while at work (in some cases) to be able to level their claim at the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. The victim must be blameless and as well as direct assaults, it is possible for victims of arson to also make a claim in this way.
Personal injury cases can vary greatly and changes to the personal injury claims process mean that some confusion has arisen over certain timeframes and deadlines. While most personal injury claimants are afforded a period of three years from the date of their injury or the date that they discover they have suffered an injury, victims claiming through the CICA only have a period of two years.
For victims of violent and serious crime, the CICA can prove invaluable in providing the financial support that they require. The compensation awarded is not only determined by the type and extent of injuries sustained but also by any loss of earnings and any medical or other expenses accrued. It is important that the victim claims within the two year period to ensure that they do not miss out on the money that they may be owed.
MAKING A CLAIM
Making a claim for your personal injuries with Stocks Legal is really easy. You can speak to an experienced personal injury solicitor today by calling 0800 988 9055 or you can use our online claim enquiry form by clicking here. There is no obligation and you have nothing to lose by speaking to us.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Mike Topper is the litigation manager at Stocks Legal Personal Injury Solicitors. Mike is highly experienced in all types of personal injury cases. He is highly focussed on client care and getting the maximum compensation that is available for his clients and their families. He rightly sees personal injury claims as a real must for the English legal System as without a proper compensation structure, many injury people can be left with no support or ongoing medical treatment.
If you have any questions arising from this article to can contact Mike by calling 0800 988 9055 or by sending him an email by clicking here.
Government Highlights Three Industries With Greatest Risk Of Accidents At Work
The government have revealed figures that show the three most dangerous industries in which to work. They take into account the likelihood of suffering an accident at work or becoming afflicted with an industrial disease. Regardless of how potentially dangerous a job is, it is the responsibility of the employer to ensure that employees have as safe and risk-free an environment in which to work. All employers should take care to offer a safe environment but it is these three industries that have the highest risk level according to the figures.
Construction remains the most dangerous industry. Only around 5% of the workforce are found in the construction industry but this is where 22% of work related fatalities and 10% of work related injuries are recorded. In 2011/2012 this meant that 600,000 working days were lost because of accidents at work while a further 1.7m working days were lost due to illnesses directly attributed to the workplace. The most common injuries were trips and falls while 5,000 cases of cancer were recorded due to exposure to harmful chemicals.
The agriculture industry utilises many types of heavy machinery and these are often responsible for accidents at work. 33 deaths were recorded during 2011/2012 although it should be noted that this is an improvement over previous years but it still means that agriculture ranks among the most dangerous and potentially life threatening industries in the UK. It is also believed that many accidents in this industry are not reported but even with potentially depleted figures, it still has high fatality and injury rates.
Manufacturing is another area where the use of heavy machinery combined with exposure to potentially harmful chemicals is rife and employees often pay the price. The 2011/2012 period saw 31 manufacturing related deaths, which represents around 25% of all recorded work related fatalities. The industry is also responsible for 16% of injuries caused by accidents in the workplace. Only 10% of the workforce are employed in the industry.
Every employer has a legal responsibility to ensure that their employees, and everybody on their premises is as safe and free from harm as possible. Workplace practices, training, and hazard prevention should be considered an integral role for any company or employer and while the majority of organisations do get it right, there are those that fail their staff. Employers run the risk of having legal action taken against them and litigious claims laid by injured parties and employees that contract so called industrial illnesses and diseases.
There are various ways in which an employer may found liable for an employee’s accident or illness and if it can be proven then the employee has the right to make a claim against their employer. Industrial claims can total large sums of money and this is why employers’ liability insurance is a legal requirement for any business that employs even a single member of staff. Employees that are involved in an accident at work or that contract an industrial illness should first report the incident to later aid their litigation claim.
Speed Cameras Reduce Accidents By More Than A Quarter
Lobbyists and groups that want speed cameras removed will be disheartened to hear that a recent study of 551 fixed speed cameras has shown that, in areas where cameras are used, there is 27% less chance of an accident occurring. The study shows that hundreds of lives are saved every year while hundreds of personal injuries are also avoided through the installation of the cameras. However, while the overall figures were good, 21 of the sites showed an increase in injuries highlighting the necessity for accurate and considered placement.
When the coalition government came into power, speeding cameras were one of the areas where they introduced big cuts. They said, at the time of the cuts that local councils were over reliant on the use of the devices and that alternative methods should also be sought to help improve road safety. Surveys and studies, however, show that local councils continue to use their cameras and have not yet had them removed or decommissioned.
A number of campaign groups and lobby groups have been set up in the past to try and bring down cameras, or limit their use. Opponents of the yellow fixed cameras have questioned their value in reducing accident numbers as well as their actual financial worth. Despite this opposition, though, the number of cameras has increased in recent years although some counties suffer more than others. It is believed that there are more than 6,000 speed cameras, including mobile cameras, in the UK.
Speed is considered a major contributing factor in the number of deaths and serious injuries that result from road traffic accidents. Although there are figures available that show this is only the case in around 6% of serious injuries, speed is certainly a contributing factor in the number of accidents and a study undertaken by RAF Group would indicate that speed cameras have the desired effect. Not only do they slow traffic down but they minimise and reduce the number of accidents, injuries, and deaths on the roads where they are placed.
Road traffic accidents are the single biggest cause of personal injury claims and the insurance industry has claimed that these cases add billions to the total amount that drivers pay every year in their insurance premium costs. The UK has been dubbed the whiplash capital of the world because of the increasingly large number of personal injury claims that are made. The government introduced changes to the industry in April 2013 but anybody that has suffered injuries in a car accident that was not their fault is still encouraged to seek compensation and litigation for the damages they endure.
Busier roads, more powerful cars, and a greater array of distractions for drivers behind the wheel are some of the reasons that car accident numbers are on the increase. Speed is considered to be a major factor that increases the number of accidents and that increases the likelihood of those involved in accidents being seriously injured or worse. This latest study shows that while there are isolated incidents where the introduction of cameras has seen an increase in injuries, they do have a positive, overall effect.
Rural Drivers Are At Greater Risk Of Road Traffic Accidents Than Urban Drivers
The Road Safety Analysis (RSA) has revealed details of a study that shows rural drivers are more likely to be involved in a road traffic accident than their urban counterparts. The study looked at figures relating to road accidents between 2007 and 2011 and the results show that young rural drivers are, in fact, more than 40% more likely to be involved in an accident than young urban drivers. The study also revealed a number of other figures and statistics related to accidents on the road.
Road traffic accidents can be devastating and any driver that has been involved in such an accident, whether it was their fault or another drivers, will have experienced the horror and shock. They may also have endured painful and lasting injuries – the speed involved in car accidents means that greater force and pressure are put on the human body and this leads to a greater likelihood of serious injuries and even death. Road traffic accidents are the single biggest cause of personal injuries and the resulting PI claims increase in this country has seen the UK described as being the whiplash capital of the world.
The study, which was carried out by the Road Safety Analysis, was funded by Michelin and Rees Jeffreys Road Fund. Figures from accidents that took place between 2007 and 2011 were considered and the RSA looked for trends that developed, paying particular attention to the differences between urban and rural drivers. Overall, young rural drivers were 44% more likely to be involved in a road accident than urban drivers.
The difference was greatest on 60mph roads where rural drivers were 66% more likely to crash than urban drivers. Perhaps unsurprisingly, young rural adults were 89% more likely to hold a full driving licence when compared to those that lived in cities and towns. Rural drivers are also most likely to be involved in a collision while on rural roads with 58% more rural than urban drivers crashing while driving on rural roads.
When it comes to reasons for accidents, rural drivers are 16% more likely to provide a positive breath test while 52% more will be involved in an accident while on a bend. Rural drivers, who have to drive on poorly lit and darkened streets with very little ambient and surrounding lighting, were 63% more likely to be involved in an accident while driving in the dark when compared to urban drivers, who enjoy better lit streets and ambient lighting from surrounding lights and buildings.
Road traffic accidents are a common form of personal injury and anybody that has suffered in a crash that was not their fault may have a case to claim. The figures show that young drivers should pay particular care especially when they are driving in what might be considered anything other than optimal results. Drivers should avoid drinking, take care around bends, and ensure that they pay particular attention when attempting to drive on darkened roads at night.
IT Worker Sues Employer For £150,000
An IT worker from Kent is suing his employer for £150,000 after an accident left him with a misshapen right finger and unable to find work within, send texts, or use a computer mouse. The man fell down an “unsafe” staircase hitting his head and enduring a number of personal injuries. It is claimed that the old staircase and a live electrical cable combined to create an unsafe environment that led to the accident sustained by Mr Alpman while working for Music and Goods Exchange Limited.
Whilst working in the computer server room at the Music and Goods Exchange, Mr Alpman fell down a flight of stairs. According to his lawyer, the 59 year old hit his head and twisted as he fell to the ground. The accident led to a number of injuries which includes a misshapen right index finger. Mr Alpman has said that the injury is so severe that not only is he unable to use a computer keyboard and mouse but he has to get his son to send text messages for him.
Mr Alpman has issued a writ against his former employers, suing them for the sum of £150,000 because the staircase was unfit and it breached health and safety regulations. All employers are legally obliged to provide a healthy and safe working environment for their employees but the state of disrepair that the staircase was in, coupled with the live electrical cable that ran down the handrail on the left means that, according to Mr Alpman’s lawyers, he was unable to stop himself falling.
The badly injured finger wasn’t the only injury sustained by the IT expert. He suffered injuries to his shoulder, knee, hands, and spine. Extensive injuries of this nature can be commonplace in personal injury lawsuits and if it is determined that Music and Goods Exchange were negligent and therefore liable to meet the damages and compensation for Mr Alpman’s accident then the total figure could be substantial. Not only will they have to pay compensation for the injuries but may have to cover potential lost earnings.
Prior to the accident, Mr Alpman was an IT executive and at the top of his field. However, he believes that the injuries sustained put him at a disadvantage in the labour market and that they are preventing him from being able to find work. Mr Alpman was dismissed from his work within a month of the accident, which occurred in 2011, and he has been unable to find work since that date.
All employers must have employer’s liability insurance and it is this policy that is used to cover incidents and accidents such as the one suffered by Mr Alpman. If the court determines that Music and Goods Exchange, where the IT expert was employed at the time of the accident, were negligent and the injuries suffered were down to this negligence then the company will be required to pay compensation to the claimant. Mr Alpman is suing for £150,000 because of the extent of his injuries, his resulting disability, and the fact that he is now unable to find work.
Shadow Minister Intimates Possible Climbdown On Jackson Reforms
The Shadow Justice Minister Andy Slaughter has given a huge hint that his party, Labour, would some aspects of the Jackson reforms if they were to regain power at the next general election. He called the decision to make so many changes at once “foolhardy” and the former barrister also said that it was too soon to judge the success, or otherwise, of the civil rights reforms. Once pressed, Slaughter said that his party would unwind some of the changes if they were found to be failing.
On the 1st April there were sweeping changes to the personal injury industry and the way in which consumers are able to make claims and pay for the resulting court cases. In particular, the changes mean that solicitor fees can no longer be claimed from the losing party. Instead, solicitors will claim the money they are owed for their services from the successful party. A 10% increase in claim values was implemented in a bid to cover these costs.
No win no fee cases are commonplace and they enable anybody to be able to pursue a case, even if they do not have the money to cover the cost of legal services. Solicitors are unlikely to take on a case they won’t win because they won’t receive any money and even those with low incomes are able to enjoy access to legal representation to pursue a variety of different cases. It was this area of law that was hit hardest by changes because the winning solicitor would normally reclaim costs from the losing party.
Under the Jackson reforms, claim values were increased by 10% but solicitor costs would be taken out of these fees instead of being recouped from the losing side. Typically, a claimant and their solicitor will now agree what is known as a Damages Based Agreement. This is a percentage of the damages won up to a maximum of 25% that the solicitor will receive from the claimant’s compensation package. This would replace the money that would previously have been collected from the other solicitors.
The reforms have come under fire from many parties, claiming that it meant claimants would be less inclined to pursue action and that where the Damages Based Agreement was higher than 10% it meant that the claimant would receive less compensation than under the old system. However, Andy Slaughter was more critical of the extent and number of changes that were being introduced in a single run rather than the actual details of the changes.
During the Westminster Legal Policy Forum, Mr Slaughter said that it was too early to judge the effectiveness of the changes. He also said that the legal profession was having to deal with an unprecedented avalanche of changes and that he didn’t know how the legal profession, let alone the public could cope with so many reforms. He said that the criticism and changes were a clear indication of why it is important not to hear opinions that are too heavily slanted to one side of the argument, and that consultation should have included members of the Legal Industry.
