Mr H was working at a construction site. He was employed by a company who were sub contracted to the main contractors on site.
Mr H was in the process of lowering work equipment between floors when a temporary platform gave way, causing him to fall 20 feet onto the concrete floor below.
Mr H did not lose consciousness but sustained significant injuries. He was taken by ambulance to the local hospital. He sustained the following injuries: fracture of his pelvis; fracture of the ribs on the left side of his chest; fracture to his left wrist; fracture to the bones in his left hand.
Mr H spent five weeks in hospital before being discharged. Afterwards he spent a further period of around three months in bed. Only after that time was he able to get around, initially using a walking frame and crutch.
For the first year or so following the accident Mr H could not do a great deal and had to rely on his partner to provide him with care and assistance, including assistance with personal hygiene, dressing and general help around the house.
Mr H was unable to drive for a period of around a year following the accident.
Mr H’s symptoms slowly improved as he underwent a significant amount of physiotherapy treatment. However he has been left with residual pain and restriction of movement in his wrist and ongoing pain in his back and pelvis.
Mr H was unable to return to work for just over a year following the accident. He initially found a manual job through a friend although he had difficulty coping with the work as it was too heavy and he therefore had to resign from this post after a few months.
Mr H then secured further work through an agency for around three months but once again due to the continued strain on his lower back and pelvis area he was unable to continue with this employment.
At the time of settlement Mr H had not returned to work but was hoping to find alternative work and look to retrain to undertake employment of a less manual nature. Mr H’s claim consisted of the following: personal injury damages; loss of earnings; care and assistance provided by his partner; travel and car parking costs; a lump sum award to represent his restriction in working capacity in the future.
Liability was admitted for the accident when the claim was presented to the responsible party.
A medical report was also obtained from a psychologist. Mr H had experienced significant anxiety and depression as a result of the accident and underwent counselling.
An offer of £75,000 was put forward to compensate Mr H which was rejected. Court proceedings were commenced and subsequently an increased offer in the sum of £110,000 was put forward. Further negotiations continued between the parties with the claim concluding in the sum of £115,000 gross with the state benefits Mr H had received being deducted.
Mr H’s full name has been withheld to protect his privacy but the above represents a true personal injury claim successfully pursued by Ward & Rider Solicitors.