Jason Claridge, director and specialist in personal injury and clinical negligence, recently acted for Mr A*. Mr A was a keen cyclist. He was a member of a cycling club and on the morning in question he had been for a long bike ride with members of the cycling club. Mr A was intending to return home after this ride.
He was riding through a built-up mixed-use area of a West Midlands town. It was densely populated and had shops, pubs, and eateries nearby. As he was riding his bicycle, he came into contact with a deep pothole on the carriageway.
He instructed us to bring his case as a consequence of this accident. We argued that the pothole was sufficiently deep to constitute a hazard to road users and also was sufficiently deep to suggest it had been in situ for long enough for the council to have known, or it ought to have known, of the problem and repaired it. It was in a high use area and the council should have been routinely inspecting the area.
Liability was disputed. Our client had suffered a very serious injury. He had suffered significant damage to his pelvis and hip area. After the accident he was taken to the hospital, and he was operated on to stabilise and fix the fracture.
We wrote to a number of local businesses and some of those individuals confirmed that the area had been in this state for some time, certainly long enough for the council to have repaired the pothole. We obtained photographic evidence which had measurements showing the depth of the hole on the carriageway.
We issued proceedings for personal injury plus consequential financial losses. Mr A had done his best in recovering as quickly as possible. He had no loss of earnings because he worked from home and he did a sedentary job. His wife supplied him with help and assistance with personal care and carried out certain domestic activities that he could not do for a few months, after which, due to his determination to recover, he was independent and fully mobile again. He had some costs in that he had to repair his bike and had some damage to his clothing.
He was left with some minor, ongoing, intermittent pain. There was a risk that he would require a total hip replacement operation. That was factored into the schedule of loss.
The council proceeded with a full defence which disputed liability for this matter.
During the course of the litigation, offers were made by the defendants and their opening offer was £45,000. This offer was a full and final settlement in the entirety of Mr A’s case including his pain, suffering and loss of amenity caused by his personal injury, his consequential financial losses which were restricted to some modest amounts of travel, treatment, help and assistance for domestic activities and personal care in the acute stage following the accident, plus damage to his clothes and the repair costs of his bike. Also factored in was the potential need for a total hip replacement operation.
We countered at £55,000 for the claimant. The defendants then made a counteroffer at £50,000. Mr A was happy to accept this offer in full and final settlement.
We acted for Mr A under a conditional fee agreement. He had been recommended to the firm by a previous client of Jason Claridge.
*Mr A’s details have been changed but this is indeed a true case. Please contact us for any advice on personal injury or clinical negligence cases which we will proceed with under a conditional fee agreement.
