On 24 April 2013, an eight-story commercial building, Rana Plaza, collapsed in Savar the capital of Bangladesh. As it currently stands there are at least 1,042 people said to have died as a result of this horrific incident with thousands more suffering serious injury. Many pulled from the rubble and had to undergo amputations due to the severity of their injuries. This incident is considered to be the deadliest factory accident in history.

The building consisted of a multitude of public outlets including clothing factories, a bank, apartments, and several other shops. The shops and the bank on the lower floors immediately closed after cracks in the building were discovered. It is alleged that warnings to avoid using the building were ignored by some occupants. The workers of the clothing factory were ordered to return the following day despite the shops and the bank on the lower floors evacuating immediately upon hearing about the structural defects.

Thankfully, such incidents are, even on a minor scale, rare in the UK. Here, construction and renovation companies have to comply with strict building regulations before commencement or completion of such building works, with a view to ensuring that the buildings are in fact safe before the public can occupy them.

In addition the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) carry out routine building checks and will, if they find it essential, close buildings that they believe are unsafe, or they will take action against those who put workers at risk of death, illness or serious injury; including employers. As part of their strict measure the HSE will serve Improvement Notices and a total of 4,816 Improvement Notices were served last year alone. In addition they pursued 1,231 prosecutions for breaches of the law. This has resulted in many employees pursuing serious injury claims with a view to receiving serious injury compensation for their suffering. This is a figure that the HSE have recorded and will not take into consideration those work place accidents that go undetected and that employees feel they cannot pursue a serious injury claim.

However, despite the potential prospects of prosecution, some employers choose to ignore the warnings notices provided by the HSE, which is akin to the employer in the Bangladeshi building collapse. We have seen recently, with this devastating disaster, what such non-compliance with regulations etc can result in, in this case many deaths and many serious injury, particularly head injury, brain injury, spinal injury including spinal cord injury and amputations.

A London based company has been prosecuted over the deaths of three construction workers at a warehouse in Hull. The building in question was due to be converted into a hotel and had been issued with two separate prohibition notices by both the Health and Safety Executive and Hull City Council. Notwithstanding their repeated efforts of notifying the construction company of the hazards, the workers were advised by their employer to continue with the renovation works, which were not being supervised by a planning supervisor or a principle contractor. Regrettably those 3 workers died when the building in question collapsed trapping them beneath rubble.

It is not just the structure of buildings that leaves employers at risk of liability it is the equipment and machinery they supply that may also be accountable for serious injury at work. It has recently been reported that a submarine maintenance company in Plymouth was found liable for a serious injury sustained by one of its employees when his hand was drawn into the rotating bar of a drum machine after the employee slipped on a wet floor. It was later revealed that the metal fixed guard had been removed from the machine. As a result of the accident the employee sustain serious injury to his hand, fortunately an amputation was not necessary.

No-one should have to suffer due to poor working conditions. In light of the new reforms and the strict liability being removed from employers liability claims, accidents still occur which are the fault of the employer’s negligence which allow for serious injury claim to be made and serious injury compensation to be paid to those employees.

Hilary Meredith Solicitors specialise in all aspects of personal injury and serious injury including Employers Liability, Public Liability, CICA claims, road traffic accidents, military claims and army accidents, head injury claims and Armed Forces Compensation Scheme claims. To discuss your claim for personal injury, call us now.

The post Bangladesh Horror at Building Collapse, Safety is Paramount appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

Steve is well suited to the role, having over 25 years experience dealing with the public and handling a range of personal injury claims. At Hilary Meredith Solicitors, his areas of particular expertise are serious injury cases involving spinal cord and traumatic brain injury and foreign accident claims.

To better represent people in this huge area, the bureau is looking for trustees to be local champions. Steve is happy to take on this role for the Wilmslow area – where Hilary Meredith Solicitors is based – developing personal contacts within the local business community.

The bureau helps around 5000 different clients a year bringing nearly 11,000 issues. The service is free, confidential, independent and impartial and delivered currently from bases in Knutsford, Wilmslow, Alderley Edge, Poynton and Macclesfield – as well as by telephone, email and information on the website www.cecab-north.org.uk. For many of the people accessing the services the bureau is the lifeline that finally helps resolve their problem and lets them get on with managing their lives.

Steve has had previous involvement with the CAB service when working in Liverpool and is looking forward to bringing this experience and his legal expertise to supporting the governance of the local charity.

The post Solicitor Joins Citizens Advice Bureau Charity Board appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

We save for it all year, whether it’s a week in Tenerife or a fortnight in the Maldives, the summer holiday to the British public is one of the key events in our calendar, and our opportunity to escape the UK and its weather for some much needed R & R.

It’s therefore very upsetting when a summer holiday is ruined by food poisoning and/or illness caused by/contracted from the hotel you are staying at or an accident caused by the negligence of the hotel proprietors or others.

Accidents or illnesses such as Gastroenteritis may prevent you from enjoying your holiday, taking part in any excursions and it may seem that you have wasted/lost the hard earned money you have spent on your flights and holiday.

Food poisoning/illness whilst on holiday may be caused by bacterial infections including Salmonella, Ecoli, Cryptosporidium, Campylobacter, and Shigella which are more common than you may think. These infections and your illness may be caused by a range of factors at the hotel such as food that has not been cooked adequately/thoroughly and/or poor hygiene standards at the Hotel.

You may experience symptoms due to the above bacterial infections to include stomach cramps, diarrhoea, fever and/or vomiting which may be uncomfortable and ruin your holiday in the short term. However in some situations these infections can lead to some long term complaints such as Irritable Bowel Syndrome.

If you have booked a package holiday through a UK Tour Operator then that tour operator is responsible under the Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992 for ensuring that your hotel maintains reasonable standards of cleanliness, public and food hygiene and health and safety.

If you, your friends or family have been ill whilst on holiday with food poisoning/illness caused by/contracted from the hotel you were staying at and/or you have been involved in an accident on holiday then you may be entitled to claim compensation from the tour operator for Personal Injury.

Hilary Meredith Solicitors specialise in representing clients who have contracted food poisoning/illness and/or been involved in an accident whilst on holiday at a number of destinations across the globe.

The majority of Personal Injury claims settle without the need to attend Court; however Court proceedings in any civil personal injury claim must be brought within 3 years of the date of the incident/injury. If Court proceedings are not issued within 3 years of the date of the incident/injury then your claim would be statute barred and you could effectively lose the right to claim compensation.

In Holiday/Travel illness/injury claims where the illness/injury has occurred outside the UK, the 3 year time limit above may be different as the Law is different in each country and the time limit could be longer or shorter than the 3 year limit in the UK.

You should contact our firm TODAY without delay to speak with a member of our specialist Holiday Claims team who will advise you and we will act for you under a No Win No Fee agreement with nothing to pay if your compensation claim, through no fault of your own, is unsuccessful.

You can even start your Holiday/Travel illness claim on our website www.hmsolicitors.co.uk.

Alternatively, to speak to our specialist Holiday Claims team call us free on 0800 124 4444.

The post What Can I Do If My Holiday Has Been Ruined By Food Poisoning, Illness Or Accident? appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

The majority of employers are certainly tightening their belts in the current economic climate; however, are employers cutting corners when it comes to health and safety?

Following the release of the report by Professor Löfstedt providing an independent review of health and safety legislation, the Government has implemented new legislation within the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill 2013 which aims to “cut the red tape” and “end the unfairness” to companies working under the current health and safety legislation.

The government has resolved to remove what is called ‘strict liability’ for claims made against employers following accidents at work. ‘Strict liability’ means that in some cases, employers can be held liable for an accident at work, even if the employer took all reasonable steps to prevent this accident. Whilst strict liability may sound unfair, we must remember that an employee may be seriously injured at work purely due to using a piece of equipment provided to them by their employer. It would be equally unfair to expect an employee, who may be unable to work due to their injuries, not to recover compensation from a situation in which they were completely blameless. We must also remember that the employer is in the stronger position as they hold the documents that an injured person will need to see in order to pursue their claim.

Removing the strict liability aspect from claims against employers makes it much harder for injured parties to claim compensation. They must now prove that their employer was negligent and did not provide reasonable care. Where no fault can be proven, injured parties may not receive any compensation for loss of earnings or medical expenses etc, and therefore be undeservedly out of pocket.

It must be remembered that employers have, or should have, employers’ liability insurance to cover such accidents at work, and are thus not personally liable to pay compensation to their employees.

The Government’s stated aim in removing strict liability is to bring common sense back into health and safety law, and limit what they perceive to be a ‘compensation culture’. They state that “fear of civil suits is causing employers to over implement health & safety requirements and to insist on unnecessarily cautious work practices, both of which are increasing costs and reducing business growth”. This view however, is not based upon the independent report by Professor Löfstedt who was appointed by the Government to consider the issue and is arguably more influenced by tabloid headlines. Löfstedt states that “The approach being taken [by the government] is more far-reaching than I anticipated in my recommendation.” He goes on to reject tabloid claims that health and safety legislation has gone too far, and states that “health and safety legislation is not holding firms back, but rather is “vital” for corporations.” It is therefore worryingly anticipated that the removal of strict liability will see employers relaxing their health and safety standards, resulting in more accidents in the workplace.

Labour MP David Anderson states that “the Bill will create a new impression that all bets are off; that employers do not have to care about health and safety, and that people can do what they want as long as they believe it is reasonable.”

Many organisations are warning against cutting corners on health and safety. The trade union ‘UNISON’ state “As spending cuts take hold, there is a danger that health and safety hazards could increase. Under-staffing, excessive workloads, cutting corners on equipment, maintenance or training, an increased threat of violence from members of the public who are losing benefits and services – these are just some of the things branches need to watch out for.” The chief executive at the Injuries Board also cautions all organisations that “cutting corners on employee safety is a cut too far”.

Lastly, the Labour MP Iain Wright who attends the Workers’ Memorial Day which commemorates all workers who have lost their lives at work, or suffer from illness and injury through work related causes writes that “By removing what is known as strict liability for health and safety… it is helping negligent employers to cut corners on health and safety and makes the workplace that more dangerous.” This article is written in the aftermath of the recent tragedy in Bangladesh where a clothes factory collapsed killing hundreds of people. Ian Wright mentions this tragedy and states that “the campaign to keep workplaces safe is not yet won.”

The post Are Government Cuts Causing Injuries? Removal of strict liability and effects on Health and Safety appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

The Ministry of Defence stated it was dedicated to improving services and last year engaged in the ‘Don’t Bottle It Up’ campaign designed to fight the stigma surrounding mental health problems in the Armed Forces and encourage more soldiers to come forward for help. It is important that the Ministry of Defence continues its efforts to remove the stigma surrounding mental health, especially post-traumatic stress disorder.

With on going and increasing defence cuts, it’s hoped those that leave service are not forgotten and that the much needed resources and support will be there for members of the Armed Forces who are at greater risk of committing violent offences and focus on helping service personnel re-integrate into civilian life following deployment.

The post Young British troops returning from duty are three times more likely to commit acts of violence appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

Will Aid are currently on course to raise a magnificent £2.1 million from the 2012 scheme. The fund will be used by the above charities to improve the lives of many individuals, groups and communities both in the UK and around the World.

Hilary Meredith Solicitors are proud to have participated in Will Aid and raised money for such a good cause. We would like to say a big thank you to all clients who took part in Will Aid 2012 for their kind generosity.

The post Will Aid appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

You may well have heard about the recent changes implemented by our Government in the area of personal injury law. As of 1st April 2013, personal injury claims, although still being accepted by Hilary Meredith Solicitors under ‘no win, no fee’ conditions, have been affected by changes in the way personal injury solicitors can obtain new client’s instructions and recover their fees from the other side. We want our existing and future clients to understand these changes and more importantly, realise they do not affect your right to make a serious injury claim, industrial disease claim, asbestos claim, brain injury claim or spinal injury claim on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis.

The recent law reforms have had a massive impact on both Regional and National personal injury firms already with many closing or struggling to survive. However, Hilary Meredith Solicitors Ltd, a niche firm specialising in serious injury claims and military accidents, has implemented radical and effective business re-structuring  such that we are better placed than ever to maximise the recovery of compensation for our clients and to  be the serious  injury solicitors you, the Claimant, need  in these uncertain times.

As a result of the new rules, if your personal injury claim is successful, you will still be able to keep most but not all your compensation, as all our legal costs can no longer be recovered from the defendants. The new rules require us to take UP TO, BUT NOT MORE, than 25% (including VAT) of your compensation to offset against our legal costs. If however your personal injury claim is not successful, you will not have to pay our costs and any liability you have for the Defendants’ costs can be covered by an insurance policy we would advise we put in place for you.

As a niche practice with many years’ experience in pursuing serious injury and military claims, we at Hilary Meredith Solicitors Ltd are confident we can maximise your compensation, thereby minimising the effects upon you of the recent reforms.  We will for example ensure recovery of the 10% uplift on compensation as required by the recent reforms, designed to offset the effects upon you, the Claimant.

Hilary Meredith Solicitors understand that the deduction of some of your compensation can seem like a daunting thought to the personal injury client, but it reflects the fact we continue to act on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis’ and do not get paid at all were the case unsuccessful.

We at Hilary Meredith Solicitors remain committed to maximising compensation for our clients and are keen for you, ‘the Personal Injury Claimant’ to join together with Hilary Meredith Solicitors to recover your deserved compensation, remembering that these new legal reforms do not affect your fundamental right to compensation following a serious injury.

Hilary Meredith Solicitors specialise in all aspects of personal injury and serious injury, including CICA claims, public liability matters, road traffic accidents, military accidents, Armed Forces Compensation Scheme claims, occupational disease and brain injury claims. To discuss your potential personal injury claim and your continued right to claim compensation, call one of our team today.

The post ‘Law Reforms’: How Do They Affect ‘You’ The Personal Injury Client? appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

I am aware of some of these rejections which we are helping to fight on behalf of our clients, the main reason being, the SPVA did not accept the injury was caused whilst on duty, this does not mean there was not a serious injury. The definition ” on duty” is ambiguous and has not been defined.

Since the commencement of the AFCS in 2005 there has in my view been a tightening of decisions to make an award and there is a growing back log of appeals .

I have long campaigned to take the word compensation out of the AFCS title it causes confusion and as the MOD are aware a reduction in the number of valid legal claims against them in the courts.

Further I would add to name and highlight Ric Clement an ex soldier who Mr Rayment has met is quite simply shocking, Ric Clement was the most severely of injured soldiers blown up by an IED he lost both legs and his genitalia making it impossible for him to father children, he has bravely spoken out about his condition and campaigned for the right of soldiers to donate sperm pre deployment. Ric is lucky to be alive, he received quite rightly so an award from the AFCS but this was capped under the terms of the scheme. Rather than complain Ric delivers talks to schools about his condition to educate those who do not understand the scarifies our soldiers make.”

The post Hilary Meredith Responds to Armed Forces Compensation Article in the Daily Mail appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

It follows that if you hire a car in Florida and you are involved in an accident that is your fault, the insurance that you purchased may not cover a personal injury claim brought against you and you could find yourself personally liable for the damages awarded against you.

It also follows that if you are involved in an accident that is not your fault and you are injured, the driver at fault may not have adequate insurance cover to compensate you for your injuries.

At Hilary Meredith Solicitors Ltd, we strongly recommend that you purchase what the Americans refer to as underinsured/uninsured motorists coverage when you hire your car as this should pay out if you are injured in an accident that is not your fault and the at fault driver’s insurance coverage isn’t adequate. Also we strongly recommend that you check the wording of the policy offered to you to ensure that it does include adequate Bodily Injury coverage in case anyone claims against you.

The post The pitfalls of hiring a vehicle in Florida appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.

The inquiry comes at a time when, statistics suggest, more and more cyclists are sustaining serious injury.

In Great Britain in 2010, 111 cyclists were killed and a further 2,660 sustained serious injury in road traffic collisions.  By 2012, these figures increased to 122 deaths and 3,085 serious injuries.  In fact, the number of cyclists sustaining serious injury has risen year-on-year since 2004.  Cyclists are vulnerable to neck injuries, back injury (including spinal cord injuries) and brain injury.  Hospital statistics show that 40% of adult cyclists involved in accidents suffer some degree of head injury, many including brain injury.

The causes of cycling accidents are varied. Common accident patterns involve motorists emerging into the path of cyclists, motorists turning across path of cyclists and collisions where a cyclist is turning right from a major or minor road.  A recurring theme appears to be motorists’ lack of awareness of cyclists, a problem perhaps best highlighted by the increasing number of cyclists injured when colliding with (or swerving to avoid) car doors suddenly opened into their path– around 600 cyclists sustained serious injury in such accidents last year.

The statistics prompted Labour MP, Barry Sheerman (who chairs the Parliamentary Advisory Council on Transport safety) to call for the greater education of motorists

“It is true there are more cyclists but there are people who are not trained enough to look in their mirrors.  It is an education challenge, we have got to raise awareness. It is much more likely that there is a quiet cyclist coming past you…..

There are worries about these figures…the number of serious injuries is up to more than 90 – a serious injury means you never walk without pain again.”

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, has recently revealed plans to introduce cycle lanes on a number of the capital’s major roads, aimed at creating a safer environment for cyclists, which would certainly appear to be a positive step.  It will be interesting to see whether the Get Britain Cycling report will lead to a similar blueprint for other major UK cities.

If you’ve been injured as a result of a cycling accident, Hilary Meredith Solicitors ltd’s dedicated team of Personal Injury Lawyers can assist in all aspects of your personal injury claim and, wherever possible, will endeavour to arrange the treatment you need to get you back on your bike as soon as possible.

The post Government’s ‘Get Britain Cycling’ Report Awaited as Bike Accidents Rise appeared first on Hilary Meredith Solicitors.