Leading industrial relations lawyer and advisor to the Police Federation of England and Wales, Binder Bansel, has criticised the Government for their lack of flexibility on the 1% cap on public sector pay increases.

Bansel, who is a partner at the leading industrial firm Pattinson & Brewer, said:

“The Federation has highlighted that there has been a real-terms cut in police pay of 15% over the last four years once reductions in allowances have been taken into account. They are now arguing for a very modest increase of 2.8% which would still see those who protect us everyday having suffered a significant reduction in their pay. This comes on top of a substantial cut to the number of officers and staff – we are seeing the thin blue line getting thinner and thinner. It will be interesting to hear what the Home Secretary has to say today when she addresses Conference.”

Steve White, the chair of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said a failure to show any flexibility on the 1% cap on public sector pay increases would mean the Federation could withdraw from the discussions and “think about dealing with things in a different way”.

Commenting as the Police Federation Conference gets underway, Mr White said:

“They can’t just say the Government only want to give us 1%. In that case we might as well withdraw from the pay review process in its entirety, because we’ll have no faith in it.
“There will undoubtedly be, as there quite often are, people in the Police Federation who will be saying that we’ve got to start lobbying for industrial rights.
“We’re not there yet – we can’t strike, we’re not allowed to – but we will have to start potentially withdrawing from the process and think about dealing with things in a different way, to show the government of the day the strength of feeling amongst the police service.”

A doctor who conquered childhood disability to achieve success – but whose career was destroyed by a series of hospital blunders after he fell down the stairs at home – has been awarded more than £450,000 in compensation after succeeding in his claim against the NHS.

As he was returning to his home in the early hours after a night out with friends, the doctor lost his footing on a flight of stairs and fell backwards. His neighbour found him in a confused state about two hours later. He was taken to hospital by ambulance, but crucial hours passed before he was transferred to a specialist unit where a brain operation was performed.

The operation failed to save him from brain damage, which has left him with impaired cognitive skills, and he has been unable to work as a doctor since. The tragedy was made all the worse by the fact that he had undergone brain surgery as a child and had been left partially paralysed. He had nevertheless overcome his disabilities to achieve his professional qualification and had worked at several hospitals, as a prison medic and as a general practitioner.

Lawyers acting on his behalf sued the NHS trust responsible for the hospital. Ruling in his favour, the High Court found that there had been a negligent delay in assessing his condition and carrying out a brain scan after he was admitted. An ambulance transfer to the specialist unit should also have been arranged earlier than it was.

The result was that the operation was unnecessarily delayed and pressure had continued to build inside his skull, worsening the damage to his brain. The doctor was awarded £454,858 in damages for his lost earnings, pain and suffering and to cover the cost of care and assistance he will need in future.

It is quite understandable that those diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease have other things on their minds than launching a compensation claim. However, as one High Court case illustrates, any delay in seeking legal advice can place the future of your loved ones in jeopardy if the worst happens.

A plumber was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a particularly lethal form of cancer of the lining of the lungs or abdomen that usually develops as a result of exposure to asbestos. He believed that he had been exposed to the substance whilst working for a local authority. However, he did not make an appointment with a solicitor straight away, partly due to the initial shock of the diagnosis and the gruelling chemotherapy treatment that followed.

During a period of remission from the disease, he was anxious to keep life as normal as possible for the sake of his wife and children and was also – wrongly – concerned that a legal claim would risk leaving his family in debt. Owing to his delay in seeking legal advice, a claim was only issued against the council about five months before he died from the disease. That was about ten weeks after the expiry of the three-year limitation period that applies in such cases.

In waiving that time limit and allowing the man’s widow to proceed with the claim, the Court noted the very human reasons for the delay. Without pre-judging the issues in the case, the Court observed that the widow appeared to have a strong case on the available evidence. The council had also suffered little or no prejudice due to the relatively short delay in lodging proceedings. In those circumstances, it was fair and just that the matter should proceed to trial.

Elderly people need support to stay living independently

Families need help who are living in terrible housing conditions

Men and women who are working for less than minimum wage need legal
help

People who have been unfairly dismissed or who are discriminated
against at work need support

People who suffer disability or illness and their carers must have a
voice
Access to justice should be equally available to everyone, regardless
of their financial situation. This principle is at the cornerstone of
our legal justice system. We at Pattinson & Brewer know this may not
always be the case in practice…
The London Legal Support Trust works to support law centres and legal
advice agencies in London and the South East by providing them with
grant funding alongside other forms of support. They do this by holding
large fundraising events, most notably the London Legal walk, and then
delivering the funds raised to the agencies where they are most needed
through grant rounds. Pattinson & Brewer are proud to support the The
London Legal Support Trust in providing access to justice to all.

A good lawyer will not only give reliable and well-informed advice but will also bring professional negotiating skills to bear, as was illustrated by a case in which a seriously injured road accident victim won the right to substantial compensation despite claims that he was not wearing a seatbelt at the time.

The teenager suffered a severe brain injury when a car in which he was a passenger skidded on a bend and collided with a tree. He was in a coma for almost a month but made such a remarkable recovery that he was able to return to school a year later. His intellect was nevertheless blunted. As a result, his earning capacity is reduced and he will need care and assistance for the rest of his life.

He brought a personal injury claim against the driver’s motor insurers, but was met by claims that he was in part responsible for his own injuries because he was not wearing a seatbelt when the accident happened. A finding to that effect would normally have resulted in a 25 per cent reduction in his damages award.

Expert witnesses were divided as to whether he had put on his seatbelt and whether that would in fact have made any difference to his injuries. However, the teenager’s legal team negotiated a settlement whereby the insurance company agreed to compensate him on the basis of 85 per cent liability.

Noting that the settlement had done away with the need for a trial of the case, and all the anxiety and expense that would have entailed, the High Court approved the settlement on the issue of liability as appropriate and realistic. The amount of the man’s compensation will be assessed at a later date.