Personal Injury Law Blogs

How to improve your car accident case settlement

car accidentCar accidents are one of the leading causes of accidental injury in the United States.  After you are injured in car accident, you may find yourself not only dealing with the physical pain of an injury.  You may also find yourself in financial stress as you are faced with significant medical bills.   At the same time, you may be unable to work for an extended period as you recover from your injuries, resulting in a loss of income for you and your family.   Thankfully, you may be recover damages from the person whose negligence caused the car accident either through a personal injury lawsuit, or through a settlement with the insurance company.  A car accident lawyer notes that the amount of money you receive after you are injured in a car accident depends on a number of factors.  However, in order to recover damages, you must be able to prove that you were not a fault for the accident and that someone else was at fault, and the extent of your damages.

Evidence of Fault

Showing that the other driver was at fault for the accident and that you were not at fault is critical for maximizing damages.  Thus, it is critical to gather as much information as possible at the scene.

  1. Witnesses.  Make sure that you get the names and contact information for all witnesses.  Testimony from eyewitnesses, particularly third- party witnesses, may have a significant impact on a judge, jury, or insurance adjuster.
  2. Photographs.  Photographs will help determine what lead to the accident.  Make sure that you take photos of not only the vehicles, but also of skid marks in the road and of the scene around the accident. Evidence of road conditions or possible distractions may be important in pinpointing fault.
  3. Police Report.  Make sure that law enforcement is immediately called and that you give a police report.  Police reports are often important evidence in determining fault.
  4. Say very little.  Say very little to others at the scene.  Do not discuss details of the accident with the others involved.  Do not say more to the police officer taking the police report than necessary.  Do not comment on fault.  Just give the facts and leave it up to others to interpret them.  Do not talk to the other driver’s insurance company.  Anything that you say immediately following the accident may be used later in determining fault.  In the moments following an accident, you may not have an accurate picture of what really happened.  Your perspective may be skewed.  Victims have been known to take the blame for an accident, only to later find out that they were not at fault.

Evidence of Injuries

Your damages from a personal injury lawsuit can be not only the amount of your medical bills and your property loss, but also an amount for your pain and suffering. Pain and suffering awards are determined based on a number of factors.  However, the more severe your injuries, the more apparent your injuries, the higher the pain and suffering award is likely to be.  For example, if the accident left you with an unattractive scar on your face, you are likely to receive a higher award than if your injury left no scars. 

  1. Photographs.  Make sure photographs are taken of your injuries  as soon as possible after the accident.  Bruises will fade over time.  So have someone take photos right away.  Also make sure that you get photos of your vehicle to give perspective of the severity of your injuries as a result of the damage to the vehicle.
  2. Doctor’s Testimony.  Go to the emergency room via ambulance immediately after the accident.  Be very clear and detailed when describing your symptoms to your doctor.  Also be honest with the doctor about any pre-existing conditions.  In order to give credible, unimpeachable testimony, it is important for the doctor to have a complete picture of your overall health.

Car accidents are often much more complicated than they seem.  It may be clear to you that the other driver caused the accident by, for example, speeding  or failing to stop at a red light. However, proving fault is not always as easy as it seems.  Therefore, it is critical that you hire a car accident lawyer to help you take the legal steps necessary to make your case as strong as possible.  This is the best way to make sure that you not only win your personal injury lawsuit, but it is the best way to ensure that the damages that you are awarded or insurance settlement that you receive are maximized. You can read at the website more info on how car accident lawyers can help you get compensated.

What is the one thing that injured drivers often fail to do immediately after a car accident that significant impacts their financial settlements?

Are You A Safe Winter Driver?

winter drivingHow easily we forget how difficult driving can be once the first snowfall arrives.  Even when a mere dusting of snow hits the roadways, some drivers seem to forget all of the road rules and act as if they had never driven defensively while other drivers are over confident and can cause an accident due to reckless driving.  Whether you’re a longtime resident of the Northwest and are used to snowfalls in the mountains or you have recently moved to the flat, snowy plains of the Midwest, you will need to know how to drive safely in the winter time.  According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, each year approximately 225,000 vehicle accidents occur due to just snow/sleet.  Additionally, an estimated 70,900 and 870 drivers and passengers are killed each year in winter weather related accidents.  While weather is unpredictable and relentless at times, driving more carefully during winter conditions can reduce your risk of being involved in an accident.

Prepare For Winter Driving: Are you Ready?

Winter weather has the potential of striking at any time and sometimes at the most inconvenient moments, but it’s vital to your safety (and other motorists’) to make sure you and your vehicle are ready for winter.  The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), has provided a checklist that will help you stay safer when a winter storm hits; according to OSHA, remember the three “Ps” (Prepare, Protect, and Prevent):

  • PREPARE for the Trip: Winter weather is particularly hard on vehicles.  Before you head out on the road, especially during winter, you want to make sure that your car is in good working condition.  Is your battery fully charged?  Are your fluids at good levels?  Are your tires is good condition?  Is your car stocked with an emergency kit and other items that can help you if you become stalled on the side of the road?  Make sure you know how to drive defensively and always give yourself extra time.  Remember!  Ice roads can slow down stopping distances and your overall commuting time.
  • PROTECT Yourself:  It should go without saying that you should always buckle up.  Failing to wear a seat belt or providing proper restraints for all passengers in your car is against the law.  Always have the appropriate car seat for young children and infants and try to keep children passengers in the backseat, whenever possible.
  • PREVENT Crashes on the Road:  You can’t control the weather or the road conditions, but you can control the way YOU drive.  Eliminate driving distractions such as texting, cellphone use, or eating while driving.  Avoid reckless driving behaviors such as aggressive driving or drunk driving.  Snow can often have a hypnotizing effect, especially in the evening and it’s easy to lose focus or feel tired.  Fatigued or drowsy driving is just as dangerous as drunk driving, so stay alert and take a break when you start to lose focus on your driving.

Take Control During Winter Weather

When road conditions become hazardous during winter weather it’s best to stay off the roads, but if you must drive follow these safety precautions to avoid an accident due to winter weather:

  • Snow and ice covered roads require slower speeds and slower acceleration.  Even if you have an all-wheel drive (AWD) vehicle, you must drive for the weather conditions.  Additionally, you are not immune to road condition issues such as spinouts, so don’t assume that your car is safer than everyone else’s.
  •  Always use your headlights.  When snow is falling heavily, vehicles are hard to see; your headlights make you more visible to other motorists.
  •  Keep a safe following distance.  Keeping at least one car length distance between you and the vehicle in front of you is vital, especially if the vehicle in front needs to brake suddenly.
  • Always slow down when approaching intersections, bridges, off ramps, or areas on the road that are visibly icy.  Even if you are familiar with roads, you should not drive at the same speed that you would during non-winter seasons.
  •  Never pass a snowplow until it is safe to do so.  A collision with a snowplow is deadly.

Driving in a Winter Wonderland

Driving during the winter can be enjoyable, offering breath taking scenery.  While winter driving can bring out anxiety in even the most experienced of drivers, it’s best to stay calm, aware of your surroundings and the condition of the road.  Don’t let your journey through a Winter Wonderland turn deadly due to your unpreparedness and reckless driving behaviors during the winter months.

 

Owner of firm prosecuted after customer dies in accident at workplace

The owner of a Berkshire car maintenance firm has been heavily fined after a customer was killed in a workplace accident in 2012.

Mr Mark Walker, 79, was fined £7,500 by the Crown Court and ordered to pay substantial costs after a customer was killed in a workplace accident at his car maintenance business on 12 March 2012.

On the day in question Mr Walker, who owns the car maintenance firm “Complete Car Care”  in Wraysbury, Berkshire, was working at the firm’s premises. Mr Walker was reversing his van down the driveway as Mr Frederick Gleeson, 79, was leaving the premises, having dropped his car off to have an oil leak checked. Mr Gleeson was unable to react in time to the oncoming vehicle and was struck, leading to his banging his head on the driveway. He later died in hospital on the same day from his injuries.

The Health and Safety Executive subsequently investigated the accident and found that there had been a number of health and safety breaches by Mr Walker at the firm. In particular, he had put in place no system for managing the movement of vehicles at the premises and had made no effort to ensure that pedestrians and vehicles were segregated. Further, he had no direct rear visibility and a rear monitoring camera that had been fitted to the van hadn’t been used.  The HSE therefore recommended a prosecution of the firm.

The case came before the Reading Crown Court on 13 December 2013. Mr Walker pleaded not guilty to the charges brought under two separate breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and there was a week-long trial, culminating on 18 December 2013. Mr Walker was found guilty of the breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £7,500, as well as being ordered to undertake 250 hours of community service. He is also technically liable for the prosecution’s costs, which amount to around £75,000, although this figure will apparently be covered by his insurance. The Judge ruled that Mr Walker’s breach of duty was a direct cause of Mr Gleeson’s death.

Neither Mr Walker nor his criminal defence lawyers appear to have commented on the sentencing since it was released.

HSE inspector Mr Nigel Fitzhugh stated after the sentencing: “Mr Gleeson’s tragic death was entirely preventable, and could have been avoided had Mark Walker taken precautions before reversing his van.”

Redmans Solicitors are employment law solicitors and can help persons who have been injured in the workplace or elsewhere claim personal injury

Please note that Redmans Solicitors were not associated in any way with this case

Council heavily fined after worker suffers severe injuries on the job

A Scottish local authority has been heavily fined by the Sheriff Court after a worker suffered a severe injury in the course of his employment in January 2011.

South Lanarkshire Council was fined £50,000 after one of its workers suffered a serious injury to his abdomen in an accident at work on 13 January 2011.

On the day in question Mr Derek Maitland, 37, was working as part of a three-man crew on a glass recycling vehicle in Glen Turret, East Kilbride. Mr Maitland was driving the vehicle but work came to a halt when the side-lifter on the lorry became jammed. He therefore unplugged the side lifter’s control unit from its berth outside the cabin and took it inside the cab, as per procedure. A short while later Mr Maitland exited the cab and re-connected the control panel. However, the engine appears to have been left running and this meant that the control panel had power to it at the time it was reconnected. The side lifter’s bucket therefore lowered on to Mr Maitland, crushing his abdomen against the lorry. This resulted in extremely serious injuries to Mr Maitland, including having to have most of his colon and small bowel removed, and having to have extensive repair surgery on damaged arteries. As a result of the accident Mr Maitland is now unable to at and digest normally and has to be fed intravenously. After a period of time off work sick, though, Mr Maitland has subsequently returned to employment. It is not currently known whether Mr Maitland has or will claim personal injury against the Council.

The Health and Safety Executive were notified of the accident and took steps to investigate. This investigation found that a combination of factors had caused or contributed to the accident, including a failure to carry out an adequate risk assessment, a failure to put in place a safe system of work, and a failure to provide adequate information or training to staff. The HSE therefore recommended that the Council be prosecuted for health and safety offences.

The case came before the Hamilton Sheriffs Court on 18 December 2013. South Lanarkshire Council pleaded guilty to three breaches of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was a result fined £50,000.

Neither the Council nor its criminal defence solicitors appear to have commented after the sentencing.

HSE inspector Eve Macready stated after the sentencing: “South Lanarkshire Council understood the risks of working with such vehicles but although supervisors were aware of this developing practice relating to the removal of the pendant controllers, they did nothing to discourage it. The systems of work in place should have triggered activity to stop this practice or review existing arrangements.”

Redmans Solicitors are employment law solicitors and can help those injured at work to claim personal injury

Please note that Redmans Solicitors were not associated in any way with this case

Fire station commander loses race discrimination claim

A black fire station commander has lost his Employment Tribunal claim after he alleged that he had been racially discriminated against by his fire service.

Commander Warren Simpson, a fire station commander for the West Midlands Fire Service, made the claim for direct race discrimination in the Employment Tribunal after he felt that he was being passed over for promotion by his bosses because of his skin colour. Commander Simpson, who is believed to be the highest-ranked black officer in the West Midlands, claimed that his career path was blocked and, further, that he had been racially harassed and bullied because of his skin colour.

Mr Simpson claimed that he had suffered the following detrimental treatment whilst working at West Midlands Fire Service:

  • A failure to promote him as compared to white colleagues
  • A failure to transfer him
  • Colleagues referring to him as “Frank Brunk”

Employment Judge MacMillan stated in the Employment Tribunal’s judgment that his discrimination claim was “a complaint without substance. The claimant is aggrieved he has been unable to achieve a substantive promotion. There is no evidence whatsoever of less favourable treatment than any comparable white officer where the circumstances of that white officer are truly comparable as required by the Equality Act”. This included Commander Simpson’s failure to show any occasion on which he had been passed over for promotion in favour of a white collleague who scored lower than him in promotion exercies. Judge Macmillan went on to dismiss Mr Simpson’s harassment claim, stating that Mr Simpson had appeared in video footage to be “very obviously just as amused as everybody else” and went on to conclude that “we have dealt with each issue raised by Mr Simpson and all the claimant’s complaints of race discrimination fail.”

There does not appear to have been any comment from Commander Simpson, nor the West Midlands Fire Service, after the release of the Employment Tribunal judgment.

Chris Hadrill, an employment solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “In order to succeed with direct race discrimination cases a Claimant must show that they have been less favourably treated (e.g. dismissed or not promoted etc.) because of their skin colour, nationality, national origin, ethnicity or ethnic origin. If the Claimant isn’t able to show any detrimental treatment as compared to a relevant comparator then their discrimination claim is extremely likely to fail.”

Redmans Solicitors are unfair dismissal solicitors and settlement agreement solicitors based in London

Dangerous Professions that Pay Very, Very Well

Dangerous ProfessionsSome people are drawn to a dangerous job or career path because they are adventurous thrill seekers, while others may gravitate to the same profession because it pays well and doesn’t require a college degree. Obviously not every high risk job is going to be open to those without a college degree, but there is a surprising number of $50K+ careers where experience is preferred over a college education. Here’s a list of five extremely hazardous vocations that pay well, some requiring a degree and some may even require you to contact an estate attorney.

 Airplane Repossession

Yes, this is a job, and yes, it can be dangerous. It’s different than vehicle repossession, which is a dangerous job in and of itself, because airplane repossession involves dealing with the private bodyguards of the wealthy, estate trespassing issues, airport security, airplane safety (has it been maintained? can it even be flown?) and a litany of other obstacles. The pay is great, though. It’s commission-based, so depending on the planes value, a person in this line of work can earn between $10,000 and $90,000 per job.

Airplane Pilot

Speaking of flying, airplane pilots themselves have dangerous jobs, especially those who fly private aircraft. Not only is the job dangerous, but liability is a big factor as well. If a pilot does crash, but survives the plane accident, he or she faces the danger of litigation. For example, if a pilot crash landed at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Texas, he could expect to hear from a Houston wrongful death attorney, regardless of whether or not he did everything right. Just as driving a vehicle with passengers carries an inherent risk of liability, so does flying an airplane.

Of course, there are many other risks involved. There are so many dangers, in fact, that compared to the 2012 overall average number of work-related deaths in the U.S. (3.2 for every 100,000), the airplane pilot’s average was an incredible 56.1 per 100,000. The job does pay well though. The average commercial airplane pilot earns about $92,000 a year.

Oil Rig Worker

An oil rig worker has a job that is dangerous and dirty, but the job appeals to so many people because a college degree isn’t required. It does help when it comes to salary though. In 2011, oil rig workers earned an average of a little more than $99,000 a year. Drilling consultants earned well over $200K, but even those who had been on the job for less than a year earned just under $70K on average. 

FBI Agent

For obvious reasons, a career as an FBI agent is dangerous. Always out to catch the bad guy, agents intentionally put themselves in the line of fire. While there are a lot of desk duties involved, the nature of the pursuit is what makes this one of the most dangerous in the United States. An FBI agent’s salary isn’t bad, with trainees earning about $51,000 a year while in the academy, and then between about $61K and $70K with their first assignment. If the agent is assigned to an area that has a higher than average cost of living (New York, San Francisco), they may also receive a one-time relocation payment of approximately $22,000. 

Private Security Contractor

Another dangerous profession that pays well is that of a private security contractor (PSC). Most PSC’s have strong military backgrounds, including special operations. The location and nature of most of the job assignments (protecting diplomats, etc in war zones) makes this an especially dangerous profession since, like an FBI agent, a private security contractor intentionally puts him or herself in the line of fire. Depending on the assignment, and location and experience of the individual, a PSC can earn up to $1,000 a day. The jobs aren’t always consistent and often there are no benefits attached, but for someone looking for a career of adventure and peril, this just may be it.

A job that is inherently dangerous isn’t for the faint of heart. Sometimes they come in the form of property owner neglect and sometimes they’re just obvious. Some of the vocations listed can be considered blue collar, some are white collar, and some don’t require a collar at all. No matter how the jobs are categorized, though, they all have two things in common – they are incredibly dangerous and they pay very well because of it.

 

Leisure centre firm fined £45,000 after burns at swimming pool

The owner of an Essex leisure centre has been heavily fined by the Crown Court after a child suffered serious burns in an accident at its premises in 2012.

Leisure Connection Limited was fined £45,000 and ordered to pay substantial costs after a toddler was severely burned at their leisure centre in Great Dunmow, Essex in February 2012.

On the day in question – 18 February 2012 – the toddler slipped and fell on his bottom at the leisure centre. He unfortunately fell on a drain which had recently been cleaned with sodium hydroxide and that hadn’t been rinsed down properly afterwards. This caused the chemical – which is designed to dissolve grease and hair in drains – to burn through the toddler’s skin, causing him third-degree burns to his buttocks and the back of his right thigh. This injury meant that the toddler had to be rushed to hospital, where he stayed ten days and was obliged to undergo a skin graft. It is not currently known whether the toddler’s family has made a claim for personal injury after the accident.

The Health and Safety Executive subsequently investigated and found that the company had failed to put a safe system of work in place for cleaning the drain, including a failure to delineate whose responsibility it was to clean the drain and how the drain should be cleaned. It was further found that the company had failed to properly train staff in the use of the chemicals. The HSE therefore recommended that a prosecution of the company go ahead.

The case came before the Chelmsford Crown Court on 5 December 2013. Leisure Connection Limited pleaded guilty to a breach of s.3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 and was fined £45,000 and ordered to pay the prosecution’s costs to the sum of £20,746. Neither the firm nor its criminal defence solicitors appear to have commented on the matter after the release of the verdict.

An HSE Inspector, Kim Tichias, stated after the court released its sentencing: “Leisure centre operators have a duty to ensure that members of the public of all ages can enjoy their facilities safely. This includes putting the appropriate training and system of work in place to manage the risks of using cleaning chemicals.”

Marc Hadrill, a personal injury solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “Organisations have a duty to not only protect their employees from harm to their health, safety and welfare, but also have a general duty to members of the public to ensure that their premises are as safe as reasonably practicable in the circumstances.”

Redmans Solicitors are employment law solicitors and can help injured workers claim personal injury if they’ve been injured in an accident at work

Please note that Redmans Solicitors were not associated in any way with this case

Lincolnshire firm fined by courts after fall from height

A Lincolnshire firm has been fined by the Lincoln Magistrates’ Court and ordered to pay the costs of the prosecution after a worker was seriously injured in a fall at work this year.

Timmins Engineering and Construction Limited was fined £4,000 after an unnamed 30-year-old worker suffered a broken back after a fall from height on 17 January 2013.

On the day in question the worker, who was employed by Timmins Engineering and Constructions Limited, was working on replacing fibre cement sheets on a storage building with prepared steel sheets, using a variety of equipment. Part of the way through installing the metal sheets, the worker stepped on one of the cement sheets. This was not strong enough to support his weight and fractured, causing him to fall to the floor below. He managed to land on his feet but then fell on his back, with his vertebra taking the impact. It is not currently known whether the worker has or will claim personal injury against his employer.

The Health and Safety Executive investigated the accident and found that there had been a number of serious health and safety violations by the company, including the fact that although the work had been planned, it was an extremely unsafe method of working and the firm had failed to mitigate against the risks of the danger of working with fragile material. It therefore recommended that the firm be prosecuted for health and safety breaches.

The case came before the Lincoln Magistrates’ Court on 12 December 2013, with Timmins Engineering and Construction Limited pleading guilty to two separate breaches of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. The firm was therefore fined £4,000 and ordered to pay the prosecution’s costs to the amount of £985.

Neither Timmins Engineering and Construction Limited nor their criminal defence solicitors appear to have commented on the case since the sentencing.

Chris Hadrill, an employment solicitor at Redmans, commented on the case: “Employers have an obligation to ensure that the method of work that their employees is undertaking is safe – in this case a worker was injured because the firm employing failed to ensure that the method of work was in fact safe.”

HSE Inspector Mr Chris Copeman stated after the sentencing: “The worker sustained a serious injury that could have been avoided had a safer system of work been used for removing the fragile sheets. The risk of serious or even fatal injury is high and eminently foreseeable with this type of work, and it is vital that the correct equipment and methods are in place.”

Redmans Solicitors are employment law solicitors who can help you claim personal injury if you’ve been injured in an accident at work

The facts about Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

As figures emerge which suggest that one in five veterans suffer from the effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. CBD has shown great promise as treatment for people with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, you can find high-quality CBD products at https://cbdarmour.co.uk/cbd-oil.html. It also appears that there are a number of myths and misnomers which surround the condition.

Not only do these myths make it difficult for those suffering with PTSD to cope with their everyday lives, but also make it difficult for those with little experience of the condition to have empathy for those suffering.

Myth 1

One of the first myths is that only people returning from active service suffer from PTSD whilst other people who have experienced traumatic situations do not. Evidence suggests that people who have been the victims of violent crimes or situations, those who have been involved in accidents or incidents which left them or others with injuries, and those who have suffered sudden bereavements as the result of sudden or traumatic situations are just as likely to suffer from PTSD as veterans and those returning from active service. In fact, people from everyday lives are just as likely to make Post Traumatic Stress Disorder claims as those from a military background.

Myth 2

There are four main groups of symptoms of PTSD and as a result, many people have the mistaken belief that a sufferer will have all four.

The first is re-experience which is to say nightmares, flashbacks or having triggers which can bring about a memory. The second is avoidance which is where the sufferer refuses or is unwilling to discuss, consider or be exposed to anything which reminds them of the event in question. Thirdly there is avoidance of social situations, lack of trust and detachment and finally there is arousal which is where a sufferer can be seen to be on a constant state of alert. They may have insomnia, over-reactions to stimulus, may be agitated or unable to rest.

Because these are the main symptoms, it is expected that all people suffering from PTSD will suffer from all four groups of symptoms. However, just as some pregnant women experience sickness and others don’t, people with PTSD don’t all show the same symptoms and individuals may experience them to varying degrees.

Myth 3

There is a very common misconception that everyone suffering from PTSD will be violent or exhibit a poor temperament. This has been mis-proven and psychologists now believe that a person with PTSD is no more likely to exhibit violent or erratic behaviour than anyone else.

Myth 4

The final myth relates to the potential for the future. Many people with inadequate information on head injury claims might believe that once a person has PTSD they will continue to suffer for the rest of their lives. However, just as many other psychological disorders, such as depression, anxiety and stress may be cured with the right treatment, as can PTSD. Many of the people suffering now may, through the correct treatment which can be procured through Blackwater Law in Essex as part of a PTSD claim, go on to lead a full and enjoyable life free of their symptoms.

Personal Injury firms need to change their ways to survive

The Jackson Reforms 2013 are so-called for Lord Justice Jackson who was tasked with preparing a report in which he reviewed the costs of civil litigation and assessed how they affected access to justice.

These changes came into force in April 2013, and have seen major changes to the way in which litigation cases, such as personal injury are heard and determined.

The changes

Jackson proposed a number of changes and for the majority these have come into force. In chief, he determined that referral fees should be abolished, that conditional fee agreements should change, that contingency fees should change, that damages should be more highly awarded but that the amount solicitors can charge for successful claims should be capped at 25% of the received amount, and that the amount for certain injuries should be capped to prevent excessive claims being sought.

The reaction

Prior to the introduction of the Jackson reforms 2013, there was some concern as to how personal injury firms like Blackwater Law would handle the new regulations.

Of course, the main aim of the reforms was to ensure that whilst those firms, such as Blackwater Law who upheld the morality of PI law, would succeed whilst the less reputable firms who have damaged the reputation of the industry would be unable to operate.

However, as the changes have taken place, many of the leading personal injury firms have suggested that even the more reputable firms need to amend their policy and actions in order to survive post-Jackson.

Key among these is David Marshall, the Managing Partner of Anthony Gold. Mr Marshall told firms they must “get big, get niche or get out” if they are to survive the changes. He suggested that the firms who continued with business as usual could lose up to 40% of their income leaving them without profits.

In addition, whilst many firms have reported little changes in their profits, accounts or business, Mr Marshall suggested that many of these may be relying on cases they took on prior to the Jackson reforms 2013, and prior to any of the other warnings issued by personal injury news forums.

Get big

Key among Mr Marshall’s directions is for firms to “get big”. He believes that those firms who merge with claims management companies and create a commoditised business could see a 400% increase in their volume of work. He also suggests that these firms could save on large wages bills by employing less qualified staff and more information technology.

Get niche

His second suggestion was that firms create themselves a niche market. They could do this, he claims, either by way of a boutique firm or a back to basics local firm. In his boutique model, the firm would specialise in certain areas such as military claims or abuse cases, abandoning other work in favour. In comparison, a back to basics business model would see the firm focusing on local areas and personal service.

Mr Marshall seems under no illusions about the effect that either of these ideas, or the overall notion of the Jackson Reforms 2013 will have on the Personal Injury industry: “We are going to be earning a hell of a lot less per case,” Marshall said. “The whole system is designed to ensure that.”