15th June 2022 – Our client, a 66-year-old man from Whitstable, suffered a partial loss of vision in his left eye due to a catalogue of failures which caused his glaucoma treatment (trabeculectomy surgery) to be delayed by up to 12 months overall. As a result of the delayed treatment (which was due to a combination of administrative errors and service delays), the visual acuity in our client’s left eye reduced from 6/12 to 6/60, and he also suffered a loss of the left superior field of vision in his left eye (on top of the loss of the left inferior field of vision which had already occurred non-negligently by the point that the delays in treatment began). Those reductions in vision would have been avoided if our client had been treated appropriately.
The visual loss arising from the negligence most significantly impacted upon our client’s confidence to drive. Although he remained able to drive legally because of his residual overall vision he no longer felt confident that he could drive safely.
This resulted in him losing his job, which was heavily reliant upon his ability to drive, and resulted in a loss of earnings over a period of around 2 years (during which time he was in receipt of benefits as he was unable to find any alternative employment).
He also suffered a psychiatric injury.
Upon our setting out the basis of the claim to the East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust, they admitted breach of duty in respect of the various delays in treatment, but they denied that this had resulted in any harm to our client (incomprehensibly attempting to argue that because the reduction in vision took place after the delays, the delays were not the cause of the visual loss; or alternatively that our client would have lost his vision in any event but that the delays had merely accelerated that process).
Unfortunately, this resulted in much further work to be undertaken in order to persuade the Defendant as to the correctness of our client’s claim on causation.
Ultimately, the Defendant was persuaded and put forward an initial offer to settle the claim for £30,000. That offer was rejected, and the Defendant then made an offer of £45,000. That offer was also rejected, and the Defendant then made an offer of £55,000, which was accepted by our client.
Following settlement of the claim, our client said “It wasn’t an easy decision to take action against the NHS, but we thank you for your professionalism which has made this matter easier.”
Alex Tengroth, senior solicitor at Fairweathers LLP, said “Many of my clients over the years have said that they were not sure about bringing a claim against the NHS, which is quite rightly a revered national treasure. However, they are always glad that they did bring a claim, either because they received compensation, because they received answers during the claim process, or simply because they received an acknowledgment that they were wronged. In my opinion it is very important that meritorious claims continue to be brought against the NHS, in order to identify where improvements are required, and to maintain trust amongst the public.”
If you or your family need the assistance of an experienced team of Clinical Negligence Solicitors surrounding an inquest or civil claim then please do not hesitate to phone us free on 0800 999 5585, request a call back or submit your case details.