Accident at work

john59_2

To add to this , the lad has not had the chance to put this into the company accident book as he went from the job where the accident happend to the hospital and since that time he has not been into his place of employment, will this have any adverse effects on the claim at all?

The lad as told me he has now had to make a claim on his mortgage insurance and make a claim for a loan insurance which he didnt want to do. He is now worried that this might have a knock on effect regarding insurance payments to the bank he is with.

A simple fall from a ladder and a badly twisted ankle because a manager decides to cut corners DOES have a knock on effect to a mans/womans life. Maybe in future they will listen and take note of the concerns of the employee, but in this case the lad didnt want to jepordise his job but could now face dissmisal because he might not be able to do his job because of the injury. So to those that poo poo his claim, it could be you thats in this situation.

missile

From what you have said, I am in no doubt that this lad is entitled to compensation.

It seems he has a good solicitor. He has been very prompt in preparing the letter. Fortunately his injuries don't sound too serious, but there may be complications later and I would caution against hasty acceptance of any settlement offer.

How many employees in his company? Health and Safety legislation requires that the employer maintains an accident book, it is their responsibility to record the details, not his. Working at heights has a high potential for serious injury and the company out to have carried out a risk assessment and have adequate procedures in place. It may or may not be relevant that the site rules forbid ladders. It seems he was instructed to use the ladder and has a strong case, if he did it on his own initiative then he might be regarded as partially responsible.

You might want to consult the local local HSE office for advice. See here > http://www.hse.gov.uk/

dickydonkin

SarEl wrote: »

I agree. Or to put it in another way. Employers are far from not being being aware that we do, whether we like it or not, live in a world where people sue at the drop of a hat. Whilst I get some of the point about what Pete111 is saying here, and I don't altogether have a lot of sympathy with the "I got my stilletto jammed in the crack of some perfectly laid paving stones and want to sue" brigade, employers know that this is the case. So the best protection is to ensure that you apply all appropraite health and safety training and risk assessment, that you maintain and check equipment and ensure that work is supervised. There certainly is such a thing as a genuine accident at work - nobody's fault, just an accident. And the way you prove that to be the case is to cover your back on all the procedures. A sensible employer isn't playing fast and loose with peoples safety - or their own bank balance.

Absolutely.

At least if an employer has made some effort to put into place preventative measures and safe systems of work etc. etc. any subsequent claim for injury can at least be defended but obviously more importantly, an accident would not occur in the first place.

Where an employee has disregarded any measures in place, then at worst, there may be an element of contributory negligence which would reduce the claim, but more importantly in my opinion, where an injured employee has had it pointed out to him that he has breached any safe system of work or established safe working practices, then that employee may be reluctant to claim and indeed the employer may instigate disciplinary proceedings.

Implementing safety measures should primarily be for the protection of the workforce, but in todays litigious society, you also have to consider everything is legally compliant as well.

dickydonkin

john59 wrote: »

To add to this , the lad has not had the chance to put this into the company accident book as he went from the job where the accident happend to the hospital and since that time he has not been into his place of employment, will this have any adverse effects on the claim at all?

The lad as told me he has now had to make a claim on his mortgage insurance and make a claim for a loan insurance which he didnt want to do. He is now worried that this might have a knock on effect regarding insurance payments to the bank he is with.

A simple fall from a ladder and a badly twisted ankle because a manager decides to cut corners DOES have a knock on effect to a mans/womans life. Maybe in future they will listen and take note of the concerns of the employee, but in this case the lad didnt want to jepordise his job but could now face dissmisal because he might not be able to do his job because of the injury. So to those that poo poo his claim, it could be you thats in this situation.

Ask if the employer has submitted an accident report under RIDDOR regulations.

This has to be submitted within 10 days of the incident and the accident in question does come under this legislation as the injured person has lost three days of work because of the injury.

He would be aware if it has been reported as he would receive a copy of form 2508 that should have been submitted by the employer.

Many employers are reluctant to report such accidents - particularly when Working at Height regs have potentially been breached.

Such incidents put companies on the radar of the HSE.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

dpassmore wrote: »

Ask if the employer has submitted an accident report under RIDDOR regulations.

This has to be submitted within 10 days of the incident and the accident in question does come under this legislation as the injured person has lost three days of work because of the injury.

He would be aware if it has been reported as he would receive a copy of form 2508 that should have been submitted by the employer.

Many employers are reluctant to report such accidents - particularly when Working at Height regs have potentially been breached.

Such incidents put companies on the radar of the HSE.

I agree with everything you have said on this thread.

However, you must admit some of the points raised in the solicitors letter is going to do nothing other than create a defensive attitude by the employer & he solicitor.

Some of it is complete tosh.

dickydonkin

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

I agree with everything you have said on this thread.

However, you must admit some of the points raised in the solicitors letter is going to do nothing other than create a defensive attitude by the employer & he solicitor.

Some of it is complete tosh.

Technically, it is likely that the employer was in breach of the regulations listed and although I am not dismissing the lads injury, the fact is that if someone had done exactly the same thing on the ladder but had fallen back after missing the step and killed himself (such as example 1 on the link on my earlier post) the breaches listed would be identical.

Obviously, the cause of the accident will likely transpire to be the same, but the outcome is obviously very much worse.

You are right however, but this is what happens now with the majority of claims and why it is vital for employers to ensure that they are legally compliant - although even the most safety conscious employers can still get it wrong.

We are told to 'keep it simple' in Health & Safety, but the solicitors letter above highlights just how difficult a concept that is to achieve.

It is not the solicitors fault - he is just interpreting the law in respect of the relevant legislation that pertains to the incident.

The lad cannot be blamed either - he is the victim and although to many the accident may seem trivial, there has been financial loss and personal suffering because of it.

Unfortunately, it will likely be the employer who will be the loser in this incident - although he should have employers liability insurance, by having to defend the claim, this could be costly.

Should the HSE become involved, there is potential for a criminal case and all of the grief and disruption to business that can cause.

The principle of 'keeing it simple' is good one, but in my opinion, the amount of legislation the UK has to contend with, will just not allow it.

We have our own statute H&S law (Health & Safety at Work Act) which is as relevant today as it was when it became law in 1974 but now we have to contend with EU directives and other legislation.

Many employers do knowingly breach H&S legislation, but the reality is that many (in particular smaller businesses) are just not aware of their legal requirements and unfortunately, it is only when something like an accident occurs when the full force of the law can be painful in more ways than one.

Googlewhacker

I do agree with the procedures and their reasons behind them but where is the personal responsability gone these days?

Hammyman

Actually, Health and Safety state that an employees safety is a JOINT responsibility. The employee is likely to fall flat on his face with this claim. I'm quite sure the solicitor thinks they have a case - I've yet to find a solicitor who doesn't tell a client what they don't want to hear.

SarEl

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

I agree with everything you have said on this thread.

However, you must admit some of the points raised in the solicitors letter is going to do nothing other than create a defensive attitude by the employer & he solicitor.

Some of it is complete tosh.

Speaking as a lawyer - you want me to tell the other side what their rights are? Sorry. No. I go for the jugular. If their lawyer isn't as good as me - tough.

dickydonkin

Hammyman wrote: »

Actually, Health and Safety state that an employees safety is a JOINT responsibility. The employee is likely to fall flat on his face with this claim. I'm quite sure the solicitor thinks they have a case - I've yet to find a solicitor who doesn't tell a client what they don't want to hear.

He will likely win his case.

You are correct though that there are provisions in the Health & Safety at Work Act (secs 7&8) and The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations (reg 14) that do indeed place some onus on the employee in respect of responsibility, however, I suspect that those will not come into play in this case.

I cannot see any reason either for any degree of contributory negligence on behalf of the employee. Now if the lad had been clowning around or there was some degree of horseplay going on, then that could be a different matter, however, the usual defence for horseplay is lack of monitoring and supervision so the employer could likely be stuffed there as well.

Having dealt with many such situations (from both sides of the clipboard being a Union Branch Official and a Health & Safety Officer), from what has been posted, the injured person will likely get compensated for his injury and losses.

I have to concede that yes, any employee pursuing an injury claim at work has a myriad of legislation on his side and whether that is right or wrong is for another debate, although I have given my opinion on that one earlier.

As for solicitors not telling clients what they don't want to hear, certainly the ones I have dealt with have alway played the Devils Advocate by highlighting any potential pitfalls in a case (and rightly so in my opinion) but I suspect many don't.