Insurance injury Specialist report.

homi

A friend of the family is in the process of making an injury claim after a fall. 

He was referred to a specialist and asked how he was managing, and he told him that he was previously independent doing everything himself but now his daughter has to help with certain tasks ( shopping , cleaning  ,gardening etc)


On the report the specialist wrote under the Loss Consequential to accident/injury

" His domestic activities were affected. His daughter had to help" 

" His social activities were affected , His daughter had to help"


Should this not be 

" His domestic activities ARE affected; his daughter has to help"

Am I reading it wrong or is he referring to when the accident happened? The way I read it it seems that he no longer needs help whic his incorrect.

DullGreyGuy

You need to read the whole report covering both recovery to date and prognosis 

homi

thanks , the prognosis was full recovery after 24 months from the accident but requested to see him back at that date just in case so the claim has to remain open. 

It was the use of the "were " and " had" which was the concern. 

DullGreyGuy

homi said:

thanks , the prognosis was full recovery after 24 months from the accident but requested to see him back at that date just in case so the claim has to remain open. 

It was the use of the "were " and " had" which was the concern. 

It's not going to make a material difference given the prognosis but if they aren't comfortable then speak to their solicitors. If its a soft tissue injury caught under the new whiplash legislation it'll make not a spot of difference.

homi

DullGreyGuy said:

homi said:

thanks , the prognosis was full recovery after 24 months from the accident but requested to see him back at that date just in case so the claim has to remain open. 

It was the use of the "were " and " had" which was the concern. 

It's not going to make a material difference given the prognosis but if they aren't comfortable then speak to their solicitors. If its a soft tissue injury caught under the new whiplash legislation it'll make not a spot of difference.

Thanks, the injury was a fracture in the lower back they were laid up for 2 months and only just about getting back on their feet but still on painkillers. 

DullGreyGuy

homi said:

DullGreyGuy said:

homi said:

thanks , the prognosis was full recovery after 24 months from the accident but requested to see him back at that date just in case so the claim has to remain open. 

It was the use of the "were " and " had" which was the concern. 

It's not going to make a material difference given the prognosis but if they aren't comfortable then speak to their solicitors. If its a soft tissue injury caught under the new whiplash legislation it'll make not a spot of difference.

Thanks, the injury was a fracture in the lower back they were laid up for 2 months and only just about getting back on their feet but still on painkillers. 

The impact statements dont carry much weight, many are carbon copies... indeed an ex-boss who had a back injury from a car accident had a big argument with her lawyers as the medical report said it had stopped her socialising such as going dancing which had never been discussed and she said she hadn't been dancing in 30 years... her lawyers said it made no difference

I doubt it will make a material difference but he is paying his lawyers for a reason so should take the matter up with them