E-bikes have become an increasingly popular form of transport in the UK. With their rise in popularity, it is no surprise that there were more than 250 collisions in London alone involving e-bikes and other road users in a recent year. As a pedestrian, understanding your rights is crucial if you are involved in a road traffic accident.
Understanding the Law: E-Bikes vs. E-Mopeds
The legal distinction between e-bikes and e-mopeds is crucial. A genuine e-bike, also known as an Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle (EAPC), is simply a bicycle with a motor. To be legal in the UK, it must meet three key requirements:
It must have pedals that can be used to propel it.
The electric motor must have a maximum continuous rated power of no more than 250 watts.
The electrical assistance must cut off when the bike reaches 15.5 mph.
If an e-bike meets these rules, it can be used on roads and in cycle lanes, just like a regular pedal bike. The rider must be at least 14 years old, but they do not need a licence, insurance or to wear a helmet by law.
If an e-bike does not meet these requirements—for example, if the motor is more powerful or it can be powered by a throttle at over 3.7 mph without pedalling—it is classified as a moped or motorbike. This means it must be taxed, registered, and insured, and the rider must have a valid licence and wear a helmet.
If you are a pedestrian and are struck by an e-bike, it’s highly likely the rider will not have insurance, as it is not a legal requirement for EAPCs. This means you would have to pursue a claim for your injuries and losses directly against the individual rider.
Because legal e-bikes are not classed as motor vehicles, the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB)—which compensates victims of uninsured drivers—is generally unable to assist. This can be a significant issue if the e-bike rider has no assets to pay a claim, making it difficult to recover compensation.
However, there are exceptions:
Modified E-Bikes: If the e-bike has been modified and falls outside the legal definition of an EAPC, it may be treated as a motor vehicle. In such a case, the MIB might be able to help.
Vicarious Liability: If the rider was acting in the course of their employment (e.g., as a food delivery driver), you may be able to pursue a claim against their employer. This depends on the legal relationship between the employer and the rider, but it can be a vital avenue for compensation.
Your Steps After an E-Bike Accident
If you are a pedestrian involved in a collision with an e-bike, follow these steps to protect your position:
Obtain all the details of the rider: Get their name, address, and contact information.
Record information about the e-bike: Note the make and model, and if you can, take a photo. If you have any reason to believe it has been adapted or modified, make a note of this.
Get the employer’s details: If the rider was a delivery driver, get the name of the company they work for.
Seek medical attention: Your health is the priority, and your medical records will be crucial evidence.
Get legal advice: The law in this area is complex. An experienced solicitor can help you determine if you have a valid claim and who to pursue it against. At ASD Solicitors, we can help you understand your rights and guide you through the process. We may be able to assist on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis, so you have nothing to lose by getting in touch.
For further information or to discuss your specific situation, please contact Chris Chappell at [email protected].
E-scooters have become an increasingly common sight on UK roads, and with their rise in popularity, so have the number of collisions. If you are a cyclist, a collision with an e-scooter can be confusing. You may be left wondering about your legal rights and whether you can claim compensation. As a cyclist, understanding your legal position is crucial. Here’s a breakdown of the key legal and practical issues for a road accident with an e-scooter.
Are E-Scooters Legal on UK Roads and Cycle Paths?
This is the most common and important question. The law classifies e-scooters as “motor vehicles,” which means they must comply with the same regulations as cars and motorbikes.
If you are a cyclist, it’s important to remember that even if a private e-scooter is riding illegally on a cycle path, you still have a right to pursue a claim if their negligence caused you harm.
Privately Owned E-Scooters: It is illegal to ride a privately owned e-scooter on public roads, pavements, or cycle lanes. They are only permitted on private land with the landowner’s permission.
Rental E-Scooters: The only legal exception is for rental e-scooters that are part of a government-approved trial scheme. These can be ridden on public roads and in designated cycle lanes, as the rental companies provide the necessary insurance.
What If You’re Involved in a Collision with an E-Scooter?
If you’re a cyclist and are struck by an e-scooter, you should take the following steps to protect your position:
Obtain Details: Get the rider’s name and address. If they are riding a rental e-scooter, note the scheme’s name and the scooter’s identification number. This is crucial for identifying the insurer.
Seek Medical Attention: Your health comes first. Get checked by a medical professional, as your medical records will be essential evidence for any future claim.
Your ability to claim compensation will depend on the type of e-scooter involved and whether you can prove the rider was at fault.
Rider on a Rental E-Scooter: A claim can be made against the rider’s insurance, which is provided by the rental company. The process is similar to a claim against a car driver.
Rider on a Privately Owned E-Scooter: Since it’s illegal to ride these without insurance, the rider is likely uninsured. In this case, you can:
o Claim directly against the rider. o Make a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB). The MIB is a body that compensates victims of uninsured drivers. They can handle your claim under the uninsured or untraced drivers’ agreement, depending on whether you can identify the rider.
Crucially, in all cases, it is not enough that the e-scooter was simply being ridden illegally; you must prove that the rider’s negligence caused your injuries.
Expert Legal Advice for Your E-Scooter Claim
The law surrounding e-scooters is complex and constantly evolving. Getting expert legal advice is vital for a successful outcome. At ASD Solicitors, we can help you navigate this difficult process and determine the best course of action.
We may be able to assist you on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis, so you have nothing to lose by getting in touch.
If you would like further information or to discuss your specific situation, please contact Chris Chappell at ASD Solicitors today.
E-scooters have become an increasingly popular way of transport in the UK. With their rise in popularity, it is no surprise that there were more than 1,250 collisions in the UK involving e-scooters and other road users in a recent year. As a pedestrian, understanding your legal rights is crucial if you are involved in a road traffic accident.
Are E-Scooters Legal on UK Roads?
This is one of the most common questions we receive, and the answer is not always straightforward. The law defines an e-scooter as a “motor vehicle,” which means it must comply with the same regulations as cars and motorbikes regarding insurance, tax, and registration. However, most private e-scooters cannot meet these requirements.
Privately owned e-scooters are not currently legally permitted on public roads, pavements, or cycle lanes. They are only allowed on private land with the permission of the landowner. Using one in a public space is illegal and can result in fines and penalty points for the rider.
Rental e-scooters, which are part of government-approved schemes, are an exception. They can be legally ridden on public roads in designated trial areas, and the rental companies provide the necessary insurance.
What to Do if You Are Hit by an E-Scooter
If you are a pedestrian involved in a collision with an e-scooter, the steps you take immediately after the incident are vital for any future pedestrian claim.
Gather Information Rental E-Scooter: If the rider was on a scheme scooter, obtain their name and contact details, as well as the name of the rental scheme (e.g., Voi, Lime). The rider will be insured through the scheme. Private E-Scooter: If the rider was on their own e-scooter, they are likely riding illegally and without insurance. Obtain their name and contact details if possible, as you may be able to claim against them directly.
Seek Medical Attention Your health is the priority. See a doctor or go to the hospital, even if your injuries seem minor. Your medical records will be essential evidence for your claim.
Report the Incident Report the incident to the police, especially if the rider fails to stop or if you suspect they are not insured.
Making a Claim for E-Scooter Injuries
You can seek compensation for your injuries, damage to property, and other losses, but you must be able to prove that the e-scooter rider was negligent. It is not enough that the e-scooter was simply being ridden illegally.
Claiming Against a Rental Scheme Rider: In this case, a claim can be made against the rider’s insurance policy provided by the rental company, similar to a standard road traffic accident claim.
Claiming Against a Private E-Scooter Rider: If you cannot trace the rider, or if they are uninsured, you may be able to make a claim to the Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB). The MIB is a non-profit organisation that compensates victims of uninsured and “hit-and-run” drivers. They will deal with the case under either the uninsured or untraced drivers’ agreement and will compensate you as if the e-scooter rider was insured.
Crucially, even if the e-scooter was being ridden illegally, you still have a right to pursue a claim if their negligence caused you harm.
We Can Help with Your E-Scooter Injury Claim
If you have been injured in an e-scooter accident, it is vital to get expert legal advice as soon as possible. The law in this area can be complex, and getting it right is crucial for a successful outcome.
At ASD Solicitors, we can help you understand your rights and guide you through the process. We may be able to assist you on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis, so you have nothing to lose by getting in touch.
If you’ve been injured and are thinking about making a compensation claim, you may have come across the term “No Win No Fee.” But what does No Win No Fee mean, and how does it work in practice?
This article will explain the No Win No Fee meaning, what you can expect from the process, and how to find the right solicitor to support your case.
What Is No Win No Fee?
No Win No Fee is an agreement between you and your solicitor that allows you to make a personal injury claim without paying any legal fees upfront. The formal name for this arrangement is a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA). Under this agreement, if your claim is unsuccessful, you won’t need to pay your solicitor’s legal fees. If your case is successful, your solicitor will take a pre-agreed success fee from your compensation. This makes it a low-risk option for people who want to claim compensation but are worried about legal costs.
A No Win No Fee solicitor is a solicitor who agrees to take on your case under a Conditional Fee Agreement. They will only charge for their services if your case is successful, usually taking their payment as a percentage of your compensation. Choosing a solicitor who works on a No Win No Fee basis can give you peace of mind. It shows they believe in your case and are willing to invest their time and expertise without asking for payment unless they win.
At ASD, our no-win, no-fee solicitors can support and help you with your case. Contact us today and get a free claim review and a free home visit if you live around the Sheffield area.
How Does No Win No Fee Work?
The process is straightforward:
1. Initial Assessment – Our solicitor will review your case for free to determine if you have a strong chance of success.
2. Agreement Signed – If your claim is accepted, you’ll sign a No Win No Fee agreement.
3. Your Case Progresses – Your dedicated solicitor will gather evidence, liaise with the other party, and handle negotiations.
4. Compensation Secured – If successful, your solicitor will take their success fee from your settlement.
5. No Win? No Fee. – If your claim doesn’t succeed, you won’t pay any legal fees to your solicitor.
You can contact us to check exactly what services and help we provide, and get a free claim review.
Do I Have to Pay Anything If I Win?
If you win your case, you will typically pay a success fee, which is agreed upon at the start of the claim. This is usually capped at 25% of your compensation and helps cover the solicitor’s time and effort in running your case.
In some cases, you might also have to pay for legal expenses insurance or disbursements (like medical report costs), but your solicitor will explain these clearly before you start.
Is No Win No Fee Right for You?
A No Win No Fee arrangement is ideal if you want to claim compensation but don’t want to take on the financial risk. It removes the barrier of upfront legal costs and means you only pay if your case wins. Always make sure you fully understand the terms before signing a No Win No Fee agreement. A good solicitor will explain everything and make sure you’re comfortable moving forward.
Need Expert Help?
If you’re still wondering what is No Win No Fee or want to speak to a trusted No Win No Fee solicitor, we’re here to help.
Contact our specialist team today for a free case review and personalised advice. There’s no obligation, and no cost if you don’t win.
No Win No Fee FAQs
How much is the success fee for a no-win no no-fee claim?
Unlike many other firms, our success fees are not the standard 25%. The exact percentage depends on the value of your claim.
Do I have to pay for anything else?
We will not charge you for any insurance premiums or shortfalls in costs. We take the risk and pay for expenses like medical reports ourselves. If your claim is successful, you will not have to pay for an insurance policy or cover any of our costs that are not recovered from the other side. The only thing you pay is the success fee.
How does No Win No Fee Claims for Children work?
As part of our commitment to the community, we are on the legal panel for the MTSP. We provide a completely free service for personal injury claims involving children.
Is there a time when I might have to pay something if I lose a no-win no-fee claim?
The only exception is if your claim is found to be “fundamentally dishonest.” This means you have not been truthful about your claim. In this rare case, you may be required to pay some of our costs.
While both involve seeking compensation for harm, the definitions, legal process, evidence requirements, and how the claims are managed differ significantly. Understanding this distinction isn’t just legal semantics; it can directly impact your chances of success and the value of your claim.
In this guide, we explain the key differences between clinical negligence and personal injury, so you can take the next steps with confidence.
What is a Personal Injury Claim?
A personal injury claim arises when you’ve been injured as a result of the negligence of another person, company, or public body. These claims often result from everyday accidents and typically involve a breach of general health and safety obligations.
In these cases, the key legal test is whether the defendant had a legal responsibility to keep you reasonably safe, whether they breached that duty of care, and whether that breach directly caused your injury.
What is a Clinical Negligence Claim?
Clinical negligence, also known as medical negligence, is a specialised type of professional negligence claim. It occurs when a healthcare professional provides care that falls below an acceptable standard, causing you avoidable harm as a result.
This can happen in NHS or private healthcare settings and can be brought against GPs, hospitals, physiotherapists, opticians, dentists, or other healthcare professionals.
Examples of clinical negligence:
A misdiagnosis or delayed diagnosis leading to delayed treatment
Surgical errors (e.g., wrong site surgery)
Prescribing the wrong medication
Failing to obtain proper informed consent before a procedure
Failing to monitor or follow up after treatment
Here, the law uses a higher benchmark—the Bolam test—which asks whether a responsible, competent medical practitioner would have acted the same way. Because of this, expert medical evidence is almost always required to prove negligence.
Key Differences: Common Misunderstandings
It’s surprisingly easy to mix up personal injury and clinical negligence. Here are some situations where people often get it wrong:
1. Injured in a Hospital, but Not from Treatment If you trip over a loose cable in a waiting area and break your wrist, this is a personal injury claim (Occupiers’ Liability). The harm came from a preventable hazard in a public space, not from medical treatment.
2. Poor Outcome After Surgery, But No Negligence If you have a surgery and, despite everything being done correctly, your body reacts badly to anaesthesia, this is not a clinical negligence claim. Sadly, some bad outcomes happen even with excellent care.
3. Medical Mistake Without Injury An incorrect allergy note in your medical record, if spotted before you receive the wrong medication, is not a valid clinical negligence claim. You must be able to prove that the error caused you actual harm.
4. Delay in Treatment, But No Change to Outcome If you wait longer than you should for an X-ray, but the eventual diagnosis and recovery are exactly the same, this is not clinical negligence because the delay didn’t make your condition worse. Negligence requires both a breach of duty and actual harm.
Why Getting the Right Lawyer Matters
Understanding whether your claim is clinical negligence or personal injury is crucial because it affects how the claim is investigated, what evidence is required, and how long it may take to settle.
Personal injury claims are generally more straightforward than medical negligence. For example, a workplace accident is unlikely to need a medical expert’s opinion on surgical standards. The success of a personal injury claim will depend on evidence like witness statements, photos, and accident reports.In contrast, clinical negligence claims require a solicitor with specialised medical knowledge. This is why we, at ASD Solicitors, do not specialise in these cases. We have established relationships with specialist medical negligence solicitors and can put you in touch with a trusted expert. This ensures you receive the best possible legal advice for your specific situation.
Compensation in Both Types of Claims
The value of a claim depends entirely on the specific injury and its impact, not on whether it’s a personal injury or clinical negligence case.
Both claim types can include two main types of compensation:
General Damages: For the pain, suffering, and loss of amenity caused by the injury.
Special Damages: For financial losses and expenses, such as loss of earnings, medical treatment costs, travel, or care needs.
Early specialist advice helps ensure all your current and future losses are properly identified and evidenced, maximising the compensation you receive.
How to Start Your Compensation Claim
If you believe you’ve been injured because of someone else’s mistake—whether in a medical setting or elsewhere—here are some steps to help protect your position from the start:
Seek medical attention immediately. Your health comes first, and your medical records will be an important part of the evidence.
Document everything. Write down what happened, including dates, times, names of people involved, and a step-by-step account of the events.
Keep all paperwork and evidence. This includes medical records, appointment letters, accident reports, and photos of injuries.
Do not delay getting legal advice. Both personal injury and clinical negligence claims have strict time limits (usually three years, with some exceptions).
Choose the right specialist. A road accident lawyer isn’t the right fit for a misdiagnosis claim. If your injury is due to medical negligence, ASD Solicitors can provide you with a referral to a trusted specialist who is an expert in this field.
At Accident Solicitors Direct, we have over 40 years experience in personal injury litigation. Get in touch with us today via our online contact form, or call us between 8am-9pm to speak to a solicitor.
Car accidents can leave more than just physical injuries; they often cause significant emotional distress. Even in minor collisions, people can experience feelings of confusion, numbness, anxiety, or overwhelm. This is known as emotional shock, and it can also be classified as a psychological injury—something many people experience without realising they may be entitled to legal recourse.
Understanding the signs of shock and psychological injury after a car accident can help you or someone you care about recover fully. As specialist personal injury solicitors, we often see clients who are not only physically injured but also struggling with the mental aftermath of a traumatic event. In this post, we’ll explore the symptoms of emotional shock, why they happen, and what you can do to get legal and professional help.
What Is Emotional Shock After a Car Accident?
When people think of “shock,” they often picture a medical emergency. However, shock from a car accident can also be emotional or psychological. This is the body’s natural response to a traumatic event. It’s your mind’s way of coping with something sudden and distressing.
An emotional shock or psychological injury may set in immediately after a crash or appear hours or days later. It can manifest as an acute stress reaction and, in more severe cases, can lead to conditions like Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). This type of mental distress can also occur after other traumatic events, including serious workplace injuries, road traffic injuries, or stressful legal disputes. If you need legal advice after a car accident, don’t hesitate to contact our specialist team.
Recognizing Car Accident Shock Symptoms: Physical and Emotional Signs
Recognizing the symptoms of car accident shock is the first step toward recovery. People respond in different ways, but here are some common signs of a potential psychological injury:
Physical Symptoms
Fast heartbeat or palpitations
Shaking or trembling
Cold, clammy skin
Nausea or upset stomach
Sweating or chills
Dizziness or faintness
Headaches or body tension
Emotional and Psychological Symptoms
Numbness or feeling detached from reality
Panic attacks or severe anxiety
Difficulty concentrating
Irritability or mood swings
Sadness, hopelessness, or guilt
Trouble sleeping or nightmares
Flashbacks of the accident
These are all signs of mental shock after an accident. Some people may feel fine at first, only to break down emotionally later. This delayed reaction is a normal part of the body’s response to trauma.
How Long Does Car Accident Shock Last?
Shock symptoms often ease within a few days or weeks. However, for some individuals, the emotional and psychological responses can last much longer. If you still feel anxious, withdrawn, or unsettled after a few weeks, it is crucial to speak to a doctor or a therapist. People experiencing other traumatic events—such as workplace injuries—often report similar emotional impacts and psychological injuries.
What to Do If You’re Experiencing Emotional Shock
If you believe you’re dealing with shock or a psychological injury after a car accident, take these steps to protect both your health and your legal rights:
Talk to Someone: Share your experience with a trusted friend, family member, or a professional. Processing trauma by talking is a vital step.
See a Doctor: Get a thorough medical check-up, even if you feel physically fine. Be sure to tell them about your mental and emotional symptoms, as this medical record is crucial if you decide to make a claim.
Rest and Care for Yourself: Give your mind and body time to recover. Eat well, get enough sleep, and avoid substances that can worsen anxiety.
Seek Therapy: If symptoms continue, professional support from a counsellor or through Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) can be highly beneficial for your recovery. As part of a claim, we may be able to arrange free psychological treatment in the form of CBT therapy for you.
Consult a Solicitor: It’s important to understand your legal rights. A psychological injury can be a key component of a personal injury claim, and our team can assess whether you are eligible for compensation.
Can You Claim Compensation for Psychological Injury After a Car Accident?
Yes. Many people believe that personal injury claims are only for physical wounds, but this is not the case. The law recognizes that a psychological injury such as anxiety, PTSD, or severe emotional distress can have a profound and lasting impact on your life. If your emotional shock was caused by the negligence of another party, you may be entitled to compensation for psychological injury. This can cover therapy costs, lost income due to an inability to work, and the pain and suffering you have endured.
Need Legal Support After an Accident?
If you’ve experienced emotional or physical trauma following a road traffic accident, our expert accident solicitors are here to help. We handle personal injury claims for psychological injury with care, understanding, and professionalism, guiding you through every step of the process.
Contact our specialist team today for a free consultation. We can help you understand your legal options and, where appropriate, arrange free psychological treatment like CBT therapy to support your recovery. Find out if you are eligible to claim compensation.
The origins of plastic surgery, a medical speciality concerned with the correction or restoration of form and function, can be traced back to 800 BC when reconstructive surgery techniques were being carried out in India (MSN Encarta (2008) ‘plastic Surgery’).
Incredibly developments in this field have taken place over the centuries, including the development of facial surgery during World Wars I and II. The advancement of treatment together with the increasingly accessible world of social media/Kardashian culture has meant that aesthetic plastic surgery – where the end goal is, in its simplest form, the enhancement of appearance through surgical and medical techniques – is a commonplace occurrence and not simply the reserve of the rich and famous.
Nine out of ten cosmetic procedures in the UK are now non-surgical, such as botulinum toxin (Botox), dermal fillers and laser hair removal. The numbers undertaking such procedures are constantly increasing and are worth 75% of the market in total. Treatments can be so easy to come by that they can now be done during a lunch hour during the workday. With such rapid changed occurring in the world of (non-surgical) cosmetic procedures, what difficulties have arisen in regulating this industry?
Cosmetic interventions and protection: the review
An independent review (the review) of cosmetic surgery led by Professor Sir Bruce Keogh, the then NHS medical director, was commissioned by the government following the PIP breast implant scandal (review of the regulation of cosmetic intervention: The review, published in April 2013, shockingly found that there was next to no regulation for non-surgical procedures, despite the fact that they account for 90% of cosmetic procedures undertaken in the UK.
The simplest of errors can cause extreme problems for consumers/patients; by way of example, if Botox is not carried out properly, this can result in droopy eyelids, muscle weakness, vision problems, or trouble speaking, swallowing, or breathing.
Sir Keogh said:
At the heart of this report is the person who chooses to have a cosmetic procedure. We have heard terrible reports about people who have trusted a cosmetic practitioner to help them, but when things have gone wrong, they have been left high and dry with no help. These people have not had the safety net that those using the NHS have. This needs to change. We would like to see everyone who chooses to have any cosmetic procedure better protected. We would like to see people who carry out procedure trained to a high standard. We would like the public to feel confident they are going to be well looked after and, if things go wrong, that they will be supported. And ultimately, if someone needs to stop in on the side of patients, we think there should be an ombudsman to do that.
The main actions that the review group said would contribute to a successful and safe cosmetic surgery industry included:
Ensuring all practitioners are properly qualified for all the procedures they offer;
Providers are obliged to ensure that people are aware of the implications and risks of the procedure and that they have adequate time to consider this information before agreeing to treatment;
An advertising code of conduct is to be developed and compliance to be mandatory for all practitioners;
Insurance products developed to protect patients in the event of product failure or provider insolvency;
Making all dermal fillers prescription only; and
An ombudsman to oversee all private healthcare including cosmetic procedures.
Non-surgical interventions: key recommendations and responses
Below is a list of some, not all, of the review’s recommendations relating to non-surgical interventions and the government’s responses to those recommendations:
Treatment is to be performed under the responsibility of a clinical professional who has gained the accredited qualification to prescribe, administer and supervise aesthetic procedures.
Non-healthcare practitioners who have achieved the required accredited qualification may perform these procedures under the supervision of an appropriate qualified clinical professional.
Government response: legalisation is to be looked at to underpin the above recommendations.
Development of appropriate accredited qualifications for providers of non-surgical interventions.
Training should include an understanding of safe premises and the responsibility involved.
Government response: to work with professional and regulatory bodies to ensure that codes of practice and strengthened for responsible professionals. (The General Medical Council’s (GMC’S) guidance in ‘Good medical practice’ and on ‘Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together’ already required this: GMC to ensure that the issue is fully covered in the ethical framework for cosmetic surgery.
All practitioners are to be registered centrally.
Unannounced inspections of manufacturers of class III and IIb medical devices to ensure production is compliant with the regulations. Reports are to be made public where possible.
Government response: risk-based audits were the most appropriate of inspections – unannounced audits were being addressed in the revision of the medical devices EU directives.
Responsible for information, resolution and redress, including prohibition of certain advertising practices, such as financial inducements and time-limited deals.
Government response: GMC to lead on developing a code.
All organisations providing cosmetic surgery should have a doctor on the board as a medical director who is professionally accountable for all work carried out by the provided organisation and for its procedures, practices, and wider activity.
Government response: under the current regulations each provider had to have a responsible officer, a senior doctor who must demonstrate that they have systems in place to ensure that all doctors engaged in cosmetic surgery are providing high standards of care. They also havea statutory responsibility to ensure that all doctors employed by or contracting with the organisation are competent and fit to undertake the duties they are being given.
Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to also cover the whole private healthcare sector, including cosmetic procedures.
All individuals performing cosmetic procedures to have adequate professional indemnity cover.
So, what happens next?
Professional guidance
Clearly the government accepted that more needed to be done to regulate the cosmetic surgery industry and one of the key ways in which they anticipated that this would be done was through joint regulations with the GMC and other professional bodies. Having assessed the revies and response and following numerous discussions and meetings on the issue, the GMC published their ‘guidance for doctors who offer cosmetic interventions’ which came into effect on 1 June 2016.
The key aims of the guidance are to make sure that doctors:
Are appropriately trained and experienced to practice safely;
Work with each individual patient to make sure their expectations about the outcomes that can be achieved for them are realistic;
Follow current guidelines or protocols for safe, effective provisions of cosmetic interventions;
Consider the psychological needs of their patients; and
Do not allow any financial or commercial interests in a particular intervention, or an organisation providing cosmetic interventions, to adversely affect standards of good patient care.
The guidance makes plain that in order to maintain a licence to practise, the practitioner must demonstrate, through the revalidation process, that they work in line with the principles and values set out in the guidance. Serious or persistent failure to follow the guidance would put the registration at risk. The GMC was not the only body which made various recommendations and provided key regulations following the revies and government response:
‘Professional Standards for Cosmetic Surgery’, Royal College of Surgeons (2016)
‘qualifications requirements for delivery of cosmetic procedures’ and ‘report on implementation of qualifications requirements for cosmetic procedures’, NHS Health Education England (2015)
The guidance from the GMC also recommends that doctors refer to other sources for complete regulatory guidance and codes of practice, including:
The British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons.
The British Association of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic surgeons
‘Marketing of cosmetic interventions’, Committee of Advertising Practice (2013)
It is unsurprising that one of the key points repeatedly emphasised within the guidance is the need to ensure that the patient provides informed consent. Following the landmark case of Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board (2015) the previous year, taken together with the PIP scandal a few years before that, the guidance espoused (as the GMC had been doing for several years in any event despite the lack of any doctrine of informed consent In English law until that time) that a more cooperative approach in the consultation room was required and that patient autonomy was key, in a safe environment with trained and competent practitioners on hand.
Legislation
Despite the government’s response to the review stating that legislation was being looked into to legally regulate the cosmetic surgery industry, this has not yet resulted in any bill successfully going through Parliament, some four years on. The Cosmetic Surgery (Standards of Practice) Bill 2016-17 had its first reading on 19 October 2016 in the House of Commons.
The bill’s aim was to make provisions about the training, qualifications and certification of medical practitioners and conducting cosmetic surgery proceeded; to establish a code of practice for the provision of information to patients on the options and risks in relation to such procedures: to make provision about permissible treatments; and for connected purposes. The Bill was expected to have its second reading debate on Friday 12 May 2017, but as the general election was called, Parliament was dissolved, and no further action was subsequently taken.
Botched cosmetic surgery today: the safety nets and the pitfalls.
Cosmetic treatment undertaken by medically trained professionals both via the NHS and privately should now be more controlled. As noted above, the guidance from professional bodies is more succinct than pre-review and sets out various codes of practices that should be adhered to by medical professionals carrying out cosmetic treatment. Nonetheless, it is noteworthy that ‘cosmetic surgery ‘is not yet recognised as a regulated branch of medicine by the GMC.
Both in tort and under contract, breaches of duty by medical professionals carrying out cosmetic intervention can now more clearly be demonstrated if there has been a failure to follow, for example, GMC guidance as to safety procedures. However, Sarah Marsh recently reported in the Guardian (‘Botched cosmetic surgery: law change urged as complaints treble’, www.legallease.co.uk/botched) that despite the review and subsequent response, the number of problems related to treatment such as lip fillers and Botox has almost trebled, jumping from 378 in 2016 to 931 within 12 months. The highest number of complaints were about dermal fillers and a large proportion of all complaints were related to practitioners found via social media.
The nub of the problem appears to be that data allegedly shows 83% of procedures were administered by non-medics. Clearly there is still an issue with rogue practitioners. This is likely to remain the case unless the government takes a stronger hold on the legal regulation of the cosmetic surgery industry and those permitted to carry out cosmetic treatment.
Conclusion
Social media continues to place extreme and unfair pressure on the consumer as to aesthetics. Even with better controls as to advertising now in place, the caustic celebrity culture and its portrayal of quick beauty has resulted in greater demand, and a consequent increase in supply, of cosmetic intervention.
Albeit the GMC and other professional bodies continue to do a commendable job in trying to provide guidance and training to all medical practitioners as regards this area of intervention, the same cannot be said for the regulation of non-medics. Without formal legal regulations and/or legalisation in place for an ever-increasing industry, access to cosmetic intervention will become even easier and complaints will undoubtedly continue to rise, with marginal redress for victims of poor and inadequate treatment save for pursuing a matter to litigation via allegations of negligence and/or breach of contract.
However, cosmetic procedures have been under a significant spotlight these last few years and change has slowly started.
Change needs to continue as per the review and response in the years to come. The present may not be looking so good, but the future may look better.
If you wish to speak to a Solicitor regarding a claim arising out of beauty treatment please contact Grace Newbold, Solicitor on 0114 2678780 or email [email protected]
ASD Solicitor’s staff and friends took part in an adventurous and charitable night walk on Kinder Plateau in support of Sheffield Children’s Hospital Charity, raising an amazing £1,455.00 for the hospital.
Despite the threat of rain and the windy conditions at the summit this was a memorable experience. Unfortunately there was no stunning sunrise due to inclement weather, but we could see the distant lights of Manchester which were quite mesmerising.
This event not only helped to raise funds for a noble cause, supporting the healthcare needs of vulnerable and ill children, it was a great team building adventure.
Even though the weather might not have been perfect, the experience of being out in nature, surrounded by fellow participants, and knowing that you’re making a positive impact on the lives of others made this event incredibly rewarding and worthwhile.
ASD Solicitor’s staff, friends and clients have now raised more than £50,000 for Sheffield Children’s Hospital Charity.
Most personal injury firms offer a ‘no win no fee’ scheme for individuals who have been injured at work, but what does this actually mean and do all solicitors offer the same terms?
‘No win no fee’ simply means that if your claim is unsuccessful, you will not be charged. Some solicitors do ask their client to pay for expenses such as medical reports if the claim fails. However, the most likely scenario is that there will be nothing to pay.
No Win No Fee – but what happens in the event of a win?
Since 2013, solicitors have been forced by the government to charge their clients a success fee rather than the insurers. The success fee charged is usually 25% of the compensation recovered. Some solicitors also arrange an insurance policy to pay for expenses, such as medical report fees in the event the claim fails. The insurance premium is then deducted from the damages in the event of a win and premiums can range from £80 to £2000. In addition some solicitors also ask their clients to pay the shortfall of their costs if they can’t recover all of their costs from the insurance company. We have heard of cases where tens of thousands of pounds have been deducted from a successful client’s damages, which the client did not expect.
The ASD approach in Accident at Work cases
At ASD, I insist on transparency, so the client knows exactly what they have to pay and when. If the claim fails, my client never has to pay a penny unless the claim was fundamentally dishonest. If the claim succeeds, all the client pays is a fixed success fee. There are no insurance premiums to pay or loans to take out, my firm funds the claim and if it fails, we pay the expenses. Clients do not have to pay any shortfall if we can’t recover all of our costs. In an accident at work case the success fees we charge are never 25%, but range from 10% to 20%, plus VAT of the compensation recovered depending on the value of the claim.
A clear policy from a local firm, that still offers a home visit by a solicitor. Get in touch or visit our Accidents at Work page for more information.
This case provides an illuminating consideration of the scope of liability in this difficult area of law.
Facts & Background On 2 November 2006, the claimant’s daughter was one of the four teenage girls in the back of a car being driven by the defendant on the mountain road between Garnlydan and Llangydnidr. The defendant lost control of the car which left the road, got into a traffic accident and crashed. All four girls died. The fathers of the other three girls attended the claimant’s home at around 10pm concerned at their absence. They returned shortly afterwards with word of an accident. The four fathers went to the site of the accident where there was a police cordon about a mile from the scene. It was apparent that there was a serious accident, but no details were given.
Incident and Aftermath Within a short time, all parents of the girls, as well as many other people, were milling around. Although the claimant could not see the accident scene itself, he had a vivid sight of the helicopter hovering over it with its lights beaming down, and of the lights thrown up by the emergency vehicles on the ground. The effect was accentuated by the sounds of the helicopter and of the other vehicles sirens. The parents were then bluntly informed by a police officer that all four girls were dead. The resultant scene was hellish. The crowd reacted hysterically: there were screams and cries of anguish with the parents staggering around. The claimant took his wife home before they went to the police station with the other parents. After a suggestion to the contrary, it was confirmed that all four girls were dead. The atmosphere was so unbearable that the claimant and his wife returned home. They, with family members of the other dead girls, then attended the hospital mortuary. The claimant’s daughter was not identified by the claimant himself but by the claimant’s wife in a morgue very close by. The claimant’s wife did, however, relate to him vivid details of the body’s appearance and smell. This all occurred in a highly charged atmosphere of extreme and tangible distress, punctuated by wails and cries from other relatives.
Legal Issues it will be remembered that so called Hillsborough cases set down three requirements for a secondary victim to recover. • A close tie of love and affection; • A temporal and physical proximity to the incident; and • Direct perception of the incident or its immediate aftermath. To these can be added a fourth, namely that there must be a psychiatric injury arising from the traumatic perception itself, as opposed to grief due to the death. The Judge identified two issues: (a) Whether the claimant suffered psychiatric injury by the shock of what he witnessed rather than grief for loss of his daughter; and (b) Whether his sight, hearing or proximity to the events in the immediate aftermath brought him within the limits of recovery.
Determination Issue (a) was one of pure fact, heavily dependent upon the medical evidence. The judge preferred the claimant’s psychiatrist’s diagnosis of PTSD over the defendants’ psychiatrists diagnose of deep grief. Issue (b) was one of mixed fact and law. Its determination entailed a detailed consideration of the authority, beginning with McLoughlin V O’Brien [1983]. In that case the claimant learned at hospital, one to two hours after a road traffic accident, that her youngest daughter had been killed, while simultaneously seeing her husband and other children distraught and badly injured. The House of Lords, allowing her claim, emphasised that it would be impractical and unjust to insist on direct and immediate perception of the actual accident itself, recognising that the ‘accident’ can consist of a serious event. The next case considered was another Hillsborough case where the brother of a victim identified the body at the morgue eight hours after the disaster, His claim failed on the basis that even if the identification could be described as part of the ‘aftermath’, it was not part of the ‘immediate aftermath’. The House of Lords did, however, emphasise the case specific nature of these issues.
Court’s Ruling The judge held that liability was established here for the following reasons: • The extreme nature of the facts four teenage girls having been killed and all their parents together manifesting mutually resounding distress at the scene, at the police station and in the mortuary. • The scene from the police cordon was exceptionally harrowing and became even worse when word of the girls’ death was bluntly imparted. • Although the attendance at the mortuary was nine hours later, the claimant’s involvement and trauma had been unrelenting from when he reached the police cordon. The brief infusion of hope when it was suggested the claimant’s daughter might have survived, swiftly discharged, was an aggravating factor. The sequence could not be dissected into different parts. • The qualitative distinction between direct and reported perception of the body was insufficient to break this sequence. Judgment was entered for the claimant for damages assessed at £25,000.
Discussion Secondary victim cases remain difficult and fact sensitive. While this case ultimately turned on its own facts, several important points can be extracted. Firstly, that these cases turn on their own facts is, in itself, an important principle. Comparisons with other decided cases, while valid, only go so far. Secondly, as the definition of ‘immediate aftermath’ is significantly more elastic than might have been thought from the earlier cases. This case perhaps represents a slight further extension as the perception of the deceased’s body was purely a second-hand one. Finally, this judgment explicitly confirms what many would have inferred: the more horrific the facts, the more likely the claim to succeed.
If you have suffered a psychological injury or PTSD after a traffic accidentand need further advice please call Richard Meggitt, solicitor on 0114 2678780, or email [email protected]
