Back injury claim

I have previously dealt with a number of back injury claims and would like to describe some examples. Please click the accompanying images to expand them.

Case study 1

In the first case study, the client worked as a saw operator.

His employers were a firm of stonemasons, and their business was located in a quarry in the Rivelin Valley, on the western outskirts of Sheffield.

As part of his job, the client was required to operate an electric saw, as shown in the attached photograph.

The photograph shows a large, rough piece of stone being placed onto a trolley using a crane. Offcuts from the cutting process would fall to the ground. The client then had to pick these up and carry them to a pile offcuts roughly 30 yards away.

I took the attached photographs during a site visit, on the pretext of purchasing some stonework. As can be seen from the photographs, the quarry was chaotic. The client had to pick his way through mounds of debris, while carrying the heavy pieces of stone. Moreover the ground around the electric saw was ankle deep in slurry.

In addition to these tasks, the client was also required to deliver individual pieces of stonework around the Sheffield area, for customers to use in their rockeries, or as garden features generally. He did this unassisted, using a van.

There were several previous minor episodes of back trouble.

Matters came to a head when the client was required to help deliver a pair of large stone pinnacles.

In the process he felt his back "click", and he experienced severe back pain.

A couple of weeks afterwards the client was lying on the sofa watching TV. When he tried to get up, his back locked completely, and he was unable to move.

The client was taken to the Northern General Hospital in Sheffield, where he was disgnosed with a prolapsed disc.

He never regained his full health, going on to develop cauda equina syndrome.

About a year after providing instructions, the client sadly died on holiday in Bulgaria, as a result of matters unrelated.

He left a widow and two children of school age.

I put forward a back injury compensation claim.

The defendants' insurers denied liability, alleging that they had provided full manual handling training.

Furthermore they strenuously denied that he ever had to lift anything excessive.

Finally they alleged that the client never made any complaint about back pain at the time, and the true causes were unrelated.

Both sides obtained medical evidence.

Our expert confirmed that the back injury was work-related.

The defendants' expert said that the pain could not have been caused by work, because of the time delay between the accident and the onset of severe symptoms.

Our expert said that he was unconcerned by the delay, as it was only a fortnight. He further said that in his experience as a spinal surgeon, he had seen many previous cases where the disc prolapse occurred subsequent to the traumatic event. As long as the time interval was no longer than 2 or 3 weeks, then a connection between the two events was entirely feasible.

Legal proceedings were issued, and settlement was achieved soon afterwards.

Case study 2

The client in this case was a gas fitter.

On the day of his injury, he and a colleague were working at an industrial premises in Warwick, where they had to install a gas pipe.

Normally they would dig a trench, and place the gas pipe at the bottom of the trench, before filling the trench in again.

But on this occasion the job was different because it involved pushing the gas pipe into an underground duct.

There were 3 particular difficulties with the job.

Firstly the duct was 72 m long, and had a kink halfway along.

Secondly the gas pipe was in a coil. The two men had to contain the coiled pipe from springing open.

Normally a pipe trailer would be provided, which comprises a winding drum, mounted on small trailer. This would have supported the weight of the coiled pipe and allowed the men to unwind just as much gas pipe as they needed. But on the day of the incident, no pipe trailer was available.

Finally, in order to access the end of the duct, my client had to dig a hole. As a result of this, he was working in a very confined space.

As the two men struggled with the coiled pipe, the owner of the premises came to help them. He said: "You shouldn't be doing this, in this day and age".

While doing this task, the client suffered a back injury. He also injured his shoulder.

I put forward a back injury compensation claim against the employers. They denied all responsibility.

So as to get photographs, we held a reconstruction. Luckily a length of coiled pipe still remained at the premises in Warwick, as it had not been disposed of since the accident.

Using a length of rope, we marked the position of the hole in the ground in which the client had been standing.

Near where the client lived in Coventry, a large housing estate was being constructed, on what used to be the site of the old Humber car factory.

On site were some identical coils of gas pipe. Permission was obtained from the site manager to photograph these, including the warning notices showing that coiled pipes were dangerous and needed to be contained.

The litigation continued and everything continued to be denied. It was likely that the claim would run as far as trial.

Unexpectedly however a more senior solicitor took over the conduct of the defendants' claim. This resulted in a complete change of heart, and a substantial offer was put forward. Settlement was achieved soon afterwards.

Case study 3

In this case the client was an excavator driver from Bristol, who suffered a serious back injury in an accident at work.

The accident took place at Swindon College, in Wiltshire. Construction work was taking place to expand the college.

As part of the works, the client drove a 13 ton excavator, as shown on the attached photographs that he took with his mobile phone. Under construction was a part of the site known as "the workshop". This was going to be the college craft area.

Apart from the site office, there was no artificial lighting on site.

Each evening, my client parked his excavator where he had finished working. Next morning, he would resume working at the same spot.

Vandalism was a major problem on site.

Accordingly the client had to fix security shutters to the outside of the excavator each evening, to stop vandals from smashing the windows. Upon arriving for work each morning, the client had to remove the security shutters, and store these in a special basket fitted to the outside of the cab.

On the day before the accident, the client had been operating his excavator at a remote part of the site. Early the next morning, when he arrived for work, it was pitch dark. The illumination from the site office did not reach as far as where the excavator was parked.

The platform of the excavator was roughly 7-8 feet above ground level. The client walked around the platform, removing each of the 5 security shutters.

While doing so, the client's left foot got caught on a metal stud, protruding from the floor of the platform.

The client fell, and found himself lying on his side, on one of the tracks of the excavator.

To begin with, he only experienced a dull aching. He got into his cab and tried to continue working. However the pain did not improve. After a couple of days, he realised he had suffered a serious back injury.

I advanced a personal injury claim against the employers, who conceded liability fairly swiftly.

Protracted medical treatment and investigations then took place. The investigations showed that the client was suffering from a pre-existing, although "clinically silent", back condition.

In this case the opposing insurers were highly co-operative. They made a succession of interim payments, and sensible compensation was eventually negotiated.

Common issues arising in back injury claims

A back injury can have devastating consequences, and clients sometimes report the following difficulties:

• Depression
• Constant pain
• Broken sleep
• Feelings of isolation
• Fading away of initial support, as there is no visible injury
• Uncertainty over when the pain will resolve
• Confusion over the range of medical options
• Anxiety over whether to have back surgery
• Inability to return to work
• Financial difficulties
• Inability to enjoy sex.

It must also be said, that the stress of litigation can compound the other problems.

The final straw

With some back injuries, the onset of pain is cumulative, and this often applies in cases involving repetitive lifting.

In such cases, the injury can develop over an extended period of time, which can lead to the injured person's back being in an "incipient state of collapse". If so, then it can just take a minor incident for the back to break down.

I have previously dealt with back injury compensation claims where the "final straw" has been:

• Bending down to apply shrink wrapping to goods on a pallet, after a year spent undertaking repetitive lifting at a factory manufacturing portable aircraft runway lights in Birmingham
• Sneezing during the morning tea break, following a period of 6 months on home deliveries for a catalogue company in Northamptonshire.

What is the maximum weight a person should lift at work?

Back injury claims for compensation normally take as their starting point the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992.

Under the Regulations, there are guidelines on the maximum safe weight.

The Regulations contain a "lifting and lowering" diagram. Please click on the image to expand it and see the full version.

As can be seen, the maximum weight that a man should be required to lift from head height, close to his body, is 10 kg.

If a man is lifting an object from ankle height, but away from his body, the maximum is 5 kg.

Similarly, if a man is required to lift something from chest height, but close to his body, then the maximum permissible weight is 20 kg.

Under the Regulations, men and women are treated differently.

The maximum that a woman should be required to lift is roughly 30% less than that of a man.

It is not illegal if you have to lift heavier weights than those shown on the diagram.

But if you do, then your employer must show that adequate steps were taken to minimise the risk of injury.

Such steps could include:

• Providing adequate manual handling training
• Undertaking a risk assessment
• In the case of repetitive lifting tasks, providing adequate breaks
• In the case of lifts involving twisting, rearranging the workstation.

The maximum safe weight varies, depending on the situation.

Does the lift involve twisting through 45°? If so, then the safe maximum weight is reduced by 10%.

Is repetitive lifting involved? If so, then the safe maximum weight can be reduced by 30%.

Tactics used by insurers

In a typical back injury claim, the opponent is nearly always one of the big "household name" insurance companies.

Insurance companies try hard in TV advertising to show themselves as being "cuddly" and "approachable".

But when fighting to get compensation from them in a back injury claim, they reveal a very different side of their nature.

The following tactics are often encountered:

• Alleging that no accident took place
• Blaming everything on pre-existing back trouble
• Claiming that the injured person is exaggerating his symptoms
• Maintaining that manual handling training has been provided
• Getting a hostile medical report from an unsympathetic orthopaedic surgeon
• Arranging covert video surveillance
• Refusing to deal with the claim until county court proceedings are started.

Generally speaking, insurance companies will try their hardest to avoid paying compensation.

Role of the solicitor

In my experience, a successful back injury compensation claim requires a certain type of approach.

Effective tactics include the following:

• Pressing the opposing insurers to give full disclosure of their manual handling training records and risk assessments
• Issuing proceedings if appropriate co-operation from the insurers is not forthcoming
• Crucially, providing appropriate reassurance to an often anxious client, throughout the lifetime of the case.

Especially where lengthy medical investigations and treatment are required, the claim can continue for quite a long time.

Thanks for visiting. I look forward to hearing from you.

• Back to home page •

UK back injury claim legal advice.
solicitor dealing with back injury claims