In July 1994 my wife was injured in a road traffic accident and was retired from her job as a result of her injuries. The other driver involved was found to be at fault in a liability trial in November 1998. A Quantum hearing was set for the 20th and 21st of November 2004. (There are a number of valid reasons for the delay of the Quantum hearing). My wife had a strong case with the medical evidence, ( of an Orthopaedic Consultant's Single Joint Report, in her favour. However, shortly before the hearing was due to start, my wife's barrister received a supplementary bundle from the defendants containing papers which her solicitor had decided were irrelevant and therefore, her solicitor had not included them in the main trial bundle.
Despite being reassured that the papers were irrelevant, her barrister surprisingly took it on himself to negotiate a relatively low settlement. He then advised my wife to accept the offer as he had been informed that the Medical Expert was going to change his opinion regarding accident-related symptoms. He also warned her that, if she wanted him to proceed with her case, she would risk losing everything, consequently, my wife had no option but to accept the offer despite it being far less than what had been expected.
After getting over our disappointment I wrote to the Consultant to ask if it had been his intention to change his opinion had my wife's case been heard. In his reply he states: "I can confirm I have not altered my opinion regarding your wife's condition." and, "I have no recollection of having discussed the length of symptoms with anyone on the morning of the case." We now believe my wife's barrister deceived her into settling her case and, as a result, he lost her the chance of having her case heard in court where she would have had a substantial chance of a higher settlement.
We have letters from my wife's former solicitor stating categorically that the Joint Expert had told them was going to change his mind. But they are now saying the expert did not tell them that until after my wife's case had been settled. However, it seems quite obvious that, the reason for my wife's solicitor and barrister saying the medical expert didn't tell them until after the hearing was over, is to cover up the fact that they had said it prior to the settlement. And that was because my wife's barrister lost his nerve and did not want to proceed with her case after being given the supplementary bundle of files.
My wife and I would appreciate any suggestions or comments as solicitors seem to be unwilling to get involved but surely, there must be something we can do? We have been advised that the limitation period for professional negligence is six years but, was the cause of my wife's 'lost chance', negligence, misconduct, or concealment? (The limitation period for my wife's case ends on the 20th of November this year. 2009)
I recently came across an article regarding concealment and it states: Section 32(1) (b) of the Limitation Act 1980 postpones the commencement of the limitation period where: "any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant". Furthermore, Section 32(2) states; deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty."
Am I right in thinking that, a Single Joint Medical Expert's written opinion is a fact, if so, it follows that the expert's opinion in my wife's case is - a fact relevant to my wife's right of action - which my wife's solicitor and barrister deliberately concealed by saying it had changed? And, they did so, in the belief that their breach of duty was unlikely to be discovered for some time.
My wife's former solicitor and barrister owed her a duty of care but, instead, they deceitfully denied her, her rightful compensation.
My wife and I would be grateful if anyone can offer any suggestions.
Thanks…adran
Despite being reassured that the papers were irrelevant, her barrister surprisingly took it on himself to negotiate a relatively low settlement. He then advised my wife to accept the offer as he had been informed that the Medical Expert was going to change his opinion regarding accident-related symptoms. He also warned her that, if she wanted him to proceed with her case, she would risk losing everything, consequently, my wife had no option but to accept the offer despite it being far less than what had been expected.
After getting over our disappointment I wrote to the Consultant to ask if it had been his intention to change his opinion had my wife's case been heard. In his reply he states: "I can confirm I have not altered my opinion regarding your wife's condition." and, "I have no recollection of having discussed the length of symptoms with anyone on the morning of the case." We now believe my wife's barrister deceived her into settling her case and, as a result, he lost her the chance of having her case heard in court where she would have had a substantial chance of a higher settlement.
We have letters from my wife's former solicitor stating categorically that the Joint Expert had told them was going to change his mind. But they are now saying the expert did not tell them that until after my wife's case had been settled. However, it seems quite obvious that, the reason for my wife's solicitor and barrister saying the medical expert didn't tell them until after the hearing was over, is to cover up the fact that they had said it prior to the settlement. And that was because my wife's barrister lost his nerve and did not want to proceed with her case after being given the supplementary bundle of files.
My wife and I would appreciate any suggestions or comments as solicitors seem to be unwilling to get involved but surely, there must be something we can do? We have been advised that the limitation period for professional negligence is six years but, was the cause of my wife's 'lost chance', negligence, misconduct, or concealment? (The limitation period for my wife's case ends on the 20th of November this year. 2009)
I recently came across an article regarding concealment and it states: Section 32(1) (b) of the Limitation Act 1980 postpones the commencement of the limitation period where: "any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant". Furthermore, Section 32(2) states; deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty."
Am I right in thinking that, a Single Joint Medical Expert's written opinion is a fact, if so, it follows that the expert's opinion in my wife's case is - a fact relevant to my wife's right of action - which my wife's solicitor and barrister deliberately concealed by saying it had changed? And, they did so, in the belief that their breach of duty was unlikely to be discovered for some time.
My wife's former solicitor and barrister owed her a duty of care but, instead, they deceitfully denied her, her rightful compensation.
My wife and I would be grateful if anyone can offer any suggestions.
Thanks…adran
Last edited:
