Despite being a small firm we have been involved in a number of high profile legal cases.
Please have a read through the following case studies that show the success our clients have had by working with our team.
How much is your claim really worth?
Driver and passenger road traffic accident
We represented both the driver and the passenger of the same car involved in a road traffic accident. The driver sustained what is commonly known as standard whiplash and having fully recovered, received a settlement under £2000.00. The passenger who had also sustained a whiplash injury was offered a similar sum but had not achieved the expected recovery. We advised the passenger that further medical evidence should be obtained. In due course the passenger claim did settle for £360,000.00.
This is a great example of not settling your claim until the time is right and making sure the right experts are instructed to provide every piece of evidence needed so you receive the best award possible.
After some maintenance had been carried out a pilot and two engineers took the twin engine helicopter on a test flight. They were at an altitude of about 2000 feet when a clutch for one engine unexpectedly disengaged. The engine revved, then the clutch re-engaged. The huge amount of extra power caused the tail boom of the helicopter to twist round, the main rotor and main rotor gearbox came off the helicopter. It plummeted to the ground, killing all on board. Glassbrooks recovered a substantial six figure sum for the pilot’s widow and children.
Accident at work
We represented a client who worked for a big name supermarket. Whilst at work the client suffered an upper-body injury when through no fault of their own they were struck by a heavy metal object. Liability was admitted by the supermarket (the ‘Defendant’). The injury brought forward a medical condition which the client would have suffered in time even if the accident had not happened. The client was originally offered a settlement at £3000.00, this was rejected. We advised the client on what options were open to them and that further medical evidence should be obtained. This matter settled without a trial for £58,500.00.
A young man was riding a motorbike possibly at a speed greater than the speed limit for the area he was in. A car driver reversed from a driveway of a house and into the path of the motorcyclist. The injuries sustained by the motorcyclist were extremely serious. The car driver denied liability and claimed the motorcyclist was driving so fast that he could not be responsible for the injuries. The motorcyclist suffered loss of his toes, other broken bones and minor brain injury. The matter went to trial. The case put forward by us on behalf of the motorcyclist was so compelling that even before the car driver had given evidence his insurance provider put forward a settlement proposal of £400,000.00 which was accepted.
This case shows that we have the experience to take on the more risky and challenging claims and win. We stood to lose thousands of pounds if this claim failed as we represented this client on a no win no fee agreement.
Our client’s husband, and father of two young children, died of a heart attack which might have been prevented had the doctor not dismissed his symptoms as indigestion. After many months of exchanging expert medical reports with the doctor’s (the ‘Defendant’) lawyers and with the opinion of a highly experienced London QC we issued court proceedings. The Defendants eventually accepted they were in the wrong and put forward a settlement proposal. After further negotiation a settlement was reached and our client’s family received £355,000.00. Although money can never replace the loss of a loved one it does help to cushion the loss of that additional income the lost family member provided.
David went to the local Accident and Emergency Department with pain in the lower right part of his tummy, sickness and a temperature. He had acute appendicitis. Unfortunately he was not referred promptly to a surgeon, and when he was seen he was not taken to theatre until after his appendix had burst. David developed septicaemia and was very ill. Recovery was slow and he was left with a large hernia down the front of his abdomen. After receiving a letter of claim from Glassbrooks the hospital admitted liability and paid a six figure sum.
Too much antibiotic
A client was prescribed the antibiotic gentamicin for a kidney infection. This is a drug which needs to be used very carefully. Ideally sample should be taken to measure the amount of drug in the blood and the dose changed accordingly. This was not done, which resulted in too much gentamicin being given. The drug damaged the inner ear, which controls balance. Without a sense of balance this client could no longer walk properly and had to use a wheelchair. Liability was admitted and compensation paid.
Personal injury solicitor negligence
We were approached by a client who informed us he had suffered an injury whilst he was on board a ship and out at sea some time ago. He had been represented by some local solicitors but unfortunately the limitation period which applied to cases such as this was 2 years and the solicitors who were representing him failed to do what they should have done to preserve the limitation period. This meant that the client was unable to pursue his claim against the ship operators. We were able to liaise with the solicitors and negotiated a settlement whereby the solicitors paid the client what he would have received had they done their job properly. Once again the client received 100% of the damages as this was another no win no fee funded case.
Conveyancing solicitor negligence
A solicitor who was instructed by a couple to help buy a house failed to advise the buyers about the different meanings of owning a property as ‘tenants in common’ and a ‘joint tenants’. When the couple parted, this became an issue as the ownership of the property needed to be sorted out. We were instructed by one of the couple. It was only at this time did our client become aware of the different meaning of the two types of tenancy. As a result of the original solicitors failing to advise properly our client was not given the opportunity of deciding how the ownership of the property should have been shared between them when it was originally purchased. We were instructed and recovered all of the monies in dispute from the solicitors being £25,000.00.
A client approached us saying he had purchased a property which ran alongside a canal. The property was newly built. He had not had the property long before he became aware of severe damp. We arranged for the property to be surveyed by an appropriate expert who was able to say that serious mistakes had occurred in construction. Those mistakes should have been spotted by the architect who had designed and overseen the building of the property then put right before the property was sold. We were able to pursue the architect and recover the cost of repair and our costs.
We received instructions from a client to who wanted to buy a house and arranged for the appropriate searches and surveys to be carried out quickly and efficiently meaning within two weeks the client was the owner of the property having exchanged contracts and completed the purchase.
Conveyancing – bad leases and advice
One client approached us to buy a flat but when the lease arrived for the property we found out it was not valid, this was because the lease had been badly drafted. Taking into account his personal circumstances we advised the client not to go ahead with the purchase. If the client had purchased the property then in years to come when he had wanted to sell it would have been a very expensive legal nightmare to sort out. Although the client had a small bill from us, in the long term our advice had saved him thousands of pounds.
We were instructed by a couple who were in dispute with some builders they had engaged to carry out significant building work on their home. The work included replacing a boiler, some electrical work and moving walls about. A price was agreed and the work was started. Money was paid to the builder at the start and at various stages yet the builders’ work fell well below the standards of workmanship expected. A dispute over standard of work and the builders demanding more money broke out. The matter went to court as a trial with the builders having sued the house owners for unpaid bills. The builders lost and were ordered to pay damages to the house owners and also ordered to pay our legal costs.
The heavy engineering work across the road from a clients house caused so much vibration the house shook, damaging foundations and walls. The compensation recovered included the cost of repairs, cost of alternative accommodation and something for stress and inconvenience.