What happened?
Our client, Ed*, had been feeling lethargic for a couple of days when he suddenly got a heavy headache around his forehead. His left arm started feeling very heavy and he started slurring his speech. He was taken to Dorset County Hospital by ambulance. Upon arrival, he was diagnosed as having suffered a transient ischaemic attack, a “mini” stroke. The treatment plan provided included being prescribed with aspirin, advice and a referral to the Fast Access Transient Ischemic Attack (TIA) Clinic. We are not sure exactly what happened with the referral, if it was processed or not, but Ed was discharged on the same day and sent home.
Six months later, Ed had still not been seen by a specialist following his stroke or been called to the TIA Clinic. A month after that he was taken back to the same hospital by ambulance after he struggled to sit up from his table after breakfast and his face having dropped, Ed was diagnosed as having suffered a stroke.
Our client and his wife were worried that this second stroke would have been avoided if the hospital had followed protocol and arranged for him to have an appointment with the Fast Access TIA Clinic.
For that reason, they came to Enable Law to help them understand what had happened and bring a claim against the hospital.
How did we help?
Associate, Helen Horne was instructed to act for Ed and her first action was to get a copy of his medical records. After familiarising herself with his medical history, Helen wrote to Dorset County Hospital to inform them of Ed’s case against them, ask them to accept liability of what happened and explore an early settlement opportunity out of court. Unfortunately, delays in hearing back meant that Helen had to liaise with the court to extend the limitation time limit to allow time for the hospital to respond to her requests. Additional delays meant that Helen had to appoint an expert consultant physician who after reviewing Ed’s medical records produced an independent report agreeing that the care he received from Dorset County Hospital had fallen below the expected standard and had breached the duty of care owned to him as a patient.
Using this supportive report, Helen drafted a letter of claim and appointed experts to help her quantify the damages Ed would be owed as the result of the negligent care he allegedly received. Having submitted a document explaining all the different financial losses (schedule of loss) Ed suffered because of the second stroke and explaining the funds he needed to meet all the new needs he acquired because of it, Helen liaised with the legal team of the hospital who initially suggested they were planning on making an out of court settlement offer. Unfortunately again, they later changed their mind so Helen issued court proceedings.
Following a lot of back and forth between Helen and the Trust’s legal team, they admitted liability and the court ordered the hospital to make an immediate payment of £75K to help Ed meet some of the urgent costs he had already incurred because of his injury. That covered some of the money he and his wife had spent on physio and home adaptations. The immediate payment aside, the case was still ongoing and sadly Ed’s wife died during the time it took the 2 parties to negotiate a fair settlement. That had significant implications on Ed as his wife was his primary care giver and was supporting him with several daily activities that he would now need carers to support him with going forward. It also meant that Ed would need external help around the house and with chores that needed doing for the upkeep of the garden. For that reason, Helen reviewed the schedule of loss and Ed’s claim finally settled for over £350K a few months down the line.
What does this mean for our client?
This second preventable stroke significantly affected Ed. While before the stroke he was completely independent, he now faces mobility challenges and is incontinent. The stroke also caused him memory loss and impacted his ability to communicate. These are all things he needed support to adapt to but also significant physiotherapy to try to overcome. Another impact of Ed’s stroke is that it caused him epilepsy which is only partially controlled with medication. Ed had not planned for any of this to happen for him and the financial hit of needing extensive therapy and being reliant on others for everyday activities had impacted him greatly. Being able to afford to pay for the care he needs means he has been able to get his life back on track to the best possible level achievable following his injury.
Can we help you?
If you or a loved one have concerns about the care you received, our specialist medical negligence team has decades of experience helping clients understand if the care they received was negligent and enabling them to access compensation to meet any new needs their injury has resulted in. There is a well-defined window of opportunity to prevent additional harm when someone suffers a stroke and when missed it can result into lifelong injuries like the ones our client Ed is facing. To talk to a member of our team, call us for free on 0800 044 8488 or fill in our contact form below.
*Please note: We have changed our client’s name to protect his privacy.