How easy would it be to sue the NHS for time at A&E?

[The-One]

I don't think even if win, I would get a lot of money because even though I have residual symptoms, they are not serious. But I do believe they did not treat me as a professional medics should have done, they just happened to discharge me after 4 hrs there when the statistics on on the % of patients discharged in 4hrs or less count towards the hospital review.

It was last October. However I am asking now because soon I will have a chance to cheaply obtain scans of my brain abroad and also because the symptoms by now have not cleared when the doctors predicted they would. So I am annoyed.

If you're wondering, I went to A&E because I was hit by a car while on bicycle and knocked unconscious.

Anyone have experience in sueing the NHS?

 

[fencer90]

The car driver is the easier target , I have been involved in a case where a public body has admitted liability and the case will still not get to court before march 2010
and the incident was in May 2007

 

[Steven]

Non-professional advice, the Courts are incredibly reluctant to question the use of discretion by a medical professional. When you read about large pay-outs in the media it is precisely a reflection of the cock-up that occurred (excuse my lack of eloquence)

And they will of course be aware that your concern that there may be an underlying damage to your brain after being knocked down by a car last year is being expressed by way of legal action, rather than say going into a hospital again for a second opinion

 

[The-One]

The car driver is the easier target , I have been involved in a case where a public body has admitted liability and the case will still not get to court before march 2010
and the incident was in May 2007

It was 8:45pm I had no bicycle lights and I did not wear a helmet. Not a strong claim there. Also the driver didn't drive off, so he didn't commit any offense there.

 

[kopchoir]

Non-professional advice, the Courts are incredibly reluctant to question the use of discretion by a medical professional. When you read about large pay-outs in the media it is precisely a reflection of the cock-up that occurred (excuse my lack of eloquence)

And they will of course be aware that your concern that there may be an underlying damage to your brain after being knocked down by a car last year is being expressed by way of legal action, rather than say going into a hospital again for a second opinion

Been studying a lot of law within the helath service recently and i believe you have no chance

So lets get this right you was on a bike no helmet no lights and was hit by a car you spent 4 hours in A&E where for all you know the medics in there where saving someones life at the time in resus could of even have been someones mother even yours at the time.

So your symptoms have not subsided medicine is very complex maybe if one wore a helmet and had some lights on your bike and didnt take everything for real life when you were watching casualty/holby city. maybe just maybe you would not been in the position you are in now trying to sue the nhs for your mistakes.

Next time you bang your noggin it might knock some sense into you to take more care of your body

 

[PoochJD]

HI,

I'm with Kopchoir on this, and in all honesty, I'm not sure why you feel that suing the NHS will be of any benefit to you.

- You rode a bicycle at night, minus any lights or helmet.
- A car hit you. Driver stopped, and persumably helped you.
- NHS staff examined you, and because you presumably didn't have life-endangering symptosm, discharged you within 4 hours.

And you want to sue them, because they did their job, but you think they discharged incorrectly?!

The fact that you didn't have life-endangering symptoms, several months after the incident, backs-up the theory that any legal action you take against the hospital will be a waste of time and effort, that could be put to better use.

As Kopchoir suggests, maybe purchase of a bicycle helmet, set of lights and a copy of the Highway Code may be of more worth, than suing an organisation that - as far as I can see - haven't done anything wrong.

What "residual effects" are you suffering from?! Unless they are life-endangering, your claim will never get taken on by anyone. You've said yourself that the effects are minimal, and as you've said it on a public-accessible website, you've given the NHS evidence to back-up the frivolous nature of any legal claim you may now choose to put in for.

Short of brain-injury, or near-death, I think the answer is simple: give-up with this claim idea, and try to move on with your life.


Pooch

 

[Singh400]

Been studying a lot of law within the helath service recently and i believe you have no chance

So lets get this right you was on a bike no helmet no lights and was hit by a car you spent 4 hours in A&E where for all you know the medics in there where saving someones life at the time in resus could of even have been someones mother even yours at the time.

So your symptoms have not subsided medicine is very complex maybe if one wore a helmet and had some lights on your bike and didnt take everything for real life when you were watching casualty/holby city. maybe just maybe you would not been in the position you are in now trying to sue the nhs for your mistakes.

Next time you bang your noggin it might knock some sense into you to take more care of your body

+1 on what Kopchoir said. Honestly some people

 

[RuddyRoad]

The only real opportunity is to claim negligence. Negligence isn't just about someone making a mistake, there has to be actual harm demonstrated as a consequence of the mistake. So until you get the scans and prove there's a problem, and then establish that the treatment or lack of it in A & E contributed adversely to the situation, then you don't have a case.

When people are genuinely harmed as consequence of NHS treatment I think they are entitled to seek compensation. On the other hand, those that see the NHS as a target for a quick buck should perhaps consider whether their ill-gotten compensation money (the NHS sometimes settles to avoid court costs, even where they don't think there's fault) could have been better spent on a heart attack victim, stroke patient or a child with leukaemia....

 

[Steven]

That public authorities are tax-payer funded is of course also a factor in the judicial approach

The-One, I have just read your first two lines again. Well that is precisely the point of expert medical opinion. Surely the reverse argument is for 10 experts to be trotted out saying they would have discharged you just the same. On rare occasions when mistakes are made it can cost lives. But in the main medical professionals make the correct call so if after all this time when you have been working and presumably driving still I cannot see why you are asking a general legal question

 

[Grrrrrowler]

I don't think even if win, I would get a lot of money because even though I have residual symptoms, they are not serious. But I do believe they did not treat me as a professional medics should have done, they just happened to discharge me after 4 hrs there when the statistics on on the % of patients discharged in 4hrs or less count towards the hospital review.

It was last October. However I am asking now because soon I will have a chance to cheaply obtain scans of my brain abroad and also because the symptoms by now have not cleared when the doctors predicted they would. So I am annoyed.

If you're wondering, I went to A&E because I was hit by a car while on bicycle and knocked unconscious.

Anyone have experience in sueing the NHS?

Why don't you go private?

Oh - because the NHS is so much cheaper isn't it?

Although people trying to sue them and make a quick buck will soon change that.

Why not go and have a few beers and trip over a pavement and sue the local council? That's an easy target too...

 

[Pack Dude]

I know nothing about the law but here goes. Under English law bicycle helmets are not mandatory the fact you were not wearing one "should" not be relevant. Also there is a chance that you still would of suffered your head injury even if you were wearing a helmet.

Bikes ridden at night are meant to have lights. There is a required standard for this but id bet a lot of bikes don't reach it. If the place you had your accident was already well lit you could argue the driver should of seen you.

I think everyone has read stories of what seems like black and white medical malpractice that never go anywhere. Fighting the NHS even if you are in the right is never easy. I don't understand the hostility directed at the OP. I cant see how anyone would think hes trying to con cash out of NHS budget? Rather someone who thinks hes been wronged by the NHS and would like it proved and some compensation.

Don't listen to anyone on here and their pseudo moral judgments, go get some proper legal advice.

 

[The-One]

For a start, there are some very self-righteous finger wagging people here.

The fact that I did not wear a helmet or have light have NOTHING to do with the NHS whatsoever. Improper accordance with the Highway code does not any way affect medical procedures and possible negligence cases in court. That's just illogical thinking on your part.

I bet you're be real happy that a cyclists like me actually got hit and got my comeuppance huh? Go take some pills for your self righteousness and indignation at people in wider society before your colon explodes.

So what if I've said it on a public domain? That would make no difference whatsoever, aren't we supposed to say "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" in court? What makes you think I would say anything different... Plus I said "not serious", I did not say "minimal". So you also misquoted me.

A lot of people try to make a quick buck everywhere people. All the finger wagging people here put their faith into "the system" dont' you? What makes you think each claim gotten from the NHS were not well deserved regardless of the compensation money could have been spent on? If you put faith into the system, accept the fact a lot of people can get claims and shut up. If you have no faith in the system, surely you'd have no qualms with someone joining the a legal trend on a high visibility target?

 

[kopchoir]

For a start, there are some very self-righteous finger wagging people here.

The fact that I did not wear a helmet or have light have NOTHING to do with the NHS whatsoever. Improper accordance with the Highway code does not any way affect medical procedures and possible negligence cases in court. That's just illogical thinking on your part.

I bet you're be real happy that a cyclists like me actually got hit and got my comeuppance huh? Go take some pills for your self righteousness and indignation at people in wider society before your colon explodes.

So what if I've said it on a public domain? That would make no difference whatsoever, aren't we supposed to say "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" in court? What makes you think I would say anything different... Plus I said "not serious", I did not say "minimal". So you also misquoted me.

well if one was wearing a helmet one would not need to use the nhs "tell me the whole truth and nothing but the truth" about minimal symptoms and ill tell you if you have a leg to stand on

 

[Grrrrrowler]

I know nothing about the law but here goes. Under English law bicycle helmets are not mandatory the fact you were not wearing one "should" not be relevant. Also there is a chance that you still would of suffered your head injury even if you were wearing a helmet.

Wearing a safety harness when up a ladder in my garden isnt mandatory, but if I fall off and injure myself it's my fault and nobody else's

Bikes ridden at night are meant to have lights. There is a required standard for this but id bet a lot of bikes don't reach it. If the place you had your accident was already well lit you could argue the driver should of seen you.

Think you shot your own argument there - whether the place the accident occurred was well lit or not you cannot blame the driver as the OP didn't have any lights which is against the law on a pubic highway...

I think everyone has read stories of what seems like black and white medical malpractice that never go anywhere. Fighting the NHS even if you are in the right is never easy. I don't understand the hostility directed at the OP. I cant see how anyone would think hes trying to con cash out of NHS budget? Rather someone who thinks hes been wronged by the NHS and would like it proved and some compensation.

Don't listen to anyone on here and their pseudo moral judgments, go get some proper legal advice.

Sorry if I sound harsh but the compensation culture just adds to the burden of us taxpayers and is systematically exploited by people trying to make a quick buck.

I am glad the OP hasn't suffered any serious effects and wish him well, but if you ride a bike at night and get knocked off (and are not wearing a helmet) the blame lies with one person only.

The NHS generally do a great job, and yes sometimes people make mistakes - don't we all?

But sueing the NHS (unless there is serious malpractice which severely impacts on somebody's quality of life) helps nobody.

By the way I am clearly thick but please can you explain what a 'pseudo moral judgment' is please?

 

[Grrrrrowler]

For a start, there are some very self-righteous finger wagging people here.

The fact that I did not wear a helmet or have light have NOTHING to do with the NHS whatsoever. Improper accordance with the Highway code does not any way affect medical procedures and possible negligence cases in court. That's just illogical thinking on your part.

I bet you're be real happy that a cyclists like me actually got hit and got my comeuppance huh? Go take some pills for your self righteousness and indignation at people in wider society before your colon explodes.

So what if I've said it on a public domain? That would make no difference whatsoever, aren't we supposed to say "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" in court? What makes you think I would say anything different... Plus I said "not serious", I did not say "minimal". So you also misquoted me.

A lot of people try to make a quick buck everywhere people. All the finger wagging people here put their faith into "the system" dont' you? What makes you think each claim gotten from the NHS were not well deserved regardless of the compensation money could have been spent on? If you put faith into the system, accept the fact a lot of people can get claims and shut up. If you have no faith in the system, surely you'd have no qualms with someone joining the a legal trend on a high visibility target?

I think the finger wagging started when you said you suffered no serious side effects from a self inflicted accident and then asked how you could make some money out of it.

Or did I misread your thread?

 

[The-One]

All the wagging fingers about me not having a light is just pointless because of course i'm not going to go after the driver and i have never intended to.

 

[Grrrrrowler]

All the wagging fingers about me not having a light is just pointless because of course i'm not going to go after the driver and i have never intended to.

The wagging fingers are about you having a self inflicted accident and seemingly trying to cash in by sueing an already under-resourced and over-stretched NHS which has to pick up the pieces when people inflict needless injuries upon themselves...

Nothing to do with your lights...

 

[kopchoir]

well if one was wearing a helmet one would not need to use the nhs "tell me the whole truth and nothing but the truth" about minimal symptoms and ill tell you if you have a leg to stand on

 

[The-One]

I think the finger wagging started when you said you suffered no serious side effects from a self inflicted accident and then asked how you could make some money out of it.

Or did I misread your thread?

Being hit by a car is not self inflicted. Even if you think having no lights is asking to be hit, I did not yell to the driver, c'mon hit me!

Apart from that, you did not misread my thread. If I have no claim against the NHS, then I was simply unlucky. If I do have a claim against them, I couldnt' care less what indignant and self-righteous people like you think.

 

[krish]

I fell down my staircase one early morning a few weeks ago (I was a bit hungry and was going to grab something from the fridge)
- I didn't bother to switch the light on, and was running

As my wrist is still a bit hurty, I am going to sue my mum for giving birth to a numpty

 

[Grrrrrowler]

Being hit by a car is not self inflicted. Even if you think having no lights is asking to be hit, I did not yell to the driver, c'mon hit me!

Apart from that, you did not misread my thread. If I have no claim against the NHS, then I was simply unlucky. If I do have a claim against them, I couldnt' care less what indignant and self-righteous people like you think.

Careful - sounds like you're insulting me

I am neither self-righteous nor indignant, I'm just fed up with the compensation culture that costs us millions every year.

I'm not saying the accident was anyone's fault but the fact you took a bike out on the road with no lights increases the likelihood of you not being seen by a car...surely you can see that?

As I said before I am glad you didn't suffer a serious injury - but to think about sueing the NHS is just absurd.

 

[Grrrrrowler]

I fell down my staircase one early morning a few weeks ago (I was a bit hungry and was going to grab something from the fridge)
- I didn't bother to switch the light on, and was running

As my wrist is still a bit hurty, I am going to sue my mum for giving birth to a numpty

 

[kopchoir]

Question 1. How did you get to A&E on the night of the accident

Question 2.Since October of last year how many times have you presented yourself in A&E with the same condition

Question3.Why claim 8 months after the event

Question4. How has the condition affected you

 

[IronGiant]

Why don't we start again (forget about the actual cause of the accident which is largely irrelevant) by you telling people exactly why you think you have a case of negligence to bring against the NHS?

Dave

(Sorry Kopchoir, we seem to have posted simultaneously)

 

[kopchoir]

Why don't we start again (forget about the actual cause of the accident which is largely irrelevant) by you telling people exactly why you think you have a case of negligence to bring against the NHS?

Dave

The whole truth and nothing but the truth to quote the OP