Cause for a lawsuit ????

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Thu Apr 05, 2012 6:48 pm

So today we were sent the photographs the law firm has taken of the site by e mail.

If you can Imagine a Cul-De-Sac and at one end Is the alley way where he fell. You would Imagine that there would be a street lamp down that end of the CDS at least near the alley way but no. Looking at the pics, I was quite shocked to see that In the entire CDS there Is only one street lamp and It's on the far end at least 12 houses away from the entrance of the alley way.

Apparently, In cases like this, It gets complicated when an alley way or passage Is maintained by the council but the actual land has never been adopted by them. We have been told that even If this Is the case, they can't get out of It because It's not about the step he fell down but the whole case Is due to 'Inadequate lighting' at the entrance of It In the CDS owned by the council.

Peter Is slightly more mobile today but this just means he's walking... well, hobbling really. He can't put his socks on or anything like that and probably won't be able to for a long time. He's still In so much pain but the Tramadol help.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 4:09 am

You will both be laughing about it soon.......

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 8:13 am

Bruv;1390515 wrote: You will both be laughing about it soon....... Well apart form being so tired, we are at that stage now where we are finding humour In all of this and laughing at stuff.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:27 am

oscar;1390533 wrote: Well apart form being so tired, we are at that stage now where we are finding humour In all of this and laughing at stuff.

So you are bouncing back......not the best choice of words I know.....in the circumstances.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:29 am

Bruv;1390544 wrote: So you are bouncing back......not the best choice of words I know.....in the circumstances. Some chirppy music just came on a TV advert so I broke Into a breakdance routine adding.... 'Look Pete... you can't do this'.... Yeah we're bouncing back.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed May 02, 2012 8:08 am

Some developments from the Lawyers........

They went out to the site of the accident to knock on doors to find out If anyone else had, had a problem with this step.

First of all, many of the residents In that Close told them they never use the alley way because It's so dark and you can't see the step.

The house next to the alley way tld them that It was In fact them who painted the step flourescent yellow because It was so dangerous and the council have failed to do It. Over a few years, that paint has worn away and the step Is now Invisible..... The mere fact that a resident had to take matters Into their own hands and paint the step speaks volumes. The resident has offered to appear as a witness for Peter should the Council object to compensation and a court battle follows.

The one street lamp In the entire Close on the other side of the entrance to the alley way turns out to be one of these Council cost cutting street lamps that Instead of flooding an area, It emits a low beam downwards only meaning the rest of the Close Is In darkness.

It appears Peter has a very good case for negligence due to ' Inadequete Street Lighting'

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Wed Aug 08, 2012 12:08 pm

So.....

This Is part of which has been served by the lawyers.

The reason why we are alleging fault is that you, by your employees or agents:

1. Failed to warn by way of notice or sign the existence of the step;

2. Failed to make sure that the surface was level and did not therefore pose a risk ;

3. Failed to provide adequate or any lighting in this area;

4. Failed to recognise the fault with the path and effect remedial works;

5. Failed to paint the step in luminous paint to alert persons to the potential danger;

6. Exposed the Claimant to a foreseeable risk of injury.

This is not an exhaustive list; the claimant reserves the right to add to this list in the future.

A description of our client’s injuries is as follows:

Blah blah blah

They have 21 days to respond....

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:47 am

So a brief update from Peter's lawyer...after the Council were served.

They have written to say that they are talking to their Insurers and will be In touch further by the end of the month.

This Is certainly good news as they are not contesting the claim and his lawyer believes they most probably will offer to settle out of court as they have not Involved their lawyers yet.

Some good has also come of this because residents of the Close who were contacted are demanding the Council make the area far safer after what happened so If It saves someone else from breaking their limbs , It's all good.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sun Dec 22, 2013 4:49 pm

Bruv;1390515 wrote: You will both be laughing about it soon.......

After nearly a year... now we laugh.

Offer

£11,000

Out of Court

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Dec 23, 2013 5:12 am

Blimey........I'm looking for a dark alleyway......and a reason to be travelling through it.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Mon Dec 23, 2013 8:00 am

Bruv;1443097 wrote: Blimey........I'm looking for a dark alleyway......and a reason to be travelling through it.

It sounds a good windfall I agree but my husband still suffers pain In the arm and shoulder and has had complication after complication. Due to the Injuries, he has been unable to participate In his Leap programme at the hospital for those with lung conditions which Is gentle exercise to help the cardio-vascular system and oxygen Intake with gas exchange. Due to that, he's suffered some pretty awful chest Infections that have seen him admitted to hospital 3 times this year, one In particular, recently, pretty damn worrying.

He deserves every penny !!!!