Our client Mr J was on the shop floor of the factory where he worked as a cleaner. His supervisor told him to move a ride on cleaning machine from the shop floor to the lower ground storage floor via a lift.Mr J advised his supervisor that he had never used the machine before. He supervisor told him it was the same as driving a car and would be fine. Mr J had not received any training on how to operate the machine.Mr J proceeded towards the lift to descend a level. The lift was designed for moving pallets of food and clothing not machinery.As our client went towards the lift he noticed it was very narrow and that there was a three meter drop behind the lift. As Mr J got onto the lift he realised that the machine did not have proper brakes and the machine did not stop in time.
The cleaning machine along with Mr J tipped over the edge and down the three meter drop.After the incident the duty manager and another supervisor rushed to the scene of the accident and an ambulance was called.Mr J was taken to hospital and his supervisor accompanied him. He received treatment and left hospital after four hours. On the way back from hospital Mr J’s supervisor made him sign a health and safety form which he had to sign and date.Mr J decided to appoint Accident at work Solicitors to pursue his accident at work claim on his behalf.
The Defendant’s position
The third party would not comment on liability because they were undertaking investigations. After the third party received the report from their investigator they confirmed that they denied liability.The third party claimed that Mr J’s statement was untrue. He said that he had never operated the ride on cleaner before and the third party said that Mr J undertook training when he commenced employment. The also said that he received refresher training two months before the accident took place.The third party also disclosed a training record sheet signed by Mr J.
How we resolved the case
Mr J disputed that he had signed a training record sheet. He said that they were compiled after the accident took place. Mr J stated that when he signed a form on the way back from hospital he put the date next to his signature so it could be proven when he signed the document. The documents that were sent to us by the third party did not include this signed and dated form. Mr J alleged that them had been tampered with and then sent to us.
- Miss Ahmed requested the original document from the third party and not a copy so she could be certain that the document had been changed.
- This evidence was sent to the third party and Miss Ahmed also sent instructions to counsel because the third party still denied liability.
- Mr J was taken for a medical. They symptoms he suffered from were moderate shock, bruising to the right elbow, right leg, right hip and right chest. He also suffered from severe pain and stiffness in the right elbow and right hip.
- Mr J’s employers did not disclose the documents and therefore we issued an application for pre action disclosure. The third party responded to the hearing date and they said that their client had given authority to settle the case on best terms
The third party entered a party 36 offer of £12,381.50 for Mr J’s claim which he was happy to accept.
Miss Ahmed’s comments about the case
Mrs Ahmed said the case was straight forward but was made complicated by the fact Mr J advised us he did not sign the documents and his employers disputed liability. To determine if the documents had been tampered with I made an application for pre action disclosure. I can only assume that Mr J’s employers solicitors realised the documents were forged and decided to settle the case.
Accident at work compensation solicitors are specialists in dealing with claims where liability is disputed.If you think you have a case or require further information contact us on 08000 430 430 or fill in the online call back request.