Background: SJP Law successfully secured a significant six figure settlement for our client, who suffered due to a breach of duty and delay in diagnosis. Our client experienced a sudden, severe headache described as an “explosion,” accompanied by nausea, weakness, and flashing lights.
Initial Medical Visits: Despite these alarming symptoms, when our client visited a Walk-in Centre, the nurses failed to accurately record her description of the pain. One nurse misinterpreted her symptoms as lower back pain and diagnosed a muscular sprain. This inaccuracy in note-taking became a critical issue as the claim progressed.
Worsening Condition: Over the following days, the claimant’s headaches and vomiting intensified, leading her to visit the Accident and Emergency Department. A CT scan and lumbar puncture confirmed a subarachnoid haemorrhage, and she was referred to a Neurological Centre.
Medical Procedures: Our client was diagnosed with a 5mm MCA aneurysm and underwent a coiling procedure. Unfortunately, she later suffered vasospasm, resulting in right facial weakness and right-sided pronator drift. She required further treatment and was readmitted for intensive therapy.
Further Complications: A year later, our client needed additional coiling treatment for another aneurysm. Follow-up scans showed that all aneurysms were adequately occluded. However, the delay in initial diagnosis deprived her of immediate therapies to prevent vasospasm, leading to severe complications.
Legal Battle: SJP Law were instructed just eight weeks before the limitation period expired. We acted quickly to secure an extension from the Defendant Trust and issue protective proceedings due to a lack of response. Our client’s condition, including severe vasospasm and stroke, was attributed to the negligent delay in diagnosis.
Permanent Impact: Our client now suffers from permanent neurological symptoms, including poor memory, concentration issues, difficulty multitasking, mental and physical fatigue, and pins and needles in her right arm.
Expert Evidence: Medical records were reviewed, and expert reports from a Consultant Neurosurgeon and a Neuroradiologist supported the case. Further investigations confirmed that timely referral and treatment could have prevented the severe complications.
Settlement: Despite the Defendant Trust’s initial refusal to settle, the case proceeded to a Costs Case Management Conference, and a trial was scheduled. The Defendant made a Part 36 Offer, which was rejected. Our client’s Part 36 Offer was eventually accepted by the Defendant.Conclusion: This fully defended case, with no admissions from the Defendant Trust, highlights the importance of accurate medical record-keeping and timely diagnosis. The perseverance of SJP Law ensured that our client received the compensation she deserved, providing some relief from the lasting impact of her condition.
Our client had the following to say about our service:
I received a fantastic service from Stamp Jackson and Procter, they kept me informed at all times and explained every detail clearly so that I knew exactly what was being done to help me.I have been really happy with the service, support and guidance provided and would recommend them 100% to anyone who needs their service.
