Product Liability Solicitors

Product liability solicitors enable you to recover compensation when you have suffered an injury due to a faulty good provided by a manufacturer or retailer. Solicitors who provide legal representation in product liability compensation claims look beyond the initial trauma that has been suffered and consider what the long-term consequences of the injury may be – not only for you as the victim, but for family and friends who may have to provide care for you through your recovery from an injury. To get specific, individual advice about compensation claims for product liability, call and speak directly with a product liability solicitor about your claim.

Holidaymakers Claim Compensation for Illnesses from a Contaminated Hotel Pool

Posted on: October 11th, 2016

Seventeen holidaymakers are claiming compensation for illnesses from a contaminated hotel pool following all-inclusive holiday on the Greek island of Zante.

The affected holidaymakers all stayed at the Marelen Hotel in the popular resort of Kalamaki during August this year. They allege that during their stay they suffered sickness and stomach cramps due to the hotel swimming pool being contaminated with Cryptosporidium – a microscopic parasite that is known to thrive in poorly maintained pools.

The claimants have alleged that conditions at the hotel were unhygienic, with several reporting faecal matter in the swimming pool. Other affected holidaymakers have said they saw staff cleaning the pool area with brushes, and then rinsing the brushes in the pool. None of the holidaymakers saw any deep cleaning of the pool or water testing being conducted.

One of the holidaymakers who believes she contracted an illness from the contaminated hotel pool is Rosanna Crowley (27) from Kettering in Northamptonshire. Rosanna was staying at the resort with her partner and two young children – all of whom suffered similar symptoms. She told her local newspaper: “As soon as I started feeling unwell I just knew it was bad. And then one-by-one we all came down with it.”

On the family´s return to Northamptonshire, they were examined by their GP. The cause of their illnesses was confirmed as Cryptosporidium and, due to the breeding habits of the parasite, her house had to be inspected by Environmental Health Officers. Now Rosanna and her family – along with the other affected holidaymakers are claiming compensation for illnesses from a contaminated hotel pool against the tour operator through whom the holiday was booked – Thomas Cook.

The solicitor acting on behalf of the claimants commented it was deeply concerning that this number of holidaymakers fell ill at the same time, at the same hotel. He added that the purpose of the claim for compensation for illnesses from a contaminated hotel pool was not only to recover compensation for those who had their holiday ruined, but also to ensure that steps are taken by Thomas Cook to ensure the same thing does not happen again.

Family take Legal Advice about Costco Product Liability Claim after Hoverboard Fire

Posted on: March 4th, 2016

A family from Bradford has taken legal advice to see if they are entitled to make a Costco product liability claim for injuries sustained in a property fire.

In November 2015, Vinh Hung Chiem and Thu Tram from Wyke near Bradford bought their two children a hoverboard from the Leeds branch of Costco as a gift for Christmas. On January 15 – while the toy was plugged into an electrical socket to charge its battery – the hoverboard burst into flames, setting light to the family home.

Fortunately a friend of the children – Jibril Faris (11) – saw the fire start and raised the alarm. Jibril, Tony (9) and Karen (8) escaped from the fire with minor burn injuries. The children – with Thu, who was also in the house at the time the fire started – were taken to hospital where they were treated for their injuries.

The Chiem family home was completely destroyed in the accident and – according to Thu – the children still suffer nightmares. “The kids could have been killed. They all believed they were going to die in the fire. Everything was ruined in the fire… it’s turned our lives upside down” Thu told BBC reporters.

The West Yorkshire Fire Service conducted an investigation into the cause of the fire and confirmed Jibril´s story that the fire was started by the hoverboard. A spokesperson for the Fire Service commented the likelihood was that lithium batteries in the hoverboard had overheated and exploded or ignited.

Now the family has taken legal advice to see if it is entitled to make a Costco product liability claim against the store at which the hoverboard was purchased. Thu said: “We thought we bought a reliable product from a trusted retailer and we want to know how something with so much potential to cause this type of devastation was sold to us.”

The family´s solicitor commented that the family would appear to have a Costco product liability claim under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 if it is proven that the hoverboard was faulty. A spokesperson for Costco UK said: “This is a terrible tragedy and we are looking into this matter but we have no comment at this time.”

Teenager Settles Claim for Gynaecological Injuries Caused by a Water Jet

Posted on: April 14th, 2015

A teenage girl has agreed to an out of court settlement of her claim for gynaecological injuries that were caused by a water jet at Blackpool Pleasure Beach.

In October 2009, Shelby Clarke and her family were enjoying a day trip to Blackpool from their home in Manchester. When the family arrived in Blackpool, they headed to Blackpool Pleasure Beach where Shelby (who was fourteen years old at the time) and her friend Sarah spotted the park´s newest attraction – “The Spectacular Dancing Water Fountain”,

The two girls ran across to the attraction – which shot water 200 feet into the air – and joined other children playing among the powerful water jets. However, as Shelby ran across the middle water jet, the jet started to operate and a jet of water hit Shelby between the legs. Shelby immediately felt the need to visit the toilet but, when she got there, the area surrounding her vagina was covered in blood.

An ambulance was summoned and Shelby was taken to hospital. She underwent a two-hour operation, during which time 250 stitches were inserted in and around her vagina. Now nineteen years old, Shelby has a limited sex life and fears that she may never be able to give birth to children. There is also a substantial amount of scarring around her vagina which Shelby hopes can be removed one day by cosmetic surgery.

Shelby´s mother – Karen – made a claim for gynaecological injuries caused by a water jet against Blackpool Pleasure beach Limited – alleging that “The Spectacular Dancing Water Fountain” presented a risk of injury to the children playing around the attraction. Blackpool Pleasure Beach Limited acknowledged it liability for her daughter´s injuries and made an undisclosed five-figure offer of settlement that was accepted by the family.

A spokesman for Blackpool Pleasure Beach Limited apologised to Shelby and her family, and told the media that since Shelby´s claim for gynaecological injuries caused by a water jet, new safety measures have been introduced to prevent children running between the water jets while they are in operation. The measures include staff monitoring the perimeter of the attraction and announcements being made immediately before the water jets are about to start operating.

PIP Faulty Breast Implant Court Case not Open to Late Applicants Rules Court

Posted on: August 29th, 2014

The High Court has ruled that late applicants, who missed the April 2013 deadline for registering in the forthcoming PIP faulty breast implant court case, will not be allowed to participate in it.

In March 2012, the High Court endorsed a Group Litigation Order (GLO) that would allow injury compensation claims against the clinics who performed breast implant surgery with the recalled PIP implants to be combined into one legal action.

The purpose of the GLO was to reduce the costs of the potential claimants who would join the legal action and the time it would take for them to be compensated if the PIP faulty breast implant court case went in their favour.

A deadline of April 2013 was set for claimants to register in order that the defendants in the case might know the scope of the claims being made against them, and the start of the PIP faulty breast implant court case was scheduled for October.

Just before the April 2013 deadline, seventeen claims for faulty breast implant compensation were being managed by a legal firm in Manchester – Tandem Law – who suddenly went into liquidation and were later acquired by AHV Legal.

Due to a lengthy changeover process, AHV Legal missed the deadline for registering their seventeen clients, and the applications to register them in the PIP faulty breast implant court case were only made in February this year.

The cosmetic surgery clinics defending the case objected to the late applications on the grounds that it would prejudice the case against them. They also cited Lord Jackson´s criticisms of non-compliance with GLO deadlines and provided several examples of subsequent court cases in which potential claimants had been disqualified from making claims due to missing deadlines.

Their objections were heard by Mrs Justice Thirwall DBE at the High Court; who also heard arguments on behalf of the seventeen potential claimants that exclusion from the PIP faulty breast implant court case might compromise their rights to recover compensation. The applicants´ barristers claimed that, should the PIP faulty breast implant court case result in substantial settlements being made to the existing claimants, there may not be enough money left to compensation AVH Legal´s clients.

The judge dismissed the applicant´s argument on the basis that it was speculative. She commented that if there were insufficient funds remaining to compensate the clients of AVH Legal after the PIP faulty breast implant court case, the clients would have a justifiable cause to sue AVH Legal. Mrs Justice Thirwall DBE granted the objection by the cosmetic surgery clinics.

DePuy Claims Action for Blood Poisoning Injury Made

Posted on: June 3rd, 2011

A claim for DePpuy claims action for blood poisoning injury has been made by a woman who received her DePuy ASR hip replacement system as recently as November 2009.

The Depuy claims action, taken by Delores Hatcher from Wheeling, West Virginia, follows the results of a blood test in April 2011 which indicated high levels of chromium-1 and meta-cobalt in her blood – known causes of cardiovascular injury and neurological conditions such as headaches, confusion and cognitive decline, and possibly carcinogens which could lead to the development of cancer.

Delores added her DePuyclaim to the growing number of Depuy compensation claims following the hip recall of August 2010 after visiting her doctor complaining of pain around her left hip and difficulty in walking. Both Delores and her doctor were overwhelmed by the outcome of the blood tests as the hip replacement was fitted in November 2009 and had failed in a short period of time.

In her DePuy claims action for blood poisoning compensation, Delores also accused Johnson & Johnson – the parent company of DePuy Orthopaedics – of hiding known defects with the faulty hip replacement systems and alleges that they aggressively marketed the faulty hip replacement systems by paying kickbacks to medical supplies purchasers and orthopaedic surgeons.