Compensation for my son due to personal injury???

luckym5080 · April 3, 2009

Hi, Im wondering if it is possible to claim some kind of compensation on behalf of my 13 year son but Im not sure how to go about it. Last August he broke his wrist whilst playing football for his local district team and being on the receiving end of a nasty tackle. Result was, arm in plaster for 6 weeks and no sports for 3 weeks after the plaster came off. This brought us up until November last year. He went to school one day to do his first PE lesson after having his plaster off and lo and behold I had a call from the school to say "we think your son may of damaged his wrist again, can you please collect him from school" . My son was in agony when I arrived at the school, I was so shocked to find out that he was pushed over in the school corridor by some older lad running past and barging into him, he was knocked off his feet as a result of this his wrist was broken again! The boy meanwhile found this hilarious and continued to run off along the corridor. Result was, my son had a much more serious break to his wrist which ended up being fixed by surgery. He now has a metal plate holding his bone together, a very very nasty 7 inch scar along the inside of his forearm and most distressing to my son was the fact he had to wait approx 12 weeks before he could rejoin his beloved football team. He is now still suffering, his scar has not healed well and phsycologically he is not the same football player he was before. Although he recovered very well from his original break, this one is a different story. He is terrified of breaking it again, the surgery he had was very distressing for him, he had such a bad reaction to the general anasthetic he had during surgery. I just feel so bad for him, none of what happened was his fault and I still feel so angry about the whole situation. Is there anything I can do on his behalf? Any advice would be greatly received. xx

GamekeeperToPoacher · April 4, 2009

Hi Luckym,

First I am not a lawyer!

I feel that you are unlikely to be able to make a claim against anyone as it would appear that the injury was a result of an accident.

There was a case reported the other day in the BBC news site where a dinner lady was unsuccessful in suing for a head injury caused when a child playing in the school grounds accidentally backed into her and caused her to fall.

I fail to see who you could claim against as there would appear to be no one who was negligent.

I am sorry if this is not what you want to hear, it might be worth trying a solicitor but then I worry that we will have yet more 'nannying legislation' foisted on us.

GKTP

luckym5080 · April 4, 2009

Thanks for your reply. I was thinking the same thing. Although the school has very strict rules about running in corridors etc Im not sure who would be held liable for his injury. Many people who were questioned about the incident has admitted that the boy who caused the injury was indeed shoulder barging into smaller kids to make them fall (apparantly he thought this was funny)! He ran off laughing even though my son was a sobbing heap on the floor (the thought of it makes me soooo angry)! The pupil was questioned about it and admitted what he had done and was further suspended from school for 1 week and made to apologise to my son. My original thought was that the school should be liable for this as they are supposed to keep our children safe but then I even considered pressing charges to the other boy as a number of witnesses have told us what happened (the boy is a known bully apparantly, in school and outside of school). I suppose I will just have to swallow my anger and get over it xx

gizmo111 · April 5, 2009

Thanks for your reply. I was thinking the same thing. Although the school has very strict rules about running in corridors etc Im not sure who would be held liable for his injury. Many people who were questioned about the incident has admitted that the boy who caused the injury was indeed shoulder barging into smaller kids to make them fall (apparantly he thought this was funny)! He ran off laughing even though my son was a sobbing heap on the floor (the thought of it makes me soooo angry)! The pupil was questioned about it and admitted what he had done and was further suspended from school for 1 week and made to apologise to my son. My original thought was that the school should be liable for this as they are supposed to keep our children safe but then I even considered pressing charges to the other boy as a number of witnesses have told us what happened (the boy is a known bully apparantly, in school and outside of school). I suppose I will just have to swallow my anger and get over it xx

The school keep your children safe .......... he had a accident, the appropriate channels were followed. What is it you want to hear?

havinastella · April 5, 2009

It seems the school has acted in a 'right' and 'proper' manner.

They have implemented rules against running in the corridors ans seem to try to uphold them.

Your only option would be to bring a civil case against the boy that knocked him over, BUT there is not a cats chance in hell you would win it.

You could try a 'no win, no fee lawyer' but i'd bet my last £23000 they would not go near this.

Its two accidents and a part of life I'm afraid.

Jogs

underdog13 · April 6, 2009

Sorry to hear about your son's distressing injury, luckym.

The only point I would query is regarding the incident as an accident - the boy knocked him over deliberately, didn't he? Might be worth having a word with a no win no fee solicitor (don't lay out any money on it ,though). As the previous posters have said, if it is classed as an accident there's no recourse, however if it is regarded as an assault, that may be a different story.

I successfully sued two teenage arsonists (after a raft of law firms telling me that I couldn't sue a minor). My own excellent family solicitor told me that minors can indeed be sued; they simply need a litigant in person to be appointed. My claim was eventually settled from the arsonists' parents' household insurance, which the police officer in charge of the case advised me was worth pursuing.

I don't want to raise your hopes unduly, but it may just be worth exploring every angle. First step, find a good solicitor!

Best of luck with it and my best wishes to your son for a speedy recovery:)

luckym5080 · April 7, 2009

Thanks so much for your kind reply. I felt like some kind of money grabbing witch after some of the responses I had on this matter. I thought I had made my posts quite clear about this unfortunate incident. The fact is, this was in no way an accident, there were half a dozen pupils interviewed who all said the same thing, this being that it was a completley deliberate act of purely yobbish behaviour. To have a boy in year 11 thinking it was hilarious to knock younger, smaller children off their feet by shoulder barging them into walls and lockers makes me so so angry!! Obviously it was a deliberate act, the school would not suspend someone for a week if it was purely accidental. I know my chances are slim, and I also know any compensation received would be put into a trust fund for my son until he was 18. I just feel that after everything he has been through, he does deserve some kind of justice. He has been an avid and very promising footballer since the age of 6, its knocked his confindence so much its unbelivable. He is almost scared to go onto a football pitch now in case he falls again. I must stress that he got over the original break fine and had just got back into his game again when this happened. Sorry to go on but Im sure anyone in my situation would feel the same. Once again, thank you for your kind response, you have given me hope and now I will be making some calls to solicitors and asking their opinions xxxx

peterlucas · April 7, 2009

Tort claims are not limited to negligence. Battery is also a tort.

underdog13 · April 7, 2009

I can completely understand your son's trepidation and your justifiable anger, Luckym.

As I said before, be careful which lawyer you choose. I spoke to at least 6 firms of solicitors before I found a superb one. Don't be conned into paying them anything upfront - all decent solicitors will give the first half hour or so free.

I really do wish you the best of luck - if more of these little yobs were made to face the consequences of their violent behaviour, perhaps there would be fewer incidents.

It's great that you have several witnesses who stated that this was a deliberate act and of course the school would not have suspended him for an 'accident', as you say. It's also advantageous that he admitted to a deliberate act and made a further admission of guilt in his (forced) apology. Be sure to emphasise these points with your solicitor. Was the school made aware of any previous violent/bullying acts by the student?

Nothing is guaranteed, of course, but IMHO it's worth a shot. At least you will know that you tried everything you could.

Edited April 7, 2009 by underdog13

underdog13 · April 7, 2009

Just a thought, but is there some sort of support your son could wear on his wrist to give him a little extra protection when he is playing football? Something like the joint supports athletes wear for injuries or suchlike. It might boost his confidence a little, perhaps.

Edited April 7, 2009 by underdog13
typo

luckym5080 · April 7, 2009

Hi, PeterLucas, can you tell me what you mean by tort? Thanks x

underdog13 · April 7, 2009

Found this definition online, luckym;

Tort law is the name given to a body of law that addresses, and provides remedies for, civil wrongs not arising out of contractual obligations.[1] A person who suffers legal damages may be able to use tort law to receive compensation from someone who is legally responsible, or "liable," for those injuries. Generally speaking, tort law defines what constitutes a legal injury and establishes the circumstances under which one person may be held liable for another's injury. Torts cover intentional acts and accidents.

For instance, Alice throws a ball and accidentally hits Brenda in the eye. Brenda may sue Alice for losses occasioned by the accident (e.g., costs of medical treatment, lost income during time off work, pain and suffering, etc.). Whether or not Brenda wins her suit depends on if she can prove Alice engaged in tortious conduct. Here, Brenda would attempt to prove Alice had a duty and failed to exercise the standard of care which a reasonable person would render in throwing the ball.

One of the main topics of the substance of tort law is determining the "standard of care" - a legal phrase that means distinguishing between when conduct is or is not tortious. Put another way, the big issue is whether a person suffers the loss from his own injury, or whether it gets transferred to someone else.

Going back to the example above, if Alice threw the ball at Brenda on purpose, Brenda could sue for the intentional tort of battery. If it was an accident, Brenda must prove negligence. To do this, Brenda must show that her injury was reasonably foreseeable, that Alice owed Brenda a duty of care not to hit her with the ball, and that Alice failed to meet the standard of care required.

In much of the western world, the touchstone of tort liability is negligence. If the injured party cannot prove that the person believed to have caused the injury acted with negligence, at the very least, tort law will not compensate them. Tort law also recognizes intentional torts and strict liability, which apply to defendants who engage in certain actions.

In tort law, injury is defined broadly. Injury does not just mean a physical injury, such as where Brenda was struck by a ball. Injuries in tort law reflect any invasion of any number of individual "interests." This includes interests recognized in other areas of law, such as property rights. Actions for nuisance and trespass to land can arise from interfering with rights in real property. Conversion and trespass to chattels can protect interference with movable property. Interests in prospective economic advantages from contracts can also be injured and become the subject of tort actions. A number of situations caused by parties in a contractual relationship may nevertheless be tort rather than contract claims, such as breach of fiduciary duty.

Tort law may also be used to compensate for injuries to a number of other individual interests that are not recognized in property or contract law, and are intangible. This includes an interest in freedom from emotional distress, privacy interests, and reputation. These are protected by a number of torts such as infliction, privacy torts, and defamation. Defamation and privacy torts may, for example, allow a celebrity to sue a newspaper for publishing an untrue and harmful statement about him. Other protected interests include freedom of movement, protected by the intentional tort of false imprisonment.

The equivalent of tort in civil law jurisdictions is delict.[2] The law of torts can be categorised as part of the law of obligations, but unlike voluntarily assumed obligations (such as those of contract, or trust), the duties imposed by the law of torts apply to all those subject to the relevant jurisdiction. To behave in 'tortious' manner is to harm another's body, property, or legal rights, or possibly, to breach a duty owed under statute.