Thursday 19 May 2011

Dog bite attracts compensation payment of £7500

Simon Bransby Personal Injury Specialist with MJP Solicitors has recently settled a case for young lady, who was bitten on the backside, by a dog. Fortunately the incident has not left major scaring but she suffered a psychiatric reaction and is now scared of dogs. The award of £7,500 was accepted after negotiations between the parties

If you have been in a similar accident or wish for further information please contact Simon Bransby on  01603 877000 or by e-mail at simonbransby@m-j-p.co.uk


MJP Solicitors have a specialist team of personal injury and clinical negligence injury claim experts who offer free legal advice about taking a claim, if you, a friend or relative have been in an accident or suffered from medical negligence please get in touch with MJP Solicitors to find out what to do next on 01603 877000Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Are hospitals doing enough to prevent avoidable thrombosis?


The NHS, writes Simon Bransby,  is paying out millions of pounds in clinical negligence claims because hospitals are failing to spot life-threatening blood clots.

New figures show that since 2005 the health service has spent £112m compensating patients who have suffered an avoidable thrombosis.

According to thrombosis charity Lifeblood, just 30 of the 159 hospital trusts in England meet the mandatory goal of risk-assessing at least 90% of patients admitted to hospital.

That means 4.5 million patients a year miss out on potentially life-saving assessments that could prevent clots.

Simple measures such as compression stockings and blood-thinning drugs can reduce the risk of clots in high-risk patients, such as those having surgery.

David Jones, Senior Partner and Head of the Clinical Negligence Department at Norwich specialist clinical negligence solicitors Morgan Jones & Pett explains “These figures are not surprising. My firm regularly handle claims against the NHS for claims arising out of a failure to spot blood clots. It is well known that thrombosis prevention guidelines are in place and it is not difficult, with the right tests, to ensure that these life threatening conditions are spotted.”

David Jones adds: "It is evidently more sensible to ensure that the right assessment and treatment is carried out, as it much more preferable and costs substantially less, to treat patients rather than paying them off when things go wrong."

MJP Solicitors have a specialist team of personal injury and clinical negligence injury claim experts who offer free legal advice about taking a claim, if you, a friend or relative have been in an accident or suffered from medical negligence please get in touch with MJP Solicitors to find out what to do next on 01603 877000

Spinal Fracture Compensation of £600,000


Sara Westwood, partner and clinical negligence expert with MJP Solicitors has recently settled a case for a 35 year old lady recovering compensation of £600,000.00 for injuries and financial losses sustained as a result of a hospitals failure to diagnose spinal fractures following a fall.

If you have a similar concern or wish for further information please contact Sara Westwood on  01603 877000 or by e-mail at sarawestwood@m-j-p.co.uk

MJP Solicitors have a specialist team of clinical negligence injury claim experts who offer free legal advice about taking a claim, if you, a friend or relative have been the victim of medical negligence please get in touch with MJP Solicitors to find out what to do next on 01603 877000

Compensation for lady who conceived following negligently performed sterilisation

Sara Westwood, partner and clinical negligence expert with MJP Solicitors, has recently settled a case in the sum of £25,000.00 for a 29 year old lady who conceived following a negligently performed sterilisation operation.

If you have a similar concern or wish for further information please contact Sara Westwood on  01603 877000 or by e-mail at sarawestwood@m-j-p.co.uk

MJP Solicitors have a specialist team of clinical negligence injury claim experts who offer free legal advice about taking a claim, if you, a friend or relative have been the victim of medical negligence please get in touch with MJP Solicitors to find out what to do next on 01603 877000



Wednesday 11 May 2011

Is property indemnity insurance over used in conveyancing?

There seems to be a tendency these days to take the easy route whenever a problem with title arises.  Rather than carrying out investigation to inquire whether an alternative solution exists, an increasing number of conveyancers are turning to indemnity insurance to ‘plug the hole’.

I can understand the reason.  Conveyancing fees are being squeezed and there is pressure to move transactions quickly and with the minimum of case handler input.   On top of this is the increased pressure we all receive from clients to ensure there is minimum delay during the process.   Clients generally have only two priorities when moving home - to move quickly and at little cost.

It is often easier for a practitioner to ask the client to pay for the indemnity policy than to ask for extra fees to investigate other solutions.

I question however whether taking out indemnity cover is always the right decision to take.  Take for example the lack of building regulations.   Yes insurance is available to cover the cost of enforcement action but this does not address whether the loft conversion for instance is structurally safe.  I recognize this should be pretty evident to most of us but there is wide spread ignorance of cover afforded by indemnity policies.

In my view insurance should be viewed as a ‘last resort’ solution and one that should only be used after investigations of other solutions are at an end.  Yes this would mean extra work but if the reason for this is explained then there should not be any problem obtaining money from the client.  

Conveyancers should always check the terms and limitations of policy cover; failure to do so could result in a negligence action.  Conveyancers should also when a lender is involved consider the policy of the particular lender relating to the use of such policies.  If a policy already exists always check it against the current valuation of the property and consider if necessary top up insurance.

My other issue with indemnity policy is that there is no register to check whether a policy on a property has been previously established.   It would not take too much for the Land Registry to make it a requirement that policies activated on a property should be noted on the title.

Perhaps another answer is the adoption of a property logbook – as a firm we have developed an electronic logbook into which we upload for clients all documents (including the indemnity policy) relating to the property and which they will need when they come to sell.  We also include a loyalty voucher to ensure as best we can that the client comes back to us in the future.  If anybody wishes to know more about this product please feel free to email me


Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Wednesday 27 April 2011

PI Insurers pose greater risk to conveyancers than new SRA proposals?

There are changes afoot with the Solicitor Regulatory Authority’s plans for conveyancing firms.  During the course of the year the SRA will be carrying out a major review of the regulation of Solicitors undertaking conveyancing and the holding of client money because of the risks posed by a small number of firms engaged in property-related fraud and money laundering.

The thrust of the proposals is to ensure conveyancing firms take seriously the risks and establish good compliance and risk management systems.  I am sure that those firms who take conveyancing seriously will already be taking these risk seriously of not by choice by reason of pressure from their PI insurers.

The Strategy is due to be published in October and will operate alongside the Enforcement Strategy published on 13th January 2011. It will set out how the SRA will engage with firms to ensure that the procedures etc comply with the Principles, achievement of the Outcomes in the new SRA Code of conduct and compliance with the new Handbook.

So why is there a need for a strategy?  Well believe it or not but Conveyancing claims represent about 50% of the value of professional negligence claims. Payments made by the fund have more than doubled over the last few years, tying in with the downturn in the property market.

So how will the SRA will engage with the profession and other stakeholders to ensure it gets the approach to the risks posed by conveyancing correct?   We are told The SRA will draw on the information and experience available (through the Law Society), clients (including lenders) and insurers.

If issues are identified the SRA will work with firms to put matters right and it suggested enforcement action will be a last resort.  The Strategy indentifies the issues that the SRA will be looking to identify and which include:

• Conflicts of Interest
• Referral Arrangements
• Costs Information (including publicity about fees)
• Financial Stability
• Property Related Fraud and Money Laundering
• Acting for Buyer and Seller
• Acting for two Buyers in a Contract Race
• Acting for a Buyer and Lender where the Lender asks a firm to go beyond standard Instructions
• The potential Conflict between duty of disclosure and duty of confidentiality when acting for Buyer and Lender

Firms will be expected to assess these and other conflict risks, and ensure that the systems are in place to identify and mitigate the risks.

The Firm’s referral arrangements will also be under scrutiny. We will be expected to assess these and other referral risks, and ensure systems are in place to identify and mitigate the risks presented by the following:

·       Valuable referral arrangements could compromise a firm’s integrity, professional judgement or independence.
·       Reliance on one-third party for a high proportion of conveyancing work could impact upon its financial stability.

The provision of cost information is another high profile area of the Strategy. Firms will need to ensure that their fees and costs are fairly expressed and not misleading.

Concerned about how financial instability could make firms more venerable to inappropriate pressures the Strategy will be focusing on the identification of firms who only do conveyancing or a significant part of their income is as a result of doing conveyancing.  These firms will need to consider what systems and controls to put in place for monitoring their financial stability and economic viability.

The Strategy will also take the opportunity to review the risks associated with property related fraud and money laundering because a large proportion of the value of payments from the Compensation Fund represents payments related to fraud in connection with conveyancing.

Firms will need to determine what policies, procedures, systems and controls they should put in place to minimise the possibility of being targeted for criminal activity. Again this seem to be re-emphasising the risks and need for processes that we have all had to live with and act upon for some time now.  I question whether there is anything new here.


So what tools will the SRA use to indentify these risks? The SRA will use a variety of strategies and tools to test the systems and controls firms put in place to address the risks they face.

The systems and controls will differ depending on:

• The size and complexity of the firm
• The nature of the conveyancing work undertaken (e.g. e-conveyancing)
• The firm’s client base (e.g. are clients local or national)

The tools and powers will include:

• Desk-based reviews
• On-site visits, including interviews
• Use of formal investigative powers, including requests for documentation and attendance of individuals at formal interview
• Obtaining documents or information from third parties, including law enforcement agencies
• Mystery shopping
• Thematic visits

The SRA has produced a transition manual “OFR at a glance http://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/handbook/ofr-quick-guide.page. It contains Q & As on ethical dilemmas etc. It is not intended to replace or be a substitute for firms’ own internal procedures.

Overall there is not very much new within this consultation document; much of what is proposed reflects the risk assessment that many of us are now required to undertake as part and parcel of our PI insurance application.  At the end of the day it’s the PI insurers who hold all the cards and who will clearly irrespective of the SRA’s moves  determine the fate of many conveyancing practices.

Morgan Jones and Pett are solicitors who provide legal advice and services to clients based in England and Wales and who can be contacted on 01603877000 or via email at davidpett@m-j-p.co.uk

Featured post

If it's not broken don't fix it