It is quite widely-known that people who have been injured are entitled to claim a financial settlement if another party was at fault. However, a lot of people never claim the compensation they are legally entitled to, and often this is down to a general lack of understanding on any deeper level. One thing that many people are often unclear on is exactly what a compensation payment is for, and what it represents.
The answer to this works on two different levels, because compensation payments are designed to represent two different forms of justice for the injured party. Both of these will be taken into account when calculating the total amount that should be awarded as a result of an accident at work claim or any other kind of personal injury case.
Reimbursement for Expenses
Part of the purpose of compensation is to reimburse you for expenses that have been incurred as a result of your injury, as it is considered only fair that these expenses are met by the person who caused your injury and was at fault. Examples of expenses that might be incurred in this way are any costs associated with medical treatment, such as the cost of having prescriptions filled, and losses incurred as a result of being unable to work. More serious and longer-term injuries may also require you to make adaptations to your home in order to accommodate a reduced level of physical ability, or assistance from private carers. These are also expenses that could be considered for reimbursement when calculating the amount of compensation that is due to you.
Compensation for Suffering
The other purpose of financial compensation is to serve as, quite simply, compensation. In other words, it is designed to make up, at least on some level, for the suffering that your injury has caused. Of course, in many cases no financial settlement could really make up for this, particularly in cases where accidents have resulted in a long-term or permanent disability or even death. Nonetheless, a compensation payment is designed to go some way – as far as reasonably possible – towards making amends for pain and suffering. In some cases, such as where a household’s major wage-earner is permanently unable to work or even deceased, this aspect of the compensation payment is also intended help ensure the financial security of the claimant or claimants in a more general way than the part of the settlement that relates to specific expenses.
Because of money-laundering salespersons and insurance companies, many people have become the victim of PPI mis-selling. If you bought a mis-sold PPI, there is a very strong chance that you won’t be getting anything from your payment protection insurance. Nonetheless, if you are a victim of PPI mis-selling, you have every right to get back the money that you’ve placed in your insurance. You can claim your PPI refund through a claims company that can do all the work for you, or you can choose to try to get the compensation yourself. Here is how you can file for a PPI claim:
Before Filing a PPI Claim
- Check Your Validity – Before you start processing your documents for a PPI claim, make sure that you are qualified for a PPI claim in the first place. Contact and ask the company that sold you your loan. Most of these lenders will tell you straight up on the phone if you’ve had a PPI in your account.
- Gather Your Documents – You won’t exactly need your documents right away when you want to start filing your PPI claim, but you will need them in the long run. You can contact your lender to give you a copy of your terms and conditions.
- Look Over a PPI Mis-Selling Checklist – The next step would be to find out if you were a victim of PPI mis-selling. Look for a PPI mis-selling checklist on the Internet.
- Contact the Insurance Company – If you believe that you are indeed one of the many people who bought void PPIs, contact your insurance company and ask for a refund. While it was a lot harder to negotiate with insurance companies before, many are now willing to negotiate even through phone calls.
- Contact the Financial Ombudsman Service – It is possible that the insurance company will reject your demand for a refund. If this happens, contact the Financial Ombudsman Service and make an official complaint. The Ombudsman will also help you determine if you have a viable case or not.
Robert Uren, 24, sought and won in the region of £6 million in compensation after a long legal battle, appeal and High Court Ruling in his favour in February this year. The case is now, however, said to be under appeal and his compensation under threat.
The former RAF technician became wheel-chair bound after being paralysed from the waist down, and he also suffers severe spasms. He sustained these injuries after fracturing three vertebrae in his neck while taking part in an ‘It’s a Knock-out’ style game at an organized event. The game involved jumping into a pool containing 18 inches of water to retrieve plastic fruit. There were rival teams competing and around half of the other competitors were diving into the water in the same manner as Mr. Uren.
Mr Uren took legal action against the Ministry of Defence, for holding the event and Corporate Leisure (UK) Ltd, for providing the inflatable equipment. The compensation claim stems from Mr. Uren believing that the Ministry of Defence and event organisers were to blame for encouraging him, and others, to take part in a dangerous event, one which proved catastrophic for him. Mr Justice Foskett ruled in favour of Mr Uren, stating that the MOD and event organisers were liable for the injuries sustained by Mr Uren as the risk assessment was fatally flawed. He also commented that steps could have been taken to remove the risk of serious injury such as issuing safety instructions.
By ruling in favour of Mr Uren, the door was opened for his compensation claim of £6 million, which it is argued he needs in order to have the lifelong support and assistance that is required for his injuries. Orginally, Mr Uren received a lump sum of over £200,000 from the Compensation Scheme provided by the Armed Forces, and he also received a military pension and an annual payment from the compensation scheme. This has, however, been described as inadequate as it is not enough to fund suitable accommodation, transportation, equipment and therapies that he now needs after his injuries were sustained.