Of course it is if, as someone else has said, they have fucked up.
Why would it not be? We pay our money into it and if they fuck with our health (as happens so many times) then they should be held accountable just like anyone else.
*Her* |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I don't think it's so black n White. I would have had a good case to sue my gp's surgery but didn't occur to me to do so. I just focused on get the best treatment possible and dealing with the shock. Not thinking about how much money I could get out of them.
In some cases it would be necessary to get the appropriate care etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *eaboMan
over a year ago
marden |
suing the nhs will only cost each of us more in the long run, depletes the money available for nurses, doctors, medicines, operations etc so i think suing the nhs is akin to shooting yourself in the foot. on the subject of suing, everyone complains about health and safety gone mad, but these rules and changes are driven by the insurance companies who have to pay out when someone gets sued, so again the ridiculous rules that are enforced upon us in the name of health and safety are our own fault because we want compensation for everything. back to shooting ourselves in the foot i think. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ig badMan
over a year ago
Up North :-) |
"I don't think it's so black n White. I would have had a good case to sue my gp's surgery but didn't occur to me to do so. I just focused on get the best treatment possible and dealing with the shock. Not thinking about how much money I could get out of them.
In some cases it would be necessary to get the appropriate care etc."
I think you have hit the nail on the head there. If your going to need long term care, further treatment etc then no probs with it. But the "profit claims" or claims for financial benefit through ambulance chasers, well i have a prob with that my self. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Depends - did they have a duty of care to you; did they breach that duty; did that breach cause you harm - pain and suffering, financial costs, loss of amenity etc?
If the answer to all of the above is yes, then that's why the litigation system exists. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
As others have said,it depends.Delberate negligence or malpractice of course.
Whinging cos they wont pander to your every need,no,i heard someone on the radio complaining they couldn't get a gastric band...so were deliberately putting on weoght! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Negligence doesn't have to be deliberate  the test under the law looks at what I've posted above and takes into consideration things like the forseeability of the damage and the reasonableness of putting measures in place to prevent said harm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"acceptable or not?"
easiest way I ever heard of to make a nice pensionable sum of money just for limping about for a few months.
Yeah, sue them, they'll only buy 50,000 pairs of rubber gloves by 300 different manufacturers at 200 different prices if you don't.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The rubber gloves argument isn't a sound one.
Rubber gloves are to the NHS what ball point pens are to the civil service. On any given day one supplier will be a fraction of a penny/ pair cheaper than the next most competitive deal. A few days later the position will be reversed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
So long as they're wearing them when they treat me I don't give a monkey's how much they cost or where they got them from.
As for suing the NHS.. I pay National INSURANCE so that when I need treatment I get it and if that treatment is inadequate, well, the insurance part kicks in doesn't it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
the whole sueing thing has got out of hand in this country, it only costs us all more as every retailer/service provider has to put up prices to cope. if your that selfish that you want to sue to feather your own nest without regard to everyone else then what ever i say wont make any difference |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"the whole sueing thing has got out of hand in this country, it only costs us all more as every retailer/service provider has to put up prices to cope. if your that selfish that you want to sue to feather your own nest without regard to everyone else then what ever i say wont make any difference"
Disagree. The system exists to compensate people for pain, suffering, costs of medical bills, adaptations at home, loss of future opportunities etc etc
If the NHS or anyone else causes significant harm in your life - like the guy who almost died after a surgeon was negligent during a kidney transplant op - then the law allows recompense.
Course, the key word there is significant - I've no sympathy for the people who just fancy a couple of grand and exaggerate the impact of an incident in their lives... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Everyone should have the right to sue anyone that has treated them negligently. The courts are there to protect the system from the more vexatious claims. So yes, it is acceptable in my view. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
what about going in to have a procedure, then 7 months its apparent that they never carried it out despite having an anaesthetic??
massive financial commitments and life style changes have happened as a result |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
I am half and half on this one. I think it would depend on how bad the mistake was and if I needed extra care at home.
I suppose there must be lots of people about who have had some bad judgements made in the NHS before now, and even if it takes months to sort out, after the event I think I would just want to forget it and be glad they sorted me out in the end.
Would you win? I know someone who did have a case to sue the NHS and the records were "lost" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I`ve always thought there`s a difference between accidents and negligence ......
We don`t seem to tolerate or understand accidents anymore...
I don`t know on this one ....it depends on the consequences...but I`m more inclined to think I`d be happy to get well and move on ...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don't think it's so black n White. I would have had a good case to sue my gp's surgery but didn't occur to me to do so. I just focused on get the best treatment possible and dealing with the shock. Not thinking about how much money I could get out of them.
In some cases it would be necessary to get the appropriate care etc.
I think you have hit the nail on the head there. If your going to need long term care, further treatment etc then no probs with it. But the "profit claims" or claims for financial benefit through ambulance chasers, well i have a prob with that my self."
the problem now is the whole system,im getting calls on my mobile asking if they can deal with my accident claim which incidently i havent had.
The whole country is looking to stick a claim in somewhere and chase easy money, you know the whiplash brigade the professional trippers etc etc
the legal profession are doing very well out of it though and now employ muppets to rattle off questions down the blower to all and sundry.
We used to have a supermarket a few miles away thats now been turned into offices for winns solicitors to deal with the "if youve had an accident that wasnt your fault brigade"
where will it end
daily rant over |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
"The courts are there to protect the system from the more vexatious claims. "
Actually not quite true! No matter who you sue, even the NHS, they will do what is best for them. If I were to sue someone, it would be guided by the current "Threshold payments" that are being made in the courts.
If I had an injury that would normally attract a payout of £5000 (tested in courts) then I would claim £6000. After negotiation, that would likely come back to the £5000 figure and no costly court room battle...
My solicitor (a relative) told me that this is common practice and there is actually a list of current payout averages. You could claim under this level with very little trouble and because it would be cheaper to pay out rather than risk losing in court, they pay out! That is why silly claims get paid out! (They gave me the wrong ladder!)
It happened to our son! The lady was a serial claimant, was disabled but not driving her adapted car that she had lent to her son to go for an interview and she was not insured in her sons’ car. There was a collision and no action taken by the police, but she claimed whiplash (just slight bumper damage)
When we got the paperwork from her doctor, he even said that there was no indication of injuries further to those she had sustained in a crash ten years before. Looking back through the paperwork, there were other medical reports on six more claims, all the same and all from minor accidents. She was paid out from our sons insurance, but was arrested just over a year later for insurance fraud! Point is, she knew how to work the system so the courts can’t police those…
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I work in personal injury...dealing with negligence cases against the NHS every day. Some are without foundation, and I have to tell people that.
Then there are the cases where negligence has lead to serious disability and death.
For these families no amount of money can bring back their loved ones: suing is part of the grieving process for many. Winning hundreds of thousands when a child has been damaged is little comfort for a lost life. The money will provide some comfort for care when the parents are no longer able to.
Suing the NHS is a long and protracted process: it's not for the faint hearted. For those making glib silly comments, let's hope you or yours never have to be in a position where you may have to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I think there are times when the NHS should be, and indeed have been sued, for example if someone dies or is seriously injured as a result of some kind of neglect or ill treatment.
However there are times when there possibly would grounds for legal action but because everything turned out well in the end, errors can be overlooked ...
Almost 7 years ago, Mrs Red was having breast related problems and for the best part of 12 months her GP treated her for a condition known as duct extasia which in laymans terms is an infection in the milk ducts. This condition was treated with antibiotics on and off for almost a year but at no time during that year did the GP offer a mammogram or any other form of investigation. It was only by chance that on the day of another appointment, her regular GP was on holiday and she saw someone else who immediately arranged for her to have a mammogram.
Following the mammogram and FNA, she was diagnosed with breast cancer ....
She received surgery, had the lump removed, had radiotherapy etc and at the end of it all the surgery was successful apart from the fact that she, understandably, was left with one breast larger than the other. It was then decided that she could have an operation to 'balance things up' and indeed she went into Hexham general Hospital for that procedure to be carried out.
Whils waiting to go to theatre, she had the usual visit from the surgeon who, at the last minute, said he decided to 'try lyposuction' instead of the normal operation which had previously been discussed and decided upon. So between us and based on the new information the surgeon gave us, we agred to go along those roads ....
OMG !! What a total and utter fuck up he made ! I needen't go into any further detail, just believe me it is the truth and it was a fuck up.
After 12months or so, another consultant agreed to perform the proper operation that should have been done in the first place and foloowing that, evrything is 100% and she has a perfect pair of breasts which apart from a few very fine scars, you'd never know anything had been done to them.
So .... firstly we could have taken action against the GP, for misdiagnosis and also against the 1st plastic surgeon for making such a total bollox of things, but hang on ...
In the end everything turned out well, she is is still alive, fit and healthy, so despite 2 major fuck ups we didn't pursue and action and we feel that made the correct decision in leaving things as they were and being grateful for a positive outcome. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
