Supermarket Injury Claims

Supermarket injury claims enable you to recover compensation when you have been injured in a supermarket accident due to the carelessness of an employer – if you work in the supermarket – or the supermarket management if you are a customer who suffers an injury in a supermarket. Claims for supermarket injury compensation should take into account the effect an injury has on your quality of life in addition to any physical pain you have suffered and emotional trauma you may have experienced in the supermarket accident; and you should also be able to claim any expenses incurred which are attributable to your supermarket injury in order that you are no worse off financially than if your supermarket accident had never occurred. Make sure you receive comprehensive advice about making supermarket injury claims by discussing the circumstances of your accident with an experienced solicitor on our freephone Solicitors Advice Panel.

Discount Warehouse Admits Liability in Legionnaires Compensation Claim

May 14th, 2015 | By injuryclaims

A discount warehouse has admitted liability in a Legionnaires compensation claim brought by the families of three men who died from the bacterial infection.

In August 2012, three men died and eighteen people needed hospital treatment after contracting Legionnaires disease at the JFT Warehouse store in Fenton, Stoke-on-Trent. The outbreak of the disease was attributed to a spa pool on display in the store in which legionella bacteria had been allowed to develop.

The bacteria was then inhaled by the victims as the water in the spa pool was aerosolized – causing them to suffer fever, chills, cough and headaches and, in the cases of the three men who died, pneumonia which deteriorated into organ failure.

The first of the victims – Richard Griffin (64) from Clayton in Staffordshire – died after inhaling the bacteria while delivering meat to the café in the JTF Warehouse store. The other two men who died have been named as William Hammersley (79) from Chesterton in Staffordshire and Harry Cadman (71) from Stoke-on-Trent.

Whereas many of the victims who recovered from the disease have settled their Legionnaire compensation claim against JFT Warehouse out-of-court, the families of the three men who died and one survivor who contracted a serious lung infection are pursuing their claims through the courts.

Mr Griffin´s daughter issued a statement in which she justified taking her Legionnaires compensation claim to court. She said: “Nothing can ever bring our dad back but we just want to make sure justice is done and that there is some accountability for his death. I truly hope no one ever has to go through what we have.”

Insurers for JFT Warehouse have admitted their client´s liability, and what needs to be resolved is how much compensation for Legionnaires disease each family and the one remaining survivor will receive. Inquests into the three deaths are due to be held later this year and the Crown Prosecution Service is also considering whether to add criminal charges to the civil action.

Magistrates Fine Tesco in Supermarket Foot Crush Injury Case

January 2nd, 2014 | By injuryclaims

Supermarket chain Tesco and lift maintenance company Otis have been fined by Southwark Crown Court for their parts in a supermarket foot crush injury case.

Mohammed Ferdous (31) worked at the Victoria Tesco Metro store in London when, on 7th August 2009, he was asked to assist with a fresh food delivery. Mohammed´s role was to wait at the lift entrance in the basement, remove cages of food sent down from the upper level of the store and replace the empty cages back into the lift.

As the second load descended, Mohammed opened the gates of the lift stepped forward to take the cages out of the lift car. Mohammed moved his right foot forward as leverage to remove the cages but inadvertently placed his foot into the gap between the base of the lift car and the lift shaft. Unfortunately the lift car suddenly moved downwards as he was taking the cages out of the lift and his foot was crushed.

Colleagues rushed to Mohammed´s aid and freed his foot after ten minutes; however but his toes had suffered terrible injuries and had to be amputated. Mohammed was unable to return to his job for more than a year after the accident and despite having a prosthesis fitted will never be able to walk normally again.

Mohammed made a compensation claim for a supermarket foot crush injury which was settled out-of-court in 2013 for an undisclosed six-figure amount. However Tesco and lift maintenance company Otis was prosecuted after it was revealed that no maintenance had been conducted on the lift in the nine months preceding the accident.

Both Tesco and Otis were charged with failing to ensure that the lift was properly maintained in breach of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, Section 33 (1) (c) and, at Southwark Crown Court, both companies acknowledged their negligence and pleaded guilty. Magistrates fined the two companies £115,000 and £110,000 respectively for their parts in a supermarket foot crush injury case

Westminster City Council’s food, health and safety manager – James Armitage – speaking after the fines had been announced, said that the supermarket foot crush injury suffered by Mohammed would have been avoided if the Tesco and Otis had “collectively ensured that the lift was properly maintained”.

Procedural Changes Aim to Speed up Personal Injury Compensation Settlements

August 3rd, 2013 | By injuryclaims

New procedures introduced on the 1st August should speed up personal injury compensation settlements for claims with a value of less than £25,000.

In April 2013, several changes to the way in which personal injury claims were handled were introduced following the passing of the Legal Aid, Sentencing & Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO). The most noticeable of these changes affected “No Win, No Fee” injury claims, and how “After the Event” insurance premiums and solicitors´ “Success Fees” could no longer be recovered from the negligent party´s insurance company; however the most recent changes have been designed to reduce the length of time it takes to resolve claims and make sure that claimants receive their personal injury compensation settlements quicker.

The primary changes concern how long a negligent party´s insurance company has to acknowledge and respond to a “Letter of Claim”. Whereas before an insurance company could take up to three weeks to acknowledge that a “Letter of Claim” had been sent to them, they now have to do this within one day. Furthermore, insurance companies are now required to inform your solicitor whether or not their client agrees they were responsible for your injuries within thirty days (forty days for accidents at work). Previously, insurance companies could waste ninety days before admitting their policyholder´s negligence, even when their client had already admitted responsibility for causing an accident.

Insurance companies who fail to adhere to the new procedures for personal injury compensation settlements will have the claim for personal injury compensation removed from the Ministry of Justice´s Claims Portal and have to pay the additional costs of defending the claim using the course of action, unless the claim falls into one of the following categories:-

  • Public liability claims for compensation against an individual
  • Employer liability claims against more than one defendant
  • Any personal injury compensation claims in which the claimant is partly responsible
  • Public liability claims relating to a disease (for example food poisoning)
  • Claims involving mesothelioma, abuse or medical negligence
  • Claims against a party who is uninsured

The procedural changes apply to claims for injuries which have been sustained or diagnosed in England or Wales on or after 1st August 2013 , and have no effect on the Statute of Limitations – the length of time you are allowed after an injury has been sustained or discovered in which to claim personal injury compensation.

Should you require further information about personal injury compensation settlements, and how the changes to the personal injury claims procedures may affect you in your specific situation, you are advised to speak with a solicitor at the first practical moment.

Slipped on Food on Shop Floor Injurys Claim Action Upheld at High Court

March 18th, 2012 | By injuryclaims

An Australian woman, who sustained serious spinal injuries after slipping on a chip that had been discarded close to the food counter of a local store, has had her slipped on food on shop floor injurys claim action for compensation upheld by the High Court in Sydney.

Kathryn Strong, an amputee who relies heavily on the aid of her crutches for walking, was passing the food counter of the Woolworths store at the Centro Taree Shopping Centre in New South Wales in September 2004, when she slipped on a greasy chip that had been left on the floor and fell heavily – sustaining serious spinal injuries.

Kathryn sued Woolworths in the New South Wales District Court for slipped on spilt food in supermarket compensation, claiming that their lack of due care and failing to provide a safe thoroughfare had directly led to her injuries.

Kathryn won her slipped on food on shop floor injurys claim action and was awarded AU 580,299 dollars. However, the case was overturned on appeal by Woolworths on the grounds that Kathryn did not proven a lack of reasonable care and she was forced to take her claim to the High Court.

At the High Court in Sydney, the court’s judges made a ruling that “reasonable care” required Woolworths to inspect and remove slipping hazards at 20 minute intervals and, as Woolworths could not demonstrate that such a cleaning schedule was in place, “on the balance of probabilities” the store was liable for Kathryn´s injuries.

Reinstating the ruling made at the New South Wales District Court, Kathryn was awarded AU 580,299 dollars plus costs in respect of her slipped on food on shop floor claim.

Compensation Claim Settled for Low Hanging Poster Injury Claims Action

February 14th, 2012 | By injuryclaims

A woman who walked into a Dublin advertising poster, and sustained head and neck injuries, has settled her low hanging poster injury claims action for 38,000 Euros.

As Sandra Memery (48)  was leaving her local MacDonald´s restaurant with her daughter on 16th September 200 the accident occurred. Having turned back towards her daughter to hand her a bag, she started walking forward again, and immediately hit her head on the corner of the low hanging poster campaigning on behalf of Fianna Fail for a “Yes” vote in the second Lisbon Treaty referendum.

After feeling unwell, Sandra visited her doctor, where she was diagnosed with lacerations to her scalp, a swelling over her right temporal and soft tissue damage to her neck. Sandra, who is 5 ft 5 in tall (1.65m) made a compensation claim for low hanging poster injury, stating that the campaign poster should have a minimum of three metres clearance from the floor.

Contesting the claim, Fianna Fail and Executive Posters Ltd together claimed that Sandra was responsible for her own injuries through contributory negligence and should have paid more attention to where she was walking. However, shortly before Sandra´s case was about to be started at Dublin´s Circuit Civil Court, her legal representatives announced to the court that a compensation settlement had been agreed upon in the amount of 38,000 Euros.

Watermelon Salmonella Injury Claims Could Follow Scare

February 8th, 2012 | By injuryclaims

People contracting food poisoning from contaminated fruit could be entitled to make watermelon salmonella injury claims following the news that the Food Safety Authority of Ireland are investigating four cases of illness which are believed to be attributable to imported fruit from Brazil.

One person is known to have died in England after consuming a watermelon slice containing “Salmonella Newport”, with scores more food poisoning cases being investigated throughout the UK and Germany. Typically, illnesses have commenced within three days of consuming a pre-packed slice of watermelon and symptoms of the illness including vomiting, abdominal pains, fever and diarrhoea last for four to seven days.

The advice released by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland is to thoroughly wash all fruit and vegetables before consuming them and, should the symptoms of food poisoning commence, seek medical attention immediately. Early treatment with antibiotics will lessen the effect of the salmonella food poisoning and ensure a quicker recovery from the illness.

People who are confirmed as suffering from food poisoning attributable to watermelon slices are urged to get claims advice from a qualified solicitor before making salmonella compensation claims directly to the Injuries Board. Inasmuch as the respondent in your claim is likely to be the shop from where the contaminated watermelon was purchased, the Food Safety Authority may establish a different negligent party in the course of their investigation.


Bigger Injury Claims Bigger Injury Claims
Bigger Injury Claims Bigger Injury Claims

Discuss your options with an
experienced US lawyer
without obligation or pressure.

Bigger Injury Claims

Enter your name, number and a
convenient time for us to call you
back, then click the button below

Bigger Injury Claims
Bigger Injury Claims
Bigger Injury Claims

What exactly is
No Win - No fee?

No Win-No Fee is an expression that is
used a lot by many legal sites but how
does it work? We have written a
comprehensive article about it to clear
up any confusion. [Read More]