New comment on your post #7676470 "Bad Accident at Costco's" ____ http://colinberry1.blog.co.uk/2010/01/02/bad-accident-at-costco-s-7676470/
All that it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing....
(1) MARY BERRY
(2) COLIN BERRY v COSTCO UK
The legal and judicial system had caused more harm to our family because of their persistence in having more interest in the defendant's then what they had for us, shame on these professionals.
Susan Rodway Q.C. (Mary's Q.C. appointed by Andrew Morgan (APIL member) of Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP, Mary's solicitor.)
Before his Honour Judge Bailey.
It is ordered that:
(1) The official Solicitor "May Maughan" be appointed as the litigation friend. Claim Number 6ED03566
(2) Before His Honour Judge David Mitchell.
Edmonton, London, Enfield, Waltham Forest.Brain Injury Law (Solicitors)
Accident at Costco's extreme horrible worst accident ever
Our Legal System in the U.K. have an interesting sense of direction, I am told by my Solicitors' that punitive damages is highly unlikely to be obtain in our circumstances, even though eight washing machines was stacked 30ft high and overlapping by 20%, 14 photos taken by the Police showing the incident and the remaining 4 washing machines dangerously tilting over.
I came across an article showing when punitive damages are awarded in the U.K. This article was referring to a case,
Should those who exaggerate personal injury claims be forced to forego the aspects of payouts to which they are entitled? By Alejandra Hormaeche. (Lord Justice Millett's judgment in Galloway v Guardian Royal Exchange (1999)). It is important for claimants to appreciate that, although a finding of serious dishonesty is unlikely to result in no damages being awarded, it could lead to a referral of the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions and a subsequent prosecution for fraud. Also, it will almost certainly result in a punitive costs order.
•Alejandra Hormaeche is a barrister at Tanfield Chambers.
I found this case to be interesting, trying to cut a long story short apparently the Claimant lied about losing his job because he claimed that it was because of his accident. The defendant found out that he was sacked for stealing his bosses tax disk. Well how sad can it be to be reduced to stealing a tax disk?
We were lucky that we had considerable amount of savings behind us some of which came from the settlement of my property when my ex-wife remarried and including Mary's life insurance policy, which we are living on today. I just wondered have they bothered to look into his hardship of coping with his accident and extra cost that he had accounted?