We were instructed by Mr Y of Cleveland to investigate a pleural thickening compensation claim following his diagnosis of pleural thickening.
Between March 1968 and 1982 Mr Y was employed by Tata Steel UK Limited as a Field Engineer/Technician. He worked in the Cleveland Steelworks, Lackenby Steelworks and Grangetown Steelworks. Mr Y alleged that during his employment with Tata Steel UK Limited he was exposed to asbestos fibres and asbestos dust which caused his pleural thickening.
Mr Y of Cleveland worked on the decommissioning and recommissioning of gas pipes within the steelworks. He worked in the thermal plants, blast furnaces, coke plants, sinter plants and steel plants. He worked alongside pipe fitters and mechanical fitters who frequently replaced asbestos. Mr Y inspected the areas to be re-lagged with asbestos and alleged that he was present during the removal of asbestos lagging and reapplication of asbestos lagging.
Pleural Thickening Claim
In the winter of 2011/2012 Mr Y developed cough symptoms and was referred for a chest x-ray which revealed a pleural effusion. He underwent an ultrasound guided pleural aspiration of his right sided pleural effusion but no malignancy was identified. In 2013 evidence of pleural thickening was identified on his chest x-ray.
We obtained expert medical evidence confirming that Mr Y’s pleural thickening was associated with his asbestos dust exposure.
Court proceedings were protectively issued in Mr Y of Cleveland’s case before limitation expired and proceedings were served on Tata Steel UK Limited. Following service of proceedings an offer to settle was made and Mr Y was awarded £30,000 pleural thickening compensation.Read More
Claim settled for asbestos related pleural thickening just two days prior to trial.
Our specialist industrial disease solicitors were instructed by Mr B who developed diffuse pleural thickening as a result of exposure to asbestos during his employment whilst employed in the construction industry.
Mr B was exposed to asbestos and a claim pursued against two of his former employers namely Gee Walker & Slater Limited and Triafon Construction Limited. A statement was obtained from Mr B to prove that he had been exposed to asbestos during his employment. Expert medical evidence was obtained and court proceedings were commenced.
The claim was listed for trial and the matter settled just two days prior to trial. The claim was concluded on a full and final basis in the total sum of £22,250.Read More
After he passed away, Mr B was found on post mortem to have had asbestosis and lung cancer, which the coroner ruled was the cause of his death. He had worked as a suspended ceiling fitter for most of his life and had been heavily exposed to asbestos through his work.
A claim was pursued against Alan Milne Flooring Limited, Anderson Construction Company Limited, Darlington Insulation Co Ltd, Clarke & Fenn Limited, Thermofelt Limited, Cape Contracts Limited and Barratt Developments (London) Limited.
Damages were obtained on behalf for Mr B’s estate.Read More
We were instructed by the daughter of Mr B who had sadly passed away following a short spell in hospital.
Mr B had been working in his garden at home pruning a tree standing on a stepladder. The stepladder tipped and Mr B fell fracturing his ribs. He was taken to hospital. Unfortunately, Mr B developed pneumonia and deteriorated quite quickly. He passed away a few weeks after the initial fall. A post-mortem revealed that his lungs were badly damaged by asbestos and silica dust which he had been exposed to in his employment. Mr B had worked at Stanton ironworks for Stanton Stavely as an electrical engineer. Although we didn’t have any evidence from Mr B, we were able to speak to his brother who had also worked at the ironworks for a period of time.
The case was complicated, particularly as Mr B had not been aware that he was unwell during his lifetime. The Defendants sought to argue that Mr B’s death was caused by his fall from the ladder and was nothing to do with his employment.
We obtained medical evidence which showed that but for the damage to Mr B’s lungs caused by the asbestos and silica, he would probably not have developed pneumonia, or if he had, he would probably have made a full recovery. The damage to his lungs from the asbestos and silica dust had been so severe that it prevented him from recovering once he developed pneumonia.
The Defendants got their own medical evidence seeking to contest the Claimant’s evidence. The matter went to an initial Hearing and we managed to persuade a Judge that the Defendant was liable for the death. The Judge entered judgment against the Defendant.
The Defendant then tried to challenge the value of Mr B’s family’s claim by arguing that while they may have been liable for some element of the injury, they were not responsible for his death, so the claim had limited value.
After substantial negotiations, we managed to persuade the Defendants that they were responsible for Mr B’s death. The claim settled for just under £90,000.Read More
Mr G was diagnosed with pleural thickening, an asbestos related disease in 2010. Pleural thickening is a condition that causes breathlessness and some chest pain.
Mr D’s asbestos exposure history
Mr G was employed as a labourer for 3 different firms of general builders that were all linked to each other intrinsically and all of which exposed him to asbestos on a regular basis.
Mr G was regularly asked to assist in the demolition, renovation and modification of properties that contained asbestos materials. Mr G was not advised that asbestos was harmful to his health. Mr G was also not provided with any personal protective equipment such as a mask to protect him from the harmful effects of asbestos inhalation.
Mr G’s legal claim
Mr G appointed specialist asbestos disease lawyers to investigate his claim and to establish whether his employers had been negligent towards him.
The Defendants to Mr G’s claim denied liability and also attempted to argue that legally it had been pursued too late meaning it was time barred.
Proceedings were issued in the Royal Courts of Justice, London in attempt to gain justice for Mr G.
After the issue of proceedings and a lengthy litigation battle the Defendants finally admitted that the claim was in fact not time barred and whilst not admitting liability for Mr G’s disease, they compensated him for his pain, suffering and loss of amenity.
Mrs G’s comments
Mrs G was delighted that justice had been achieved and that he would receive compensation for his injuries.
Mr G is thankful that the Asbestos Advice Helpline was able to advise him and put him in touch with specialist asbestos lawyers to assist him in gaining justice.Read More
I was instructed by the daughter of her late father, Mr A, who died from mesothelioma.
Mr A had been a very hard worker all his life. He worked for many employers mainly as a manual labourer doing construction and demolition work. His family believe that he was exposed to asbestos during the course of his work but they were unable to identify which employers.
A public appeal was made for witnesses and a witness who worked alongside Mr A at Humphreys and Glasgow came forward.
The witness was able to recall Mr A working in the early 1970s when he was gutting and refurbishing a large council estate near Barnsley.
It was a very physically demanding job. Mr A used a sledgehammer to knock out all the interiors of the council houses. He had to remove old asbestos boilers which had asbestos rope and old water tanks and pipes which were covered with old asbestos lagging.
Mr A did all of this by hand. If the windows had been taken out then all the debris would be thrown out of the window into the garden below. Mr A would then sweep and shovel all the dust and debris into a wheelbarrow and wheel it to the skip. It was an incredibly dusty job.
Once we had obtained the support of witness evidence, the claim settled relatively quickly without the need for Court proceedings. Mr A’s claim settled in the sum of £70,000.Read More
We were instructed by Mr C during his lifetime following his diagnosis of mesothelioma.
Mr C’s claim was disputed by the Defendants from the outset. Mr C was too unwell to undergo further invasive investigations and the Defendants challenged his diagnosis of mesothelioma.
Expert evidence subsequently confirmed that Mr C was indeed suffering from mesothelioma.
The Defendants then challenged our evidence alleging that Mr C did not have sufficient exposure to asbestos to materially increase the risk of his developing mesothelioma.
Mr C worked for many years with the Rover Company/British Leyland UK Limited. He was exposed in the 1960s and 1970s. He worked at different premises including Lode Lane in Solihull and Clay Lane Car Manufacturing Plant in Yardley where he worked on the engine assembly lines.
Mr C worked in the production line fitting the brake drum to the rear axle of Land Rovers. We obtained expert medical and engineering evidence in support of Mr C’s case.
Mr C’s claim settled in the gross sum of £70,000.Read More
I was instructed by Mr L who had been diagnosed with an asbestos induced condition called diffuse pleural thickening which was causing him breathlessness.
It transpired that Mr L had been exposed by two different employers. Mr L worked as a motor mechanic for Midland Shires Farmers Limited. He spent a five year apprenticeship as a motor mechanic there in the 1970s.
He was also exposed by Royal Mail when he worked as a motor vehicle technician based at its workshop at Caversham Road in Reading between 1988 until 2006.
Court proceedings were commenced against the two defendants. Engineering evidence confirmed that it would be difficult to prove the case against the first employer but Mr L’s case against the second defendant Royal Mail was much stronger. Royal Mail had admitted that on occasions it allowed the claimant to be negligently exposed to asbestos in the course of his work between April 1988 until 1997.
Mr L was exposed to asbestos in the course of checking renewing and repairing asbestos brake linings and clutches. In particular Mr L used an air line to blow out dust from brake drums and/or from around brake discs and also from clutch housings. Mr L also replaced burnt out clutches on a regular basis. He also replaced asbestos gaskets including exhaust gaskets which often broke and became dusty.
Asbestos based fillers were used for vehicle body repairs in the workshop and which when dry, were sanded down causing asbestos dust and fibre to be released into Mr L’s working atmosphere.
The expert evidence showed that Royal Mail had exposed Mr L to almost 70% of his exposure to asbestos. The total value on a 100% basis of Mr L’s claim was £50,000. He successfully recovered £34,200 which represented Royal Mail’s share of his exposure.Read More
I was instructed by the son of the late Mr J who had died from lung cancer. Although Mr J had been a heavy smoker throughout his life in one respect his case should have been relatively straight forward as his family were able to tell me that Mr J had worked as a lagger throughout the 1960s and 1970s all around the Cardiff area.
Unfortunately his family did not know very much more than that and getting evidence on where Mr J had worked proved difficult as a lot of his contemporaries had pre-deceased him.
However a public appeal for witnesses was successful and a witness who worked with Mr J was able to describe in detail the work he did for a company called Versils, a thermal insulation engineering firm.
Mr J had worked all over the Cardiff area and beyond working in many schools in the local valleys. His work involved lagging boilers and also lagging pipes with asbestos lagging.
His work involved the use of 45 gallon drums. The asbestos came in bags and the tops of the bags of asbestos were cut and poured into these 45 gallon drums.
Water was then poured on top of the asbestos and the mixture was mixed. In order to do this the laggers leaned over the top of the large drum and mixed it all up together into a paste. As soon as water was added to the asbestos the asbestos “fluffed up” and the laggers got covered in dust.
Once the mixture was in a paste form the laggers used their hands to apply the asbestos lagging onto the pipes and onto the boilers.
Mr J work as a lagger involved him working with asbestos all day every day.
The helpful information provided by the witness enabled us to bring a successful claim on behalf of the family of the late Mr JRead More
Our specialist solicitors were instructed by Mr B following his diagnosis of pleural thickening, an asbestos related disease, in 2012.
Mr B was employed as a carpenter and joiner with Weaver Construction Limited now known as Strata Construction Limited in the early 1980s. Mr B was exposed to foreseeably harmful levels of asbestos dust and fibres whilst carrying out refurbishment work to council properties in South Yorkshire.
It was this exposure to asbestos that led to Mr B suffering a significant respiratory disability.
Our specialist solicitors took a detailed witness statement from Mr B and used this evidence in order to pursue a claim against his previous employers.
They also assisted Mr B in applying for government benefits which he was entitled to as a consequence of his exposure to asbestos.
Initially Weaver Construction Limited (the Defendant) refused to negotiate a settlement of the claim despite admitting that they had breached their legal duties to him in exposing him to asbestos dust and fibres during the course of his employment.
The Defendant contested the extent to which Mr B’s exposure to asbestos dust and fibres had caused or contributed to his breathing difficulties and chest pain and insisted upon obtaining their own medical evidence.
Our solicitors obtained a medical report from an eminent respiratory physician relating to Mr B’s asbestos related lung condition as did the Defendant’s solicitors. The Defendant’s medical expert considered that Mr B suffered from a lesser respiratory disability which had improved after an initial period of 18 months when Mr B suffered significant respiratory difficulties as a result of developing a pleural effusion. The medical expert for Mr B felt that his respiratory disability had gradually improved but that he had been left with a more significant level of respiratory symptoms. Both agreed that he was at risk of developing other asbestos related respiratory diseases as a consequence of his asbestos exposure.
Following considerable negotiations based upon the arguments of the two medical experts and shortly before an Assessment of Damages Hearing before the Court our specialist solicitors were able to negotiate a settlement of £37,500 net of benefits received for Mr B’s pain and suffering and out of pocket expenses arising from his injuries.
Mr B was also given the right to revert to the Defendant for further compensation should his asbestos disease progress into any further asbestos related illness such as asbestosis, lung cancer or mesothelioma or if he were to suffer further significant deterioration of his pleural thickening.Read More