Richard suffered an injury to his foot during a game of five aside football with some friends. He proceeded immediately to A&E where he was examined, x-rayed and discharged. He was told to return to the hospital should the symptoms persist. He attempted to manage the pain in his swollen foot but it persisted.
Despite taking painkillers and using heat and ice packs, he was in a significant amount of pain and struggled to bear weight on the injured foot. After two weeks of no improvement, Richard returned to A&E. However, he was told to return home and await contact about an appointment.
Several weeks passed and Richard was finally contacted by the hospital about an appointment. He was advised he may have a fracture that was not previously diagnosed. However, when he attended the appointment and was examined, it was realised that it was now too late for corrective surgery to be carried out. This meant that Richard’s recovery would now be much slower and a much more painful process.
Richard experienced pain and suffering whilst trying to conduct regular daily activities on a seriously injured foot. He also suffered loss of earnings due to being unable to work whilst he recovered and was left out of pocket from having to purchase special equipment to help him better manage the pain.
Understandably, Richard was left frustrated and disappointed by the standard of care he received. He decided to seek legal advice and contacted McCartan Turkington Breen. Richard was given a telephone appointment on the day he made contact and had the benefit of a free initial consultation. Following this exploratory chat, Richard instructed Tanya Waterworth with his case and she sent a letter of claim to the relevant Health and Social Care Trust. In this letter, we detailed Richard’s experience, the impact it had on him and their negligence. The Trust denied liability.
Tanya sent Richard to be examined by a consultant orthopaedic surgeon and a consultant radiologist who both provided medical reports that detailed the extent of the injuries, the recovery time and the correct procedures that should have been followed.
As the hearing date approached, the Trust made contact and showed a willingness to try to resolve the matter. After negotiations, the matter settled in the sum of £50,000, to Richard’s delight.
If you suffered due to misdiagnosis or a failure to diagnose, we are here to advise. You can learn more about our expert services at Misdiagnosis Claims or Contact Us to arrange a free initial consultation.
The name referenced throughout this case study is a pseudonym that has been put in place to protect the client’s privacy.
