Bite to calf with mental trauma attracts an award of close to £5000
We represented the Claimant in an action brought against the Defendant for damages for injuries and losses arising out of a dog bite incident.
On 10.11.2021 the Claimant walked out of her property onto the public highway with her dog, when the Defendant’s dog ran across from the opposite side of the street and bit the Claimant on the right calf.
The Claimant suffered a dog bite injury to her right calf, with bruising and lacerations and has ongoing scarring and alleged that the incident was caused by the Defendant’s negligence and/or breach of statutory duty.
Work was undertaken to fully quantify the Claimant’s claim for damages.
Medical records were obtained, with additional communications being unavoidably incurred with the Claimant’s GP, whose software had redacted the GP records, before further copies were provided which had less redaction.
Expert nominations in the field of A&E Medicine were provided to the Defendant, with no objections being raised.
A report was obtained from Mr Aslam, Consultant in Emergency Medicine, to include a review of records. Mr Aslam opined that the Claimant had sustained dog bite type of wounds over the back of her right calf as a result of the accident on the 10/11/2021 which healed in approximately 4 to 6 weeks. There was mild to moderate pain for the same duration of time. There are visible scars. 2 vertical scars measuring 1 cm and 2 cms. There is also an area of mild skin discoloration that measures approximately 5 cms in diameter. The above are causing mild cosmetic disfigurement. These scars are due to the accident. The scars will become pale over a period of approximately 2 years from the date of the accident. After this period the scars will become very pale and the cosmetic disfigurement will become very minor. This very minor cosmetic disfigurement will then remain permanently. Mr Aslam opined that the Claimant was nervous about walking her dog, particularly when it is dark and recommended that an opinion be obtained from a Clinical Psychologist.
As a result of Mr Aslam’s recommendations, expert Psychologist nominations were obtained and provided to the Defendant, with no objections being raised.
A report was obtained from Dr MacCarthy, Clinical Psychologist. Dr MacCarthy opined that the Claimant was shocked and shaken by the incident and that she had experienced an increased level of wariness/cautiousness about the risks presented by dogs from the time of the incident that was attributable to the index incident; that her increased wariness/cautiousness about the risks presented by other dogs represented a normal, functional, and adaptive emotional reaction to the incident that was not clinically significant; on the balance of probabilities, that she had also experienced an understandable level of self-consciousness about the appearance of the scars that have been left by the dog bites; her self-consciousness about the appearance of her scars was not clinically significant; on the balance of probabilities, that psychological impact of the index incident would not meet criteria to warrant a diagnosis of any DSM-5 disorder.
Full details of the Claimant’s losses were obtained and a Schedule of Loss was drafted.
This was disclosed to the Defendant, with the Claimant’s medical evidence, with the Claimant making a Part 36 offer in the sum of £4,927.36 on 07.08.2023, which the Defendant accepted on 21.08.2023.
Physical injury and mental trauma attracts an award of £8000.00
We represented the Claimant in proceedings brought against the Defendant for damages for personal injuries and losses arising out of a dog bite incident.
The Claimant was employed at the property by the Defendant, as a domestic cleaner. The Defendant was an owner and a keeper of a dog named ‘Achilles’, a long-haired miniature Dachshund.
On 30.09.2019 the Claimant was at the property as part of her employment by the Defendant as a domestic cleaner. The Claimant went into the kitchen of the property in order to commence cleaning it. After hearing the Defendant returning home, the dog chased the Claimant around the kitchen and then bit the Claimant on her right ankle and lower leg and her left hand.
As a result of the attack, the Claimant sustained dog bite injuries to her right ankle and left hand in the attack, as well as the development of psychological symptoms and alleged that the injuries and associated losses were caused by the negligence and/or breach of statutory duty of the Defendant.
Medical evidence was obtained by way of a report from Mr Williams, a Consultant in A & E Medicine, which included a review of records. Mr Williams provided a report dated 25.08.2021. He opined that the Claimant had suffered dog bite injuries to her right ankle and left hand in the attack, the bite injuries from the attack included bites around the medial aspect of the right ankle, these bites became infected but eventually healed. There was residual and permanent scarring, that caused the Claimant cosmetic embarrassment. The scarring was more visible against the Claimant’s darker skin tone. The Claimant’s wounds at the left hand were less serious but had still resulted in ongoing scarring, which was expected to be permanent and was easily visible. Mr Williams recommended input from a Psychologist.
In light of Mr Williams’ recommendations, a Psychologist was instructed. Nominations were provided to the Defendant and no objections were raised. Dr Mushati was initially instructed. However, considering the lengthy timescale for an appointment, instructions were forwarded to Dr Church, Consultant Psychologist. Dr Church provided a report dated 30.03.2022. He opined that the Claimant suffered an adjustment reaction because of the attack and a Specific Phobia relating to dogs. She suffered a panic attack in relation to a dog sniffing her about 2 months after the attack and she was very anxious. She remained very self-conscious over the appearance of her scarring.
In July 2023 the Defendant made a Part 36 offer in the sum of £8,000.00 to conclude matters, this offer being accepted on 05.07.2023.
£2100 for dog bite
Instructions were received on behalf of the Claimant in relation to a claim for damages arising out of a dog bite incident.
The background of the claim was that on 22 January 2020 the Claimant, who was a self-employed delivery driver for Amazon, attended at the Defendant’s property to deliver a parcel. The Defendant was not present at the property and the Claimant had been given instructions to leave the parcel in the garden. As the Claimant entered the garden the Defendant’s dog, who was unrestrained, ran up and bit the Claimant on the leg. On account of the Defendant’s breach of duty and/or negligence personal injury was caused to the Claimant.
Detailed initial instructions were received from the Claimant in relation to the incident circumstances and the background to the claim. Investigations were undertaken to obtain the background information and clarify the specific issues in relation to the claim.
The Letter of Claim was prepared and forwarded to the Defendant on 31 March 2020.
On 14 July 2020 the Defendant provided their formal letter of response, which confirmed that liability was denied.
Analysis took place in relation to liability and the Claimant’s medical records were obtained and considered, with the same supporting the Claimant’s version of events. Counsel was involved due to the liability denial, with Counsel confirming that the case had prospects.
As a result of the incident the Claimant attended hospital and experienced ongoing symptoms. On account of the Claimant’s symptoms it was necessary for a medical examination to be undertaken and for a medical report to be obtained in support of the Claimant’s claim for compensation.
Instructions were given to an A&E Consultant, who prepared evidence dated 16 July 2021. The expert confirmed that the Claimant sustained a number of dog bite wounds which affected him for a period of 4 weeks. The expert also noted that the Claimant was also psychologically affected as a result of the incident.
Due to the Claimant’s psychological symptoms, instructions were given to Dr Kathryn Newns, Clinical Psychologist, who prepared evidence dated the 13th of November 2021. The expert confirmed that the Claimant had sustained symptoms including intrusive thoughts, poor sleep, avoidance phenomena, and anxiety as a result of the index incident.
On 16 February 2022 the Claimant put forward a Part 36 offer of £2,478.68, which was not accepted by the Defendant. Due to the dispute in relation to liability steps were taken towards the issue of proceedings.
On 5 April 2022 the Defendant finally confirmed that liability was now accepted and responded with a Part 36 counter offer of £2100.00, which was accepted by the Claimant on 19 April 2020, thus concluding the matter save as to costs.
The matter was funded by a CFA with the Claimant which covers all work from the inception of the claim. No additional liabilities are claimed from the paying party.
Bite to arm valued at £2800
Instructions were received on behalf of the Claimant in relation to a claim for damages arising out of a dog bite incident.
The background of the claim was that the Claimant attended at the Defendant’s property during the course of his employment as a delivery driver for Amazon. The Claimant left the parcel at the door and was walking back to the van when the dog escaped and bit him on the right shin.
The Claimant returned to his vehicle and telephoned his employees for advice who recommended that he attend hospital. The Claimant attended the Accident and Emergency department at the North Middlesex University Hospital. It was confirmed that the Claimant had sustained a graze to his right shin and surrounding soft tissue swelling. The Claimant was prescribed antibiotics and given a tetanus booster. The Claimant was unable to work for four days and upon his return, he was apprehensive when delivering parcels after what had happened. The Claimant’s injuries healed with three small areas of localised discolouration remaining. He experienced localised pain for two weeks following the accident.
Careful consideration was given to the background of the claim and the treatment provided. Steps were taken to obtain the Claimant’s medical records. Upon receipt of the relevant documentation, it clearly supported the Claimant’s version of events.
The Letter of Claim was prepared and forwarded to the Defendant on the 7th January 2021. In the interim, further investigations were undertaken and outstanding information was obtained. The Letter of Claim was acknowledged by the Third Party Insurers on the 25th January 2021 who confirmed they were making enquiries into the issue of liability. On the 20th April 2021, the Defendant admitted primary liability.
Steps were taken to obtain the Claimant’s full medical records from his GP and the hospital. The Claimant was examined by an A&E Consultant who confirmed the Claimant’s injuries.
Discussions took place between the parties in relation to potential settlement and on the 3rd January 2022 the Claimant put forward a Part 36 offer of £3500. The Defendant responded with a Part 36 counteroffer of £2800 on the 27th January 2022. On the 9th February 2022, the Claimant accepted the Defendant’s Part 36 offer of £2800 thus concluding the matter save as to costs.
The matter was funded by a CFA with the Claimant. No additional liabilities are claimed from the paying party.
Bitten on the face resulting in scarring and adjustment disorder £23,000
Instructions were received from the client in relation to a dog bite that occurred as the client was a lawful visitor to the Defendant’s home. The client was acting in the course of her employment as a care worker and was walking between the Defendant’s kitchen and lounge where the Defendant’s dog was lying down on a footstool. As the client stroked the dog, it suddenly jumped up and attacked the client’s face.
Four Legs Law was instructed as the client suffered bite and scratching injuries to the face, bruising around the right eye, swelling to the right side of her face, tissue damage, and a consequential infection that required antibiotic treatment.
The client’s full claim was set out by Four Legs Law and liability was promptly admitted by the Defendant’s Insurers, albeit they considered that the client was contributorily negligent in her actions in stroking the dog.
The client’s full medical records were obtained and considered, and medical evidence was
obtained from a Consultant in Emergency Medicine, a Psychiatrist, a Plastic Surgeon, and a Camouflage Expert.
The medical evidence detailed the client’s injuries and confirmed that the client had sustained permanent scarring and an Adjustment Disorder, amongst other injuries. As the client had clearly been affected by the incident and therefore CBT treatment was arranged to facilitate her recovery.
The evidence was disclosed, and the Defendant’s Insurers made an offer to settle the whole of the claim in the sum of £23,000.00. Counsel was instructed to ensure that this was at the top end of what may be awarded at Court for the claim on a full basis (i.e not with the alleged contributory negligence applied as suggested by the Defendant at the outset).
Upon confirmation that the sum of £23,000.00 was fair Four Legs Law concluded the claim without the need for Court proceedings.
Bite to the hand requiring surgery £5000
Instructions were received from the client in relation to a dog bite. The client came to the Defendant’s door to deliver Christmas presents for the Defendant’s foster child. A friend of the family opened the front door and the Defendant’s dog ran out and bit the client on the left hand.
Four Legs Law Solicitors were instructed to recover the client’s losses as she suffered serious injuries to her left hand which required surgery and physiotherapy for 18 months. The full details of the client’s claim were set out against the Defendant. No response was initially received from the Defendant, so consideration was given to the appropriate steps.
As the Defendant was refusing to engage Court proceedings were issued which resulted in the Defendant promptly admitting liability.
Thereafter, an offer was made by the Defendant in the sum of £5,000.00 which was insufficient. The Defendant was notified of this and they made a further offer in the sum of £10,000.00 which again was too low and rejected.
Four Legs Law continued to progress the claim and obtained medical records, which were considered. Medical evidence was subsequently obtained from a Hand Surgeon who produced evidence in support of her claim and confirmed that the functionality of the client’s hand was reduced.
Meanwhile, the Court proceedings were progressing, and further details were sent to the Court detailing the full extent of the claim to include the client’s financial losses.
The Defendant made an offer of £25,000.00 to settle the claim and following confirmation from Counsel that this was a reasonable amount the claim settled in that amount and the Court proceedings were ended.
Injury sustained protecting dog from attack by another dog – award of £7,900.00
Four legs law received instructions from the client who had been the subject of a dog attack whilst out walking her Cavapoo. The circumstances of the incident were that, without warning, the client’s Cavapoo was attacked by the opponent’s Greyhound. As the opponent did not intervene, the client attempted to prise the opponent’s dog’s teeth away from her own using her hands and as the opponent’s dog released the client’s dog its teeth caught on the Claimant’s left leg. As a result of the attack the client sustained injuries to the hand and left leg and her dog was also injured.
Investigations were made for the relevant documentation in relation to the claim to be obtained which included veterinary records and other documentation.
A Letter of Claim was prepared and sent to the opponent and was passed from the opponent to his insurers. The opponent’s insurers denied liability and maintained that the incident was caused as a direct result of the client’s actions.
Four Law Legs law continued to fight the case on behalf of the client and requested disclosure of documentation. This was not forthcoming and therefore a successful Pre-Action Disclosure Application was made. Full disclosure was subsequently provided, and the parties’ respective positions were analysed.
Counsel was involved by Four Legs Law to ensure that the client’s position was reasonable. Counsel confirmed that the client’s case was a reasonable one, with the opponent likely being liable.
Four Legs Law continued to investigate the claim and steps were made for the client’s medical records to be obtained and considered. These supported the client’s version of events in relation to her injuries to her left leg and hands. Additionally, the client had been psychologically affected as a result of the incident.
It was necessary for medical evidence to be obtained in support of the client’s claim and instructions were given to a Consultant in Emergency Medicine and a Clinical Psychologist. The medical experts confirmed that the client had sustained dog bite injuries and as a result had developed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder with CBT treatment being recommended.
On account of the opponent’s liability denial, it was necessary for proceedings to be issued. Court proceedings were therefore issued and served. The Defence maintained the pre-action position.
Following the service of the Defence, the opponent put forward an offer to settle the client’s claim in the sum of £7,900.00, which was accepted by Four Legs Law on behalf of the client.
The client was delighted with the outcome as the incident was traumatic for her and despite liability being denied by the opponent a reasonable settlement was achieved due to Four Legs Law work in support of her position.
Injury and scarring to the leg – £25,500
Instructions were received from the client in relation to an attack that occurred as she was walking her foster dog. The opponent’s dog, which was off its lead at the time, saw the client’s dog and chased after it. The client’s dog hid behind the client’s leg and the opponent’s dog attacked the client’s leg and began rag-dolling causing the client to scream in pain. The opponent’s dog then appeared to realise it had the wrong target and attacked the client’s dog biting its tail. The opponent then intervened and dragged his dog away. At the incident, the opponent notified the client that his dog had been involved in previous incidents and was supposed to be muzzled at all times.
The client instructed Four Legs Law who investigated the incident and obtained the client’s medical records and other relevant documentation. The locus of the incident was investigated to ensure the full facts were understood. A Letter of Claim was sent to the opponent asking that they admit responsibility for the incident. Liability was admitted shortly thereafter by the opponent’s insurers.
As a result of the incident, the client sustained nasty lacerations to her leg, which required surgery, and was left with scarring. She was also affected psychologically due to the attack on account of the traumatic circumstances. Due to the nature of the Claimant’s symptoms rehabilitation treatment was arranged by the Four Legs Law so that the client made the best recovery possible.
Medical evidence was obtained from a Plastic Surgeon who confirmed the injuries and scarring to the leg and from a psychiatrist who confirmed that the client had developed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder due to the incident. The client had also experienced significant pain in the leg and deliberation was given to the effect of this on the client.
The claim was not capable of settlement, so Court proceedings were issued to protect the client’s position. During the course of this the client’s full losses, including her financial losses were detailed and set out for the Court.
Due to the severity of the client’s injuries Counsel was involved in the claim by Four Legs Law to assist in the client’s recovery. The matter progressed through the Court procedure which had the effect of adding pressure on the opponent’s legal team.
Deliberation was given to the value of the claim and Four Legs Law put forward an offer in the sum of £25,500.00, which was accepted by the opponent, thus concluding the claim.
Instructions were received from the Claimant in relation to an attack which occurred during the course of his employment whilst delivering a parcel for Amazon. The circumstances of the accident were that the claimant was walking towards the gate when without warning a dog rushed up and bit him in the back of the left thigh. The incident resulted in the claimant attending the Accident and Emergency Department of the local hospital.
The Claimant subsequently instructed Four Legs Law who investigated the incident and obtained the client’s medical records and other relevant documentation. The locus of the incident was investigated to ensure that the full facts were understood. A Letter of Claim was forwarded to the opponent requesting that they admit responsibility for the accident .Primary Liability was admitted shortly thereafter by the Defendant’s insurers.
As a result of the accident the claimant sustained a nasty laceration to his thigh which healed over a month and was left with residual scarring. He was also affected psychologically due to the attack on account of the traumatic circumstances. He remains very wary of dogs.
Medical evidence was obtained from an Accident and Emergency Consultant who confirmed the injuries to the left thigh and scarring to the leg.
During the course of the claim, the claimant’s full losses to include his financial losses were detailed and set out for the Court
Deliberation was given to the value of the claim and Four Legs Law put forward a Part 36 offer in the amount of £5205.62 which was rejected by the opponent who put forward a counteroffer of £4100 subject to the payment of fixed costs. Four Legs Law then countered that offer with a further Part 36 offer in the amount of £4100 which was accepted by the opponent thus concluding the claim
Over £7000 for a bite to right middle finger
Instructions were received from the Claimant in relation to a potential Dog Bite claim against the Defendant.
The background of the claim was that the Claimant was posting a leaflet through the Defendant’s letterbox on the 5th January 2020 during the course of his employment as a window cleaner when the dog bit him on his right middle finger. On account of the Defendant’s breach of duty, injury and loss were caused to the Claimant.
Detailed instructions were received from the Claimant in relation to the background of the claim and the injuries sustained by the Claimant. Steps were taken to obtain the Claimant’s medical records and the same was considered, corroborating the Claimant’s version of events.
The Claimant’s Letter of Claim was prepared and sent to the Defendant on the 28th January 2020. The Letter of Claim was acknowledged on the 19th February 2020. Liability was subsequently denied by the Defendant on the 6th July 2020. However, after further investigation, Defendant conceded primary liability subject to contributory negligence on the 8th April 2021.
Medical evidence was obtained by way of the report from an A&E Consultant received on the 11th September 2021. The expert confirmed in his report that the claimant’s wound had been stitched and X rayed, however, it had become infected and he had required three operations to open the wound and clean inside. He had been prescribed antibiotics and referred to physiotherapy but was unable to undertake treatment due to Covid 19 restrictions. The expert opined that the Claimant’s finger was mildly deformed and he had a loss of full extension his grip strength was reduced. Whilst the physical symptoms should improve moderately over a period of 2.5 to 3 years from the date of the index accident the loss of extension and reduction in grip strength will persist indefinitely.
The Claimant put forward a Part 36 offer in the sum of £11410.19 on the 18th November 2021. The Defendant then put forward a counteroffer of £7117.10 on a Part 36 basis which was subsequently accepted by the Claimant thus concluding the matter save as to costs.
Bite Injury to Right receives £2750 in damages
We acted the Claimant in an action for damages for personal injuries and losses arising from a dog bite that occurred on 3 August 2020.
The Claimant attended the Defendant’s property with her parents to view puppies that were for sale. Whilst the Defendant directed the Claimant’s father to the toilet the puppy’s mother, a Dobermann, attached the Claimant biting her calf and thigh. As a result of the attack, the Claimant sustained injuries to her right thigh and calf together with scratches and bruising.
A letter of claim was served on the Defendant. Liability was denied. As a result of the denial of liability, the issues in respect of the date of ownership, the lack of records, the Defendant importing the dog from Serbia and the Defendant’s failure to register as a breeder were raised and Counsel was instructed to Advise.
Upon the receipt of Counsel’s favourable advice, a Consultant Orthopaedic Specialist was instructed to prepare a medical report. Careful consideration was thereafter given to the medical the Claimant put forward a Part 36 offer in the sum of £3,500.00. The Defendant rejected the offer and a counteroffer of £2,000 was made on 29 December 2021.
Following a further review of quantum, a revised Part 36 offer was made by the Claimant in the sum of £2,750. The Defendant accepted the Claimant’s Part 36 offer.
Bite to leg with psychological trauma, claimant awarded £17,500.
Instructed Solicitors represented the Claimant in an action brought against the Defendant for damages for injuries and losses arising out of a dog bite incident.
On 14.04.2021 the Claimant was acting during the course of his employment working in a public house. He was serving the Defendant’s table when the Defendant’s dog attacked the Claimant, biting him on his right leg.
As a result of the incident, the Claimant sustained a dog bite on his right leg with ongoing scarring.
Instructions were received and full consideration was given to the circumstances surrounding the claim before a letter of claim was sent to the Defendant on 07.07.2021.
The Defendant responded on 04.08.2021 admitting liability.
Work was undertaken to fully quantify the Claimant’s claim for damages. The Claimant’s GP and Hospital records were obtained.
Expert nominations were provided to the Defendant who confirmed on 03.09.2021 that they had no objections to the nominated experts.
Initial medical evidence was obtained from a Consultant in Emergency Medicine, an Orthopaedic Specialist who stated that the Claimant had sustained 2 dog bite lacerations/abrasions to the right lower leg which healed in 1 to 2 weeks, with 2 visible marks/scars which would become pale over a period of 12 – 18 months, also recommending that evidence be obtained from a Psychologist as the Claimant had become nervous of dogs.
In light of the recommendations a report was obtained from a Consultant Clinical Psychologist. who stated that the incident was responsible for creating a heightened sense of vulnerability and triggered the development of a psychological disorder, Specific Phobia (Situational) DSM-V 300.29 and the development of a Major Depressive Episode DSM-V Recurrent 293.31 (mild). The expert was of the opinion that the Specific Phobia would persist and recommended CBT treatment to assist recovery.
The Claimant’s medical evidence was disclosed to the Defendant on 19.05.2022 and an interim payment was requested in the sum of £5,000.00 in order that the Claimant could commence his CBT treatment. Following numerous communications with the Defendant, an interim payment in the sum of £5,000.00 was obtained on 27.07.2022 (£4,750.00) and 29.07.2022 (£250.00).
Work was undertaken to quantify the Claimant’s losses. At the time of the accident the Claimant was working in hospitality with a salary in excess of £30,000.00 per year, plus bonus. This career came to an end and he could only obtain employment in a driving role at minimum wage and was disadvantaged on the open labour market.
An initial Part 36 offer was obtained from the Defendant by way of a Part 36 offer dated 18.08.2022 in the sum of £15,000.00 gross of interim payments.
Quantum negotiations ensued, culminating in the Claimant making a Part 36 offer in the sum of £17,500.00 gross of interim payments on 23.08.2022, which the Defendant accepted on 01.09.2022 to conclude matters.
£4,880.00 for mental trauma and scarring.
At all material times, the Defendant was the keeper of a large husky-type dog being fostered by the Defendant from a Dog Rescue Centre.
On 21.07.2020 the Claimant was collecting glasses in the course of his employment in a public house when the dog jumped up and bit him on the top of his left thigh, causing the Claimant injury.
As a result of the attack, the Claimant suffered a dog bite injury to his upper outer left thigh. The bite went through his trousers. He went to hospital where the wound was cleaned and dressed, he was also given a tetanus booster and prescribed antibiotics. The wound was dressed for a week and gradually closed over a period of one month. The bite area remained painful for 2 months.
The Claimant alleged that the attack was caused by the negligence of the Defendant.
A report was obtained from a consultant in A&E Medicine. The consultant stated that the Claimant had sustained a dog bit, with the injuries healing in a month, but he had been left with a prominent scar and had also become wary when around dogs, recommending further medical evidence be obtained from a Plastic Surgeon and Psychiatrist.
In light of the recommendations, expert nominations in the fields of Psychiatry and Plastic Surgery were obtained and provided to the Defendant and no objections were raised.
A report was obtained from a Consultant Plastic and Hand Surgeon, who stated that the Claimant has ongoing scarring, measuring approximately 4.5cm by 4cm, which was a bruised mauve colour. The ongoing bruising indicates there was likely bleeding into the fat of his upper thigh and probably damage to the fat. It is likely the bruised appearance will fade further with the passage of time, but it is possible he will have a permanent mark on the upper posterior left thigh.
A report was obtained from a Consultant Psychiatrist who stated t the Claimant had suffered a Psychiatric Disorder of Situational Anxiety caused by the incident, which resolved within 6-9 months of the incident.
The Defendant made an offer in the sum of £4,880.00. Instructions were obtained and the Claimant accepted the offer.