C S.
2/5
Suggested Improvements for the Medical Negligence Department
My overall experience with the medical negligence department was disappointing. In both instances, I found myself having to take matters into my own hands to achieve a satisfactory outcome, which highlights significant areas for improvement.
First Claim
On a positive note, the firm was willing to negotiate down the success fee to an acceptable level, unlike many other firms, which I appreciated. However, I resented paying it, as the only success in the case came from my own efforts in achieving an offer completely independent of the firm’s involvement, and securing an increased offer despite their advice to accept a lower offer.
The Solicitor was dogmatic:
The solicitor I used (AL) was dogmatic to the extreme. It felt like speaking to a brick wall—there was a complete lack of creative thinking and an inability to negotiate effectively. When I raised concerns and discussed escalation, I was told I was “threatening him,” which was naive and bizarre.
Your case is ancillary to their fees:
The main focus seems to be on using your medical negligence case to generate fees at all costs, with little regard for your actual case.
The Barrister was a bull in a China shop:
The Barrister they hired undermined my case, with poor briefing from the solicitor and an arrogant attitude. This led to unnecessary costs and a lack of focus on the strengths of my case, despite having a substantial settlement offer.
Their fees and no win no fee - don’t be fooled:
Don’t assume that a ‘no win no fee’ agreement will shield you from responsibility for their fees. Even under this agreement, you may still be liable for shortfalls if the other side disputes the fees.
Raise concerns and escalate:
Don’t hesitate to raise concerns and escalate them. Skip the supervisor level, as it means speaking to someone with little change in perspective. I recommend escalating directly to the senior Partner, who is responsible for handling complaints, if necessary.
Give clear, written instructions, with a timeline:
Providing clear, written instructions with expected timelines is crucial. They will try to avoid or delay responses, so ensure all requests are well-documented.
Second Claim
My experience with a second claim further supports the concerns I raised earlier. They rejected a second claim I submitted, which I later pursued successfully on my own. This highlights a significant gap where clients are left unsupported when they take matters into their own hands.
Handling Success Fees:
As with my first claim, handling of success fees remains a concern. Firms often charge a fee even for cases they are confident in winning. It is essential that clients are not overcharged for low-risk cases, and accountability in fee management should be improved.
Taking on Strong Cases:
If you have a strong medical negligence case, it’s not worth using this firm. However, for those with less clear-cut cases, negotiating down the success fee may be beneficial. Many firms appear to prioritize cases they are confident in winning, managing risk over genuinely supporting clients.
Client Empowerment:
Empower clients to take more control over their cases. Providing better guidance on managing fees and ensuring their concerns are taken seriously will enhance the overall client experience
Conclusion
The medical negligence department could greatly benefit from a more client-centric approach, with improved communication, fair handling of fees, and a stronger focus on supporting clients, especially those with complex cases.
