Posted By el nino El Nino has not had much experience with the claims process following an injury but would like to ask the gang a question. A "person" has an accident. Their solicitor states after a few months that they intend to process a claim but no action is taken. Action ( serving of papers ) is finally taken after 3 years and 3 months. El Nino's solicitor has stated that the extra 3 months is allowed and the claim will progress via the courts. Has anyone else come across this flexible approach to the 3 year rule - is it common? Also, what is the dress code for court? I have been warned that fancy dress is not generally a good idea? El Nino

Posted By J Knight Just don't turn up wearing a stripey jumper a black eye mask carrying a hessian bag marked 'swag'. That kind of get up is sooo last century, John

Posted By el nino Heather How many claims do you get a year and how big is your workforce? El Nino's boss does not believe in settling claims, hence most claims and threats of claims seem to disappear. I may go half way in the wardrobe department. Perhaps a nice suit with a twirling bowtie and squirty flower? El Nino

Posted By Barry Cooper El Nino I tend to leave it to our insurers, as they are the ones that will pay up at the end of the day. usually they settle as it is cheaper than a barrister, unless the injuries are severe or you can prove contributory negligence (100% if you can). We do win an odd one now and again, but I have given up worrying about it. The key is to work at preventing the accident in the first place then no one will have cause to make a claim.

Posted By J Knight Some of our managers take claims quite personally (workforce of c 2,500 in service provision so MOPs claim as well), I point out the 'balance of probabilities' and apportionment of damages stuff to them, but they don't like it at all. As long as we don't get prosecuted I'll be happy, civil claims I can stand, John

Posted By garyh What does your Solicitor say about the 3 years 3 months? (I assume you are an employee of the defendant or tare the defendant).

Posted By Heather Aston El Nino To succeed in a civil claim the employee has to prove: a) that you (his employer) were in breach of your duty of care to him/her (or in breach of a statutory duty) b) That the employee has suffered injury of loss as a result of that breach. If it is your word against his, on the balance of probabilities the judge will (in my experience) believe the employee. Here's an example. Employee slips on wet floor and hurts his back. Unless he has just deliberately spilt the water there himself (!) you have no defence. You are in breach of your duty of care to provide a safe place of work. Admit liability pronto and keep costs low - you will hate doing this but believe me it's the best way. If you don't, the employee's solicitor will rub his hands in glee, get expensive medical reports, get expert opinions, get investigators, (and possibly your insurers will insist you settle six months down the line anyway) win in court and send you a huge fat costs bill complete with success fee. It's not unusual for a claim settled for £1500 to run up £5000 worth of solicitors costs. The trick is to pick out the dubious claims where the employee can't really prove they did the injury at work, or where they haven't followed company procedure in reporting say an ULD problem and defend those. This DOES deter others from making spurious claims. Refusing to settle does not - after all it doesn't cost the employee anything to make a claim if you are in a unionised workplace so what have they got to lose? I'd skip the twirling bow tie and go for something in a normal tie with sober stripes if I were you (and if I wore ties). Heather