Statute of Limitations

[Larklin]

In the year 2013 I suffered an injury during a procedure at a hospital.

Despite many letters, for a period in excess of six months, the department concerned ignored all my efforts to get an answer.

After much difficulty, I felt I had acquired sufficient information to present to legal counsel. However, they told me that due to the Statute of Limitations (SOL) they would not have sufficient time to prepare a case.

Recently, as a layman, I prepared a letter for submission to the High Court asking for a dispensation due to the delaying actions of the hospital.

Now, searching for advice on how to progress my prepared letter, I discovered that the SOL is for six years in a case of negligence.

The advice I require is where to send my letter, which branch of the High Court, plus any other information you feel I may find useful.

Thank you.

[des8]

Where did you find a six year limitation period?
The general rule is three years from the date of the event or your becoming aware of it. (Limitations Act 1980 Sec 11 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/58)
Part II sec 28 deals with extentions of limitation period in cases of disability
Sec 33 deals with Discretionary exclusion of time limit for actions in respect of personal injuries or death.

I wonder if your "legal counsel" (solicitor/no win no fee firm or something else?) just thought you had no chance of a successful conclusion and felt the easiest way out was to say "out of time".
They could probably have submitted a holding claim whilst looking into your case more thoroughly.

Are you seriously thinking of taking on a health board for a clinical negligence case yourself without professional help?
Proving clinical negligence is extremely difficult, not just a case of showing there was injury.
Lose and you will land up with their costs to pay.

Will you be a Litigant in person?
If so have you studied The Preaction Protocol for the Resolution of Clinical Disputes? (https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...tocol/prot_rcd)

I wonder how much you intend claiming if you are going to write to the High Court for permission to claim.
Personal injury claims aren't started in the High Court unless the value of the claim exceeds £50, 000
If you intend to proceed I would complete an N1 form and send it to the relevant court with your letter, and hope!

[Larklin]

Hi DES8. Many thanks for your comments/advise. Pity I did not know about the holding claim. Actually, my initial complaint was one of being 'deliberate and intentional', with the doctor's words verbatim. Reconsidering the matter, I felt that as the hospital obstructed my efforts by which time the doctor had left, a court might have seen reason for me to take this course of action.

I checked before and knew it was 3 years. Lately, I put search words into the computer and found 6 years SOL. After receiving your reply I checked the site and found it was a US site about negligence claims, not UK.

I am most grateful for your response. Whilst I am fairly knowledgeable I am not astute with legal matters. If you are able to be more definitive please let me know, but from the links you provide I think Part 2 Sec 28, and Sec 33 are relevant. This means I would now need to assemble sufficient documentation and seek more in depth counsel. I wait to hear form you.

Many thanks

[des8]

I really think you have a large hill to climb to have your claim heard as you are now 18 months to 2 years out of time.
6 months of non cooperation by the hospital still leaves 2'5 years in which to lodge a claim.

Somehow you have to convince the judge that Sec 33 (3) applies
(3)In acting under this section the court shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case and in particular to—

(a)the length of, and the reasons for, the delay on the part of the plaintiff;

(b)the extent to which, having regard to the delay, the evidence adduced or likely to be adduced by the plaintiff or the defendant is or is likely to be less cogent than if the action had been brought within the time allowed by section 11 [F4, by section 11A] or (as the case may be) by section 12;

(c)the conduct of the defendant after the cause of action arose, including the extent (if any) to which he responded to requests reasonably made by the plaintiff for information or inspection for the purpose of ascertaining facts which were or might be relevant to the plaintiff’s cause of action against the defendant;

(d)the duration of any disability of the plaintiff arising after the date of the accrual of the cause of action;

(e)the extent to which the plaintiff acted promptly and reasonably once he knew whether or not the act or omission of the defendant, to which the injury was attributable, might be capable at that time of giving rise to an action for damages;

(f)the steps, if any, taken by the plaintiff to obtain medical, legal or other expert advice and the nature of any such advice he may have received.


The extent of the injury and the effect it had on you will be important in obtaining the court's agreement.


I know from assisting my son in law (broken ankle bone missed by surgeon and resulting in fusion of ankle and medical discharge from RAF) that clinical negligence cases are extremely complex.
Obtaining records took for ever and then expert opinion had to be sought on those records
We thought overlooking a fracture was a slam dunk.
It wasn't and eventually after nearly 2 years of work by a specialist firm the claim was discontinued.

[Larklin]

Thank you.

Other than the hospital, I tried to get equipment specification from the manufacturers, but they seemed worried I was about to make a claim against them and up until now no number of attempts will budge them. Even when I told them, as an engineer, I knew the equipment was not faulty.

But I needed to know the specification as applied to the equipment, so I could convincingly point the finger at the doctor. My own GP did not help when I made a report to him alleging the doctor to being 'deliberate and intentional'. He almost struck me off his list. He changed his mind though, after I wrote him a very detailed letter. Thereafter, he was, by his subsequent actions/attitude (but did not actually express it) most apologetic, because he realised that my account was truthful.

I did a research earlier, and contacted the researcher/doctor in the U.S who advised that it was preferable if such procedure was not done, because of the risks.

So, together with your case as outlined, I am in a dilema whether or not to go any further.

[des8]

I regret I can't decide for you.

I just know how difficult it is to make a successful claim, even with expert help.
Even your USA contact only says "it was preferable if such procedure was not done" which suggests it is not a clear cut matter and there will be contrary opinions produced in court. That will make your task even more difficult.
This doesn't mean you couldn't do it, but it will be at a tremendous cost (and I don't just mean monetary!)

Good luck, whatever you decide

[Larklin]

Thanks again.
I just wish I had the financial resources to absorb the losses. But take the matter to court and expose the doctor, because I feel that like other cases, past and present, he could do it again.

I lost that 6 months because the department's advice was to complain to them first. With the usual hindsight it is clear to me that there was a conspiracy.

Hospital management suggested making them (that department) apologise to me, but I felt that alone would not help me, so I explained why, although appreciative, I would not bother. If I firstly wrote to the hospital's proper complaints department in the first instance he would not have escaped. They have scrapped that procedure, all complaints now go through a central section.

Yes, litigation is expensive. Thank you.