Insult To Widow – Malignant Mesothelioma only £85,000

In a recent case there were arguments about how painful a man suffered from mesothelioma (a disease where there is no cure – contracted by asbestos exposure).

These unsavoury arguments are a further insult to bereaved families to gain some comfort of compensation to the unlawful killing of a loved one.

No amount of compensation for fatal injury can ever be enough.  We all get it but to make widow come to court to explain the pain and suffering and for then Solicitors and Barristers to argue over what such suffering is worth is unjust.  There must be a better way to stop insurance companies arguing over such trivial amounts of compensation when one considers what the deceased has been though and the suffering from the families.

We tend to live in an age where privacy for celebrities are paramount (in some cases justified) and to award such important celebrities they are often ordered six figure sums to compensate them for “hurt feelings.”  Fatal accident solicitors are not saying that such compensation figures are wrong, but the law is unjust when you compare such money awards to claims involving fatal accidents.

Long Suffering Death Worth £85,000 to Widow

The law is an insult to victims and loved ones left behind when it comes to compensating those who need it most to carry on with their life. We all know money will never be enough following the death of a loved one, but the award by the Court which should reflect what is just and mirror our caring society is barbaric.

In this recent case, the Mr Thomas Mosson died, after a prolonged illness, of malignant mesothelioma contracted during the course of his employment.  Anyone who knows about death following exposure to asbestos dust will understand that it is a very painful and progressive death.  In this case the following was said about the disease and how he suffered:

    1. The chemotherapy was particularly unpleasant causing the deceased nausea, vomiting, fatigue, peripheral neuropathy and tinnitus. His condition steadily declined and he died on 19 January 2014. But for this illness it is said that he would have lived for a further 12 years.

    2. Mr Steinberg, for the claimant, puts the effect of this illness in graphic terms in his skeleton argument. He says:

“This was a devastating illness – Mr Mosson suffered terribly – made exceptional by the unusually long period of suffering (i.e. 26 months).”

See full case Mosson v Spousal (London) Ltd

It is hard to believe in this so called “compensation culture” that Mr Thomas’ widow was only awarded £85,000.  She suffered and her family suffered, seeing this once proud man decay and depreciate before her eyes and suffer beyond imagination.  Just £85,000 how on earth is this justified?

Yes no amount of money can ever compensation, we get it, but to offer this amount is an insult and unjust.  But it is happening every day in England and Wales.  Large insurance companies are strong enough to lobby the Government and have deep pockets to defend and challenge fatal accident claims by some of the best Counsel and Magic Circle Solicitors in the business.

Justice is not on a a level playing field, no equality of arms (if there ever was one). The Government had now introduced fixed fees to Claimant’s solicitors and due to the cost cutting exercise, forcing the Claimant Solicitor to take up to 25% of the Compensation awarded to Widows and other members of the family who have lost a loved one.

So to add more insult to injury to the bereaved families, after winning the case, if settled after the cost cutting Conservative Government*, the Claimant solicitors will then have to bill the Widow and for services rendered:-

Here £84,000 – 25% (Solicitors Fees) = £21,250: 

Widow Receives Only £63,750*

*If the case was brought after April 2013 when the Conservative Government attacked Claimant Solicitors Costs and thus were forced to charged injured clients 25% of their compensation.  Please note by instructing R James Hutcheon Solicitors, our charging fees are currently capped at 12.5% not 25%.


Posted: April 1, 2016 at 1:17 pm