Exposed to asbestos at work:
Between about 1980 and 2005/06 Mr T worked for Safety Devices (Cambridge) Limited as an engineer. He worked at their premises in Newmarket and then Soham. Mr T was exposed to harmful amounts of asbestos dust when working for the company. His work involved stripping down standard motor cars and then rebuilding them to off-road or rally standard. Unfortunately, asbestos was used in the rebuilt cards. It was applied as padding on the silencers to reduce noise, used as bandages on exhausts for heat protection, and applied as matting around the gearbox housing for heat protection. The fuel tanks were also encased in asbestos, and the clutches and brakes were manufactured using asbestos. The handling, cutting, and fitting of these asbestos-based materials, both by Mr T and others, produced significant quantities of asbestos dust. Mr T and others subsequently inhaled this. No suitable respiratory protection was offered to him or his colleagues. We relied on this to prove negligence and breach of statutory duty in the pleural thickening claim. We specifically argued that the provisions of the Factories Act 1961 applied. When racing took place in the villages, Mr T and his colleagues packed asbestos wool into the silencers. This meant he was further exposed to the harmful dust. Overall, asbestos dust and debris littered the workplace and was disturbed by various activities. In the early 1990s the asbestos materials were substituted for asbestos-free ones. However, by then, Mr T had already suffered sufficient exposure. This exposure led to him developing pleural thickening allowing him to make an asbestos disease compensation claim.The claim:
Initially, Safety Devices Limited’s Solicitors denied liability and argued that Mr T was not exposed to an amount of asbestos which would prove that his pleural thickening was asbestos-related. However, this argument is only relevant to claims for asbestosis compensation where there is a need for sufferers to prove that they were exposed to a total asbestos dose in excess of 25 f/ml years. Unfortunately, pleural thickening can develop in sufferers after relatively low level asbestos exposure – unlike asbestos-related fibrosis.Medical evidence:
We obtained medical evidence from a well-respected respiratory physician in support of the asbestos claim. This evidence showed that the asbestos-related disease was causing him a 27% level of respiratory disability. This stopped him from functioning as he normally did prior to receiving his diagnosis. The medical report also showed that Mr T is at risk of the asbestos-related disease progressing and causing an increased respiratory disability. He is also at risk of developing mesothelioma. Whilst Mr T has suffered limited asbestos exposure outside of the time he spent working for Safety Devices, this only amounted to around 5% of his total dose of asbestos exposure. Therefore, Safety Devices had to pay 95% of his pleural thickening compensation under the settlement agreement.The compensation:
Tens of thousands of pounds of pleural thickening compensation was recovered on behalf of Mr T, who decided to settle his asbestos claim on a provisional damages basis. This leaves the door open for him to claim further asbestos compensation if his condition deteriorates in the future. We also assisted Mr T in claiming further asbestos compensation in the form of relevant state benefits. We wish him all the best for the future.How can we help ?
If you require assistance in pursuing a claim for pleural thickening compensation or any other asbestos-related disease, then please contact us today on our Freephone number: 0800 038 6767. Alternatively, head over to the ‘contact us’ page, complete the form and we will be in touchThe post Success! We have won another pleural thickening claim appeared first on Asbestos Justice.
from News – Asbestos Justice https://ift.tt/2Gz4Dyu
via IFTTT
Success! We have won another pleural thickening claim
Reviewed by Unknown
on
March 27, 2018
Rating:

No comments: