Customer area
Cavernoma Misdiagnosis
searchSearch
call-answerCall Us
new-email-envelopeEnquiry
list-menuMenu
×
×
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • ×

    The United Kingdom is one of the best places in the world to receive medical attention – the World Health Organization ranks it 18th in its global table – despite this, clinical negligence does occur, sometimes even before patients begin treatment for their ailments.

    How is this possible? Well, depending on the circumstances, if a medical professional misdiagnoses a condition, fails to send a patient for further tests, misinterprets test results, or provides a correct but late diagnosis, this can be classed as clinical negligence.

    In most circumstances, any of the above scenarios will have a negative impact on an individual’s health. However, in some situations this type of medical negligence can be particularly catastrophic and may result in severe injury or even death. One example of where this might happen is where a patient is suffering from a cavernoma.

    If you have experienced pain and loss as a result of negligent medical professionals, contact Healys today.

    Cavernoma symptoms

    A cavernoma is a cluster of abnormal blood vessels, usually located in the brain or spinal cord. It changes in size as it bleeds and then reabsorbs blood. Sufferers could have more than one cavernoma. Cavernomas occur in around one percent of the population. A single bleed brings a risk of disability of about 40% and a risk of death of around 10%. The average age to be diagnosed with a cavernoma is 40.

    Some people don’t develop any symptoms, but others might experience weakness, slurred speech, numbness, and double vision. Furthermore, cavernomas can cause an individual to suffer a stroke or seizure.

    It is important that someone who has suffered the above symptoms has their case properly investigated and given a correct diagnosis. If they are not offered the right treatment they could experience serious brain injury, severe personal harm, or even death.

    Patients may be able to keep symptoms under control with prescribed medication, or might need to undergo surgery to have the cavernoma removed.

    Healys can help

    Although individuals cannot claim compensation for a cavernoma – it is an inherited condition – they can claim for incorrect or delayed diagnosis.

    The medical negligence solicitors at Healys could tell you whether you have a valid and viable case against the person or medical establishment responsible for misdiagnosing or failing to diagnose you with a serious medical condition, including cancer, diabetes or cavernoma.

    Call Us Today
    Call our London office on 0800 280 0432 or our Brighton office on 0800 280 0432. You can also contact us online.
    Call Us Today
    London: 0800 280 0432 Brighton: 0800 280 0432 Or you can contact us online: Contact Us
    Cavernoma Misdiagnosis capabilities
    Cavernoma Misdiagnosis experiences
    • Jonathan was able to help the husband of a 50 year old woman claim compensation after the hospital failed to diagnose her cancer. Mrs L attended hospital complaining of pain in her abdomen. She was discharged without further tests but unfortunately she died of thyroid cancer a few months later. Jonathan argued that the chance for a liver biopsy was missed during her visit to hospital and although this would not affect the unfortunate outcome, palliative care could have been arranged to ease Mrs L’s suffering. Jonathan was able to secure Mrs L’s husband a five figure sum in compensation.
    • Jonathan has also helped the family of a 71 year old man claim compensation after a complication in his surgery caused his death. Mr R was suffering from chest pains and was admitted to hospital for tests. He was found to have an issue with his heart and doctors attempted to rectify this with a surgical procedure. Unfortunately during this procedure an air pocket had got into one of his blood vessels which caused Mr R’s death. With expert medical evidence Jonathan was able to secure Mr R’s family £75,000 in compensation.
    • Jonathan helped X get further compensation and access to services to aid in his rehabilitation. X was a subject of sexual abuse from his step father between the ages of 5 and 7. Initial application for compensation was made in 1990 and X was awarded £10,000. After several attempts at his own life, X decided to contact Jonathan to seek further compensation. Jonathan was able to secure X £200,000 in compensation and an overall award of £1,200,000 inclusive of state benefits. More importantly Jonathan then arranged the Special Needs Trust to support X’s rehabilitation.
    • Jonathan helped the parents of Baby B claim compensation after a failure in care during labour resulted in Baby B’s death. Initially the Trust denied they were responsible for Baby B’s death but after negotiations the Trust admitted responsibility and Jonathan was able to negotiate an out of court settlement for Baby B’s parents.
    Cavernoma Misdiagnosis insights
    • Clinical Negligence – You’re Never Too Old to Seek Justice

      15th January 2021

      Elderly victims of clinical negligence who are approaching the end of their lives may feel there is little point seeking justice. However, they also have their loved ones to think about and a High Court case in which a woman in her 80s received six-figure damages showed how important it is to obtain legal advice. Continue reading »

    • Healys Recommended as Leading Firm in Legal 500

      23rd October 2020

      Healys LLP has again been recognised as a leading firm in the latest edition of the Legal 500.

      The Legal 500 directory provides comprehensive coverage on legal services providers in over 100 countries, with independent and unbiased commentary on the leading law firms.

      This year Healys has been ranked in 4 practice areas, with 8 lawyers individually recommended. Continue reading »

    Cavernoma Misdiagnosis awards
    Cavernoma Misdiagnosis news
    • Type 1 Diabetes Sufferer Wins Direct Disability Discrimination Claim

      18th October 2021

      When employees disclose that they are suffering from a disability, it is an important moment that should always put employers on their mettle. The point was powerfully made by the case of a business development manager who was dismissed within days of his employer learning that he had been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes.

      After the man launched proceedings, an Employment Tribunal (ET) found that his dismissal was significantly influenced by the employer’s knowledge of his disability. He had been subjected to two acts of direct disability discrimination: his dismissal and the refusal of two of the employer’s founding directors to acknowledge his ill health. The employer’s contention that he had been dismissed solely for the non-discriminatory reason of poor performance was rejected.

      The ET found that all three of the employer’s directors, who worked closely together, were aware of his condition prior to his dismissal. The employer had moved virtually directly from learning of his disability to terminating his employment. When he complained about his dismissal, two of the directors colluded in maintaining their assertions that they had no advance knowledge of his ill health.

      The ET also found that, in seeking to embellish the employer’s dissatisfaction with the man’s performance and bolster its case, one of the directors had altered an email so as to give the impression that a client had specifically named him as the person responsible for a serious overcharging error.

      Anyone aware of his diagnosis would have known that type 1 diabetes is a lifelong condition that, unless controlled by medication, can have a significant effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. The man testified that the condition caused tiredness and digestive complications that made it difficult for him to perform his extensive role in entertaining clients.

      In dismissing the employer’s challenge to those findings, the Employment Appeal Tribunal noted that the ET had rejected several other complaints put forward by the man in what was a long and hard-fought case. It could find nothing perverse or unfair in the ET’s careful and balanced conclusions. If not agreed, the amount of the man’s compensation would be decided at a further hearing.

      For more legal advice regarding Employment Law and legal claims, please don’t hesitate to contact Healys LLP today.