Mr FA was in receipt of a disability support pension, which also prevented him to perform work. He was limited to the number of hours he was permitted to perform some work. His limitations were also caused by his injuries which were both physical and psychological.
Mr FA was involved in a very serious motor vehicle accident on the M4 where his vehicle was struck at speed.
As a consequence, his pre-accident physical injuries were exacerbated.
Mr FA was unable to perform any of his part time work which he was able to do prior to the motor vehicle accident. Despite Mr FA being on a disability support pension (DSP), he still had a capacity to work. His income was only very limited and sporadic. FA was advised of the benefits of pursuing a claim for economic loss, but also cautioned as to how this can affect his DSP.
Mr FA explicitly instructed Gerard Malouf & Partners to pursue a claim for his loss of income.
Mr FA was assessed by the Medical Assessment Service (MAS) to have an injuries equivalent to less than 10% whole person impairment. GMP sought a review of the assessment. Even though the review caused the assessment to increase in value, he nevertheless still did not exceed the threshold of 10% whole person impairment to be entitled to compensation for his injuries and pain and suffering.
Although FA was not entitled to compensation for his injuries, he was still entitled to the other heads of damages which includes reasonably incurred medical and treatment expenses. Available were consistent records of his past medical and treatment expenses because the insurer had met all of these costs. This in itself was close to $28,000.00 worth of treatment expenses. This allowed for a projections into the future of the treatment expenses he was likely to require.
In relation to a claim for domestic assistance and care, Mr FA’s had pre-existing medical conditions which entitled him to a disability support pension. This meant that prior to the motor vehicle accident, he required the assistance and care of his wife. This caused difficulty when claiming further domestic assistance and care as there is a threshold of 6 hour per week for 6 months before he was entitle to compensation for this head of damage.
Mr FA’s instructions to pursue a claim for his economic loss on the basis that he was working part time increased the overall value of the claim as the insurer provided consideration for the economic loss.
Mr FA was able to resolve his case for $150,000.00 which was an excellent result despite the limitations on each of the heads of damages because of his pre-existing medical conditions entitling him to the DSP.