Accidents in Sainsburys
If you sustain an injury due to a preventable accident in Sainsburys, you may be entitled to claim supermarket accidents compensation for your injury if the shops´ managers or staff were negligent in their responsibility for your health and safety. Not all accidents in Sainsburys are preventable or qualify for injury compensation, for although Sainsburys have a duty of care to provide customers with a safe environment in which to shop, that duty of care is not absolute. Therefore, if staff at Sainsburys have not had a “reasonable” amount of time in which to identify a hazard and eliminate the risk of injury to shoppers – such as liquid which have spilled from another shopper´s trolley or goods which have been left precariously on a shelf by another customer – it may not always be straightforward to claim compensation for accidents in Sainsburys Supermarkets. Therefore, it is always advisable to discuss the circumstances of any accidents in Sainsburys with an experienced solicitor on our Supermarket Claims Service for a free case assessment – without obligation – and to ensure that you have a Sainsburys accident claim for compensation which is worth your while to pursue.
A pensioner, who fell and badly injured her arm and face after tripping and falling in a local branch of Sainsbury’s supermarket, has received a settlement of compensation.
Jean Annis, aged seventy-nine from Cheshire, was shopping in the Alsagar branch of Sainsbury’s when she tripped on a loose mat by the entrance. As a result, she fell badly and sustained a fracture to her right arm, damage to her nerves and injuries to her face.
Medical attention was called to the scene, but this didn’t prevent Ms Annis’ dominant arm being severely weakened. Five months after the accident, Ms Annis fell again, fracturing the same arm. Medical experts claim that, had she not sustained the first fracture several months earlier, the second would not have occurred.
Ms Annis has been advised by doctors to allow metal pins to be inserted into her arm, though Ms Annis has reservations. She is concerned that her husband, Norman (aged eighty-nine), will require specialist care whilst she is in hospital both having and recovering from the procedure as he suffers from dementia.
The victim sought legal counsel and proceeded to make a claim for trip and fall compensation for her accident in Sainsbury’s. In her claim, she stated that her fall was because of Sainsbury’s negligence in allowing the mat beside the door to become loose, creating a hazard for all entering. Sainsbury’s admitted liability for Ms Annis’ injuries, and negotiations began between the two parties to settle the claim. Eventually, a sum of what is believed to be five figures was agreed upon.
Legal representatives for Ms Annis stated after the announcement of the settlement that “It is imperative that premises such as supermarkets take great care to ensure their stores are safe for visitors at all times, particularly the entrance and exit area which can become hazardous due to wear and tear caused by the sheer number of people passing through on a daily basis, and also as the result of wet weather conditions.”
“It is imperative that premises such as supermarkets take great care to ensure their stores are safe for visitors at all times, particularly the entrance and exit area which can become hazardous due to wear and tear caused by the sheer number of people passing through on a daily basis, and also as the result of wet weather conditions.”
A man, who was gravely injured whilst working at Sainsbury’s, has presented his evidence to the Westminster Magistrates Court concerning his work accident.
The accident occurred on the 8th August 2013 when James Whelan was working at the Wandsworth, London, branch of Sainsbury’s supermarket on behalf of his employers, Bowmer and Kirkland Ltd, a construction company that specialises in scaffolds. However, as James was walking between an existing part of the building and the construction site, he applied pressure to an area of the plasterboard that gave way.
James fell seven metres down to a stairway below what he presumed to be a sound structure. After he was rushed to hospital, James was diagnosed with fractures to his spine, ribs and pelvis, as well as having a bruised lung. The extent of his injuries was so severe that the thirty-one year-old from Surrey has yet to make a full recovery.
An investigation into the circumstances of James’ accident was conducted by the Health and Safety Executives. The report determined that James’ employers could have taken many steps to prevent an accident such as James’. These included securing the walkway with guard rails or covering the fragile sections with a stronger material.
The scaffolding company were subsequently prosecuted by the HSE for breaches of the Work at Height Regulations 2005. Though Bowmer and Kirkland Ltd admitted liability for the accident, they disputed that they were negligent as they claim that they attempted to prevent accidents by limiting access to the dangerous pathway.
After the court hearing, the company were fined £6,000 for their negligence and ordered to pay £1,428 in costs. After the announcement of the fine, Gavin Pugh – an inspector with the HSE – commented that “The hazards presented by fragile surfaces and open edges are clear, and it is common knowledge that falls from height account for almost half of all deaths and serious injuries on construction sites. As such, companies like Bowmer & Kirkland should be fully aware of what needs to be done to adequately protect workers.
“The safety standards surrounding the walkway and fragile area fell some way short on this occasion, and it could have cost the scaffolder his life. He suffered painful injuries that still cause him pain and discomfort, but he could just as easily have been killed.”
A pensioner from Worcestershire, who broke a bone in his foot after he fell on a wet floor in Tesco, has been awarded an undisclosed four-figure settlement for his Tesco wet floor injury claim.
Ronald Fryer (80) from Whittington in Worcestershire was going into the Tesco store in St. Peter´s Drive, Worcester in October 2009, when he slipped on a wet floor by the entrance to the shop.
The retired cricket umpire was taken to the Worcestershire Royal Hospital where X-rays revealed that Ronald had broken a metatarsal bone in his foot.
After recuperating from his injury, Ronald sought legal guidance and established that he was eligible to make a Tesco wet floor injury claim due to a breach in Tesco´s duty of care towards its customers.
After lengthy negotiations over how much compensation for slipping on a wet floor in Tesco Ronald should be entitled to, the company made a four-figure offer in settlement of Ronald´s Tesco wet floor injury claim which he was advised to take.
A second major personal injury compensation claim for a slip and fall in Asda´s Rivergate store has been settled for an undisclosed sum.
The store made the news for the wrong reasons in June this year, when Peterborough County Court found in favour of Thomas Wardle and awarded him 10,500 pounds after he injured his back when slipping on a grape.
This time the victim was 74-year-old Patricia Hill of Orton Goldhay, who damaged her knee and ankle after slipping on vegetables in a non-fruit and vegetable isle while shopping in May 2008. Mrs Hill was found to have a closed break of the tibial plateau on arrival at Peterborough General Hospital and had to stay in hospital for 5 days.
Three years of treatment subsequently, Mrs Hill still suffers pain in her knee and ankle, and doctors have told her that she is likely to need knee replacement surgery in the near future and has a 50 per cent chance of developing osteoarthritis. Mrs Hill has no family living near her in Peterborough, and has had to rely on friends and hired help to help her with household and personal chores during her rehabilitation.
Asda agreed to a “substantial” out-of-court settlement, the specific details of which Mrs Hill did not wish to reveal, but the same supermarket store has a third slip and fall injury claim to contend with which is due to be heard in Peterborough County Court later this year.
The Food Standards Agency is investigating watermelon salmonella claims following the death of one person and thirty other reported cases of food poisoning in the UK.
Other similar cases of illness have also been reported in Germany and the Republic of Ireland, and officials at the Health Protection Agency are treating the outbreak of salmonella poisoning with particular caution – issuing advice to wash all fruit and vegetables thoroughly before eating them.
The origin of the salmonella contaminated watermelons has not yet been firmly established, but they are thought to come from a food preparation unit in Brazil; where the watermelons may have been washed in unclean water or cut with a contaminated knife. Of the thirty people known to have contracted the “Salmonella Newton” strain of salmonella, fifteen have confirmed that they had eaten watermelon within the preceding week.
The watermelon salmonella claims victims suffer in similar ways to other strains of food poisoning, with victims suffering from diarrhoea, vomiting, fever and abdominal pains which last from four to seven days. Some individuals will need a course of antibiotics to prevent complications such as septicaemia and infection, and people recognising the early symptoms of food poisoning are advised to seek medical attention immediately.
Subject to the specific medical prognosis, it will be possible for salmonella in watermelon claims for compensation to be made against the retail outlets to blame for selling the contaminated watermelons. This is most likely to be snack kiosks or smaller shops with self-service fridges rather than the larger supermarkets, although some cafes and restaurants may also be at risk if they have served the contaminated watermelons on their premises.
In order to help with determining liability and the preparation of injury compensation claims, those suffering from salmonella in watermelon food poisoning are being advised to speak with a solicitor at the earliest possible opportunity.