Category Archives: Compensation

Accidents, Compensation, Criminal Justice, Defamation, Health Law, Law Firm, Lawyers, Legal Services, Personal Injury

PHC Law Recovers Over Â£500,000 Compensation For Accident At Work Claimant

October 4, 2011 EPR Law News Leave a comment

PHC Law Recovers Over Â£500,000 Compensation For Accident At Work Claimant

The Claimant claimed damages for an accident which occurred on 6th December 2005 when he was 42-years old. He was required to move a completed lorry by means of a hand operated electrically powered â€œdead man truckâ€. His left foot/lower leg was trapped and crushed by the truck causing very serious injuries including compound fractures to the left tibia and fibula, a fracture dislocation of the ankle and a fracture of the calcaneum.

The Claimant has suffered a very serious injury and underwent three operations in quick succession his treatment involving external fixation and skin grafting. The Claimant did not make a good recovery and suffered multiple corrective operations â€“ a total of 13 to date of settlement.

Although the Claimant attempted to return to his work as a motor engineer the effect of ongoing pain and disability made this impossible. He was unable to do manual work from a standing position and work involving weight bearing. He was equally unable to manage sedentary work due to swelling and increased pain caused by being seated.

Expert evidence was obtained from a Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon. The Defendants obtained orthopaedic evidence from two other specialists.

Settlement was necessarily delayed to enable a proper assessment of the full extent of the Claimantâ€™s ongoing disability together with his future limitations on the labour market and domestically.

The matter was dealt with co-operatively throughout between the parties and the Claimant was voluntarily provided with interim payments by the Defendants.

The Defendants initially offered Â£110,000.00. This offer was rejected by the Claimant. The Defendants then offered Â£400,000.00 in January 2011 which was rejected by the Claimant. The Defendant subsequently reduced this offer to Â£380,000.00. Both parties wished to seek disposal of the claim by joint settlement meeting. As the date for the meeting approached the Defendants disclosed surveillance evidence which required most careful consideration by the Claimant and the Claimantâ€™s legal advisors.

In the event the matter was settled by way of joint settlement meeting on 21st July 2011 for the total sum of Â£568,330.28. Settlement was inclusive of Â£49,000.00 interim payments and Â£19,330.28 payable to the Department of Work and Pensions in respect of refundable benefits.

ViaÂ EPR Network
MoreÂ Law press releases

Administrative, Cases, Compensation, Health Law, Law Firm, Lawyers, Legal Services

Where Fraud Victims Need To Go For Help

September 29, 2011 EPR Law News Leave a comment

Unfortunately fraud victims are often the forgotten victims in our justice system. There are often no support groups or counselors for them. Nor are there many places where they can go for help.

Strangely enough the more complex the fraud is and the more money involved, too often, the less likely the victim is to receive to help. This does not mean that help is not available. It simply means that fraud victims are looking for help in the wrong places. In most cases, â€œgetting helpâ€ starts with fraud victims helping themselves.

The first place to go for help if you loose a lot of money in any sort of scam is not to the prosecutor or law enforcement, but to an attorney. Find a lawyer who has a lot of experience in the field. In some cases, these attorneys will only charge for expenses and a low retainer. In these cases, they will take the largest part of their fees as a percentage of the settlement.

File such aÂ suit even if the fraudsters are operating outside the US . You should do that because you might be able to get money from them if they return to the US or have property or assets here. AttorneyÂ Howard Fensterman sued a group of businessmen in Abu Dhabi who allegedly stole money from a group of Americans trying to organize an insurance company there.

ViaÂ EPR Network
MoreÂ Law press releases

Administrative, Business Law, Cases, Compensation, Corporate Law, Lawyers, Securities

A Simple Search Could Save You a Lot of Money

August 31, 2011 EPR Law News Leave a comment

Something that a lot of investors don’t realize is that a simple internet search can save an investor or group of investors a lot of money. In many cases simply typing the name or locale into a search engine such as Google or Bing can protect a person from fraud.

Most of the scam artists that commit investment fraud have done it, over and over again. Some of them have been committing such crimes for decades, and they even have criminal records or a history of serving time in prison. Typing their name and the word fraud into a search engine can turn up interesting results. Similarly, typing the name of somebody offering an investment and the word lawsuit into a search engine also can produce very informative results. It is possible to sue con artists to get your money back. You can even sue in U.S. Courts foreign con artists who commit their crimes in other countries.

That means you can check out foreign investment opportunities with an online search. But don’t just read a single on-line posting about the fraud or lawsuit, read all the postings to obtain a full perspective of what happened so you can make a more educated decision. A person thinking of doing business in the United Arab Emirates or UAE (the Persian Gulf State where Dubai and Abu Dhabi are located) could type in the words lawsuit and UAE. This search might show you that New York attorney Howard Fenstersman has sued a group of a group of prominent businessmen in Abu Dhabi on behalf of a group of US investors who alleged that $18 million of their money had been stolen from a UAE bank.

Obviously, con artists and persons trying to drum up business would not tell you this, but an online search can. For example, shares in Medical Capital Holdings, a notorious pyramid scam based in Orange County , California , were sold by agents working for Securities America (a brokerage based in Nebraska ). Anybody who searched â€œSecurities Americaâ€ and the word â€œlawsuit wouldâ€ have found that the brokerage is facing millions of dollars in lawsuits filed by investors who claimed they were ripped off by its brokers.

An online search can be one of the most powerful tools in stopping fraud and protecting investors. All investors should do so when considering new investments.

ViaÂ EPR Network
MoreÂ Law press releases

Administrative, Cases, Compensation, Health Law, Law Firm, Lawyers, Legal Services

Office of Inspector General Is Aggressively Asserting Its Authority to Exclude Owners, Officers and Managing Employees of Sanctioned Entities From Participation in Federal Health Care Programs

August 3, 2011 EPR Law News Leave a comment

â€œThe longstanding but little-used authority of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to exclude from participation in any federal health care program, such as Medicare, any officer or managing employee of a health related entity that has been convicted of certain legal offenses, should now be top-of-mind for all general managers, business managers, administrators and directors of today’s health care facilities,â€ says Patrick Formato, a partner at AbramsÂ ,Â Fensterman , Fensterman, Eisman, Greenberg, Formato & Einiger, LLP (Abrams Fensterman).

Reflecting on his recent participation at June’s Annual Meeting of the American Health Lawyers Association, Formato is reaching out to his clients with a stern warning: â€œThe OIG is becoming increasingly aggressive in targeting owners, managers and boards of sanctioned health care facilities. These individuals must keep a finger on the pulse of what is going on in every phase of their organization and they must be proactive about reporting their concerns.â€

Formato notes that exclusions under section 1128 (b) (15) of the Social Security Act are based upon the individual’s role or interest in a company that is excluded or is convicted of certain offenses. Individuals who have an ownership or a control interest in a sanctioned entity may be excluded if they knew or should have known of the conduct that led to the sanction. Officers and managing employees may be excluded based solely on their position within the entity.

â€œThere is a higher standard for exclusion of an owner,â€ Formato points out. â€œThe relevant statute requires evidence that the owner knew or should have known of the conduct that formed the basis for the sanction. In cases involving officers and managing employees, the statute includes a no knowledge element. The OIG therefore has the authority to exclude every officer and managing employee of a sanctioned entity.â€ says Formato.

â€œAs a practical matter, the OIG does not intend to exclude all officers and managing employees,â€ Formato notes. â€œBut where the evidence supports the fact that a managing employee knew or should have known of the conduct, the OIG will probably operate with a presumption in favor of exclusion.â€

â€œAbrams FenstermanÂ has one of the largest health care legal practices in New York state, representing approximately 125 nursing homes, a large number of medical groups and individuals in a variety of complex health care-related matters,â€ saysÂ Howard Fensterman, Managing Partner of Abrams Fensterman.

â€œSome of our clients include physicians, medical societies, ambulatory surgery centers, diagnostic and treatment centers, hospitals, imaging facilities, dentists, podiatrists, chiropractors, early intervention agencies and other health care providers,â€ Fensterman notes.

â€œThis experience has led to our health care lawyers lecturing at bar associations, professional organizations, hospitals and colleges. At these meetings and through direct communications, Pat Formato and I, along with our entire senior health care-specialist team, will be underscoring what is clearly an environment of increased enforcement on the part of the OIG that is specifically related health care fraud. We want our clients to be proactive, diligent and aggressive so as to prevent legal action against their health care entities and the possibility of beingÂ sued and personally excluded from future participation in the industry,â€ says Fensterman.