Latest news with #ExpressSolicitors
ITV News
a day ago
- Health
- ITV News
Woman one of three suing health club after chlorine leak at swimming pool in Derbyshire
A 71-year-old woman is one of three people suing a health club for injuries after being exposed to excess levels of chlorine while swimming. Enid Hollingworth has not stepped into a pool since January, when a chemical leak at Clifford Health Club and Spa in Long Eaton, Derbyshire, left her struggling to breathe. 27 people were exposed to high levels of chlorine in the spa area of the building. Ms Hollingworth was one of four people who ended up in hospital. She said: "I was doing breaststroke and I was swimming underwater. So when I came up to take a breath, I just felt this toxic gas hit me on the side of my face and straight away, I couldn't breathe. "My lungs were burning, so I was coughing and choking. I managed to, I don't know how... I was begging and pleading for somebody to help me to make it to the bottom of the steps to get out of the pool." Ms Hollingworth still struggles to breathe and has been left with problems to her left eye. She said: "It took four months for the cough to go away completely and now I've been left with problems with my left eyelid, it's drooping. "When I wake up in the morning, it's barely open when my eye is tired. So now, I've got to have some surgery. "I've been referred to the ocular surgeons to have the eyelid lifted - all because I thought I was doing something to keep me healthy." Ms Hollingworth said she used to enjoy swimming: "I do have back problems. I've got scoliosis and osteoarthritis and that really eased some of the back pain for me, so it was really important. "I used to do it once a week, but I did 50 lengths of the pool, swimming really quite fast for my age and I enjoyed it. It was exercise that I felt was doing me a lot of good." Since the incident, Ms Hollingworth does not feel safe enough to enter a pool: "It's left me with far more back ache because I'm not able to loosen up my back by swimming. "It's left me feeling quite anxious about it, I would like to get back to the pool but I just don't feel that I can." Ahmed Jamad, from Express Solicitors, who represents the three chlorine leak victims, said: "We're taking legal action for personal injury. "The law around that is that they breached common law, duty of care and also a statutory duty of care under section two of the Occupiers Liability Act. "It basically imposes a duty on landowners and owners of the premises to ensure that any visitors on their lands or on their premises are kept reasonably safe, in the environment and not exposed to any sort of danger or hazards." Clifford Health Club and Spa said last month human error was to blame for the leak - and internal investigations are ongoing. Erewash Borough Council is continuing its own investigation.
BBC News
3 days ago
- Health
- BBC News
Woman takes legal action for chlorine exposure at spa
A woman has said she is taking legal action after being exposed to excess levels of chlorine while swimming at a pool in Derbyshire. Enid Hollingworth, 71, is one of four people taken to hospital after a chemical leak at Clifford's Gym and Spa in Regent Street, Long Eaton, on 7 Hollingworth said she was awaiting surgery on her eye as a consequence of the exposure and added "lessons need to be learned".The owner of the gym, Mark Clifford said internal investigations remained ongoing and it was "not therefore appropriate to provide any further comment". "I think it's important for everybody to feel safe when they go for a swim, when they think they are doing something healthy."People are dealing with very dangerous chemicals, chlorine is a very dangerous chemical, and I think it needs to be thoroughly looked into."It just can't be allowed to happen again to anyone else," Mrs Hollingworth said. Clifford Health Club and Spa said the leak in January happened after staff had failed to follow correct said there had been a build-up of dry chlorine in the pipework of a hydrotherapy pool which was undergoing Hollingworth is one of three people who are now seeking compensation. 'Held accountable' Ahmed Jarad, associate solicitor at Express Solicitors, said: "We were approached by three clients to take legal action under common law negligence and breach of section two of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957."Ultimately it's to make sure that this doesn't happen again to anyone else to make sure that the health club are held accountable."People expect to go to their local health club to better their health, not damage it, and I think unfortunately on this occasion that wasn't the case."Mrs Hollingworth, said she was struggling to get back into a swimming pool after the chlorine exposure left her with a four-month-long cough and problems with her left eye."I don't know how I'm going to react when I smell the chlorine, so I really don't have the confidence to go back to swimming and that was a big part of my fitness regime."I suffer from back pain and I have osteoarthritis arthritis and the swimming was really good but I still feel that I haven't got the courage to go back."Erewash Borough Council said its investigation into the leak was continuing.
BBC News
28-04-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Oxford judge raps 'costs padding' no win, no fee solicitors
A judge has characterised the work undertaken by a firm of no win, no fee solicitors as "costs padding" in the case of a three-year-old boy who was injured on a Farm, near Christchurch, Dorset, agreed to pay damages of £3,600 for the boy's cut lip, Oxford County Court District Judge Richard Lumb said there was a suspicion that the costs reported by personal injury firm Express Solicitors, who represented the boy, may have been "artificially inflated" in order to reach a firm, in Wythenshawe, Greater Manchester, said it offered good value, was clear about its charges and had not received any complaint from its client. Judge Lumb said the firm's accounts showed nearly 90 hours of work by 14 fee earners, "all at hourly rates which were very significantly higher than the SCCO [Senior Courts Costs Office] guideline hourly rates for Manchester". The incurred costs of £29,641.80 were way in excess of the £1,860 recoverable from the defendant, he judgement continued: "It would appear that the solicitors were prepared to undertake tens of thousands of pounds worth of work for which they were not going to be paid."Any objective observer would consider that to be a very odd way for solicitors to conduct business."The judge added: "The file reveals a considerable amount of duplication of work both by individual and other fee earners."There is also a considerable amount of non-progressive work undertaken that could properly be characterised as 'costs padding'."The judge said it raised a suspicion that the costs were overstated in order for the firm to ensure that its fee would reach a capped he said the cap would have been reached in any case, and the firm could claim a £900 success fee from the a statement, Express said its practice was to agree a maximum amount by way of a percentage deduction that clients would ever have to executive James Maxey said: "In this case the judge awarded the deductions but was somehow unhappy that the costs exceeded the pitifully low fixed costs."An awful lot of work was done but the contract limited the total charges to the client to an amount which ultimately the judge approved." You can follow BBC Dorset on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
