Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
While not every mishap requires a lawyer, there are some cases which will. These include accidents where you may have sustained permanent or serious injury. In such a scenario, a talented attorney can make a world of difference and can help you get the compensation you deserve.
Since no two accidents are the same, how do you decide whether your situation requires a lawyer or not? Well, here are some scenarios in which the services of a personal injury lawyer can prove invaluable. Let’s take a look.
In cases where you were permanently disabled or seriously injured in a mishap, you certainly need an attorney. Serious and permanent injuries can cause suffering, pain, and ongoing bills. Some common serious or permanent injuries include but aren’t limited to:
If the accident has led to a permanent disability or an injury requiring long-term care as suggested from the list above, the services of a lawyer could be your only way to avert severe, long-lasting financial burden.
Assigning fault in an accident involving multiple parties is rarely straightforward. Consequently, without a lawyer representing you, there’s a good chance you may lose your case. Some examples of accidents involving multiple parties include:
If you’ve experienced any of the above, it’s a good idea to consider hiring an experienced attorney. They’ll be able to handle multiple insurance carriers and get you the compensation that’s yours.
Assigning fault in an accident involving multiple parties is rarely straightforward.
Have you suffered damage due to medical negligence? If so, it’s important to see legal advice as soon as possible.
The law dictates these types of claims should be made within a specific time period. You’ll need to seek advice from your lawyer about when to inform the doctor, hospital, or provider in question about the claim. Medical negligence can be in the form of:
These are just some that can occur. Overall, a medical negligence claim tends to be complex, technical, and long-drawn-out, so hiring an attorney is a necessity.
A workplace injury can be quite overwhelming or even fatal. Generally, lifestyle changes are required, and medical bills may strain your finances. Some workplace injuries include:
Typically, in a workplace injury claim, you need to address two fronts: your employer and your insurance company. While your employer may be likely to deny their liability to avoid paying the compensatory damages, your insurance carrier may try to avoid responsibility by paying as little compensation as possible.
[ymal]
So how can make you the best of a bad situation? Consulting an experienced personal injury attorney after a workplace injury is a good starting point. They’ll be able to advocate your case and get you the best results possible.
Do you want to settle the case out of court but believe the offer made by the other party is far less than you deserve?
In cases like this, you can try negotiating more compensation with the insurance company in question—but these companies tend to play hardball. They may use aggressive tactics and technical jargon to confuse you into agreeing to something you may not understand or want.
Hiring a lawyer to help you understand your situation with out-of-court settlements can give you the edge you need to win. People who hire lawyers win five to seven times more out-of-court compensation cases than those who don’t.
As you can see, dealing with a personal injury claim by yourself is anything but easy. While you may be able to win by representing yourself, a personal injury lawyer can help ensure you get nothing less than what you deserve. They can also take the stress of the legal process off your shoulders.
Below, we explore the differences between a car accident and a truck accident, highlighting the aspects that make truck accidents so complicated.
Vehicle size is one of the factors used by insurance companies to calculate the cost of coverage. Truck policies can be worth up to 40 times more than passenger vehicle policies. Thus, many insurers would do anything to escape liability in the event of an accident, meaning you are less likely to recover damages if the at-fault party is a commercial truck driver.
Without a seasoned truck accident attorney, you may not receive the compensation you deserve. There are many factors to consider when calculating a claim’s worth that an attorney who is not familiar with truck accidents may not fully understand.
Additionally, semi-truck lawyers know all the tactics used by insurance adjusters to exploit victims. A first offer may seem good when it is actually far below what a court would have awarded. Sometimes victims are coerced into admitting liability, oblivious of the impact it will have on their claim. If you are involved in an accident of this kind, you should learn all you can about how a truck accident attorney can help with your case.
Without a seasoned truck accident attorney, you may not receive the compensation you deserve.
Most commercial trucks do interstate deliveries, meaning trucking companies have to register with the Department of Transportation and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
Some of the trucking industry regulations include annual inspections, special driver qualifications, and truck maintenance rules. These truck-specific regulations are among the elements that create a platform for complexity in the claim-filing process.
Statistics by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration show that truck accidents cause between 3,000 and 5,000 deaths every year. Typically when a victim loses their life in an accident, fault determination becomes more laborious, and the whole legal process becomes drawn-out. It is best that whoever is filing a wrongful death claim hires an accident attorney to conduct independent investigations for them instead of relying on the findings of the potential at-fault party.
[ymal]
Due to their size and weight, trucks are often harder to control or stop when there is an emergency. This creates room for mistakes and increases the chances of the truck ramming into other vehicles on the road. The involvement of several cars makes it more challenging for investigators to determine fault and expedite the victim compensation process. Many accident cases involving trucks end up in court for this reason.
Now you know why compensation claims for truck accident victims are so complicated. Always have an attorney by your side when pursuing damage recovery following a truck accident. An attorney will navigate the legal process more smoothly and negotiate a fair compensation amount for you.
The UK Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed an appeal by credit card companies Visa and Mastercard, upholding an early Court of Appeal ruling that multilateral interchange fees (MIFs), which are set by the card companies and charged to retailers each time a credit or debit card purchase is processed, breach both UK and EU competition law.
The case was originally brought by retailers Sainsbury’s, Asda, Argos and Morrisons in 1992, and Mastercard and Visa’s appeal was heard over four days in January this year. After three separate rulings on the issue in lower courts and tribunals produced different results, the Supreme Court chose to uphold the Court of Appeal’s finding in 2018 that the MIFs charged in the Visa and Mastercard payment card schemes were unlawful.
Kate Pollock, head of competition litigation at Stewarts, the firm representing Morrisons, Asda and Argos, commended the decision. “The fixing of interchange fees by Mastercard and its network members over many years was an unlawful infringement of competition law,” she said in a statement, adding that her clients "look forward to a swift resolution of the matter without further delay.”
Visa said that it was “disappointed that the Supreme Court did not agree with the previous High Court ruling that Visa’s UK interchange complies with competition law.”
Meanwhile, a Mastercard spokesperson said that the Supreme Court’s decision was “not a final ruling,” and that the issues would be raised in further court hearings, which “will most likely take place in 2021.”
As lockdown is slowly lifted, law firms will be looking to get back into business and onto an even keel as swiftly as possible. However, they will also probably be looking to cut costs to do so.
This needs to be balanced with the knowledge that certain types of work are likely to be more abundant than others in the immediate aftermath of lockdown. For example; commercial leases and contracts, tenancy agreements, general contractual disputes, divorce and family law, probate, will writing, employment contract, and company mergers and acquisitions, etc. These are areas you want to be sure you can service effectively and profitably from the minute your doors open again for business.
However, some of these areas are at the lower end of the fee scale and may not be work you generally focus on. Perhaps in the past they haven’t been profitable enough to form a key part of the business, but with demand likely to be high, now might be the time to reconsider.
[ymal]
So, what can you do if your firm does not employ (or is unable financially to employ) sufficiently experienced individuals in these areas? This is where outsourcing to a local licenced paralegal may solve the problem. NALP licenced paralegals specialise in one or two legal areas and will not be as costly to employ on a contractual basis as a qualified solicitor. As many have their own paralegal practice, it’s possible either to outsource or sub-contract the work to them, while keeping the management (and profits) in-house.
Over the next few months there is likely to be a rush of small low-end legal matters, like small claims, contractual disputes and tribunal matters. Access to legal advice and help may be too costly via conventional routes like paying a fee to a solicitor for matters such as general contractual advice, matrimonial assistance, hiring and firing staff (employment contracts), renting or leasing private accommodation or commercial units, collection of debts or minor civil disputes. All of these can be dealt with, at a much lower rate, by a NALP Licenced Paralegal Practitioner.
It therefore makes sense to utilise the services of a NALP paralegal or two and ensure you win that business. By offering these services at an affordable rate and then outsourcing to a paralegal, you can increase your profits without the risk of taking on more staff or making a long-term commitment. The rest of your team can then continue to earn the bigger fees while the smaller jobs tick along and pay the bills. In addition, these new lower paying clients today may well be tomorrow's higher paying business.
Over the next few months there is likely to be a rush of small low-end legal matters, like claims, contractual disputes and tribunal matters.
As a law firm, if you’re looking to use the services of a paralegal there are a few things to look out for:
There is no doubt that paralegals can play a big part in getting the legal sector back on its feet quickly and helping to ensure it’s in a position where they can thrive once more.
Amanda Hamilton is Chief Executive of the National Association of Licenced Paralegals (NALP), a non-profit Membership Body and the only Paralegal body that is recognised as an awarding organisation by Ofqual (the regulator of qualifications in England).
The ruling delivered on Monday relates to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination based on “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,” but does not explicitly mention sexual orientation or gender identity as protected classes.
The prohibition of discrimination based on sex, however, was interpreted by the Court as sufficient justification to extend the Act’s protections to homosexual and transgender individuals.
“An employer who fires an individual for being homosexual or transgender fires that person for traits or actions it would not have questioned in members of a different sex,” judge Neil Gorsuch wrote in his opinion.
The ruling is being hailed as a watershed moment for civil rights, guaranteeing protections for more than 7 million LGBT+ individuals in the United States. It is also the first time that the Supreme Court has spoken directly about legal protections for transgender individuals.
Roy T. Englert, a Washington appellate lawyer who wrote an amicus brief in the case, commented on its significance. “As of today, nowhere in the United States is it legal to fire someone for being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. That’s a big deal.”
The decision also stands in contrast to the announcement of the Trump administration last Friday that it is eliminating Obama-era regulations prohibiting discrimination against transgender individuals in healthcare.
Legal practice isn’t going to return to “normal” in the near term. Legal firms, providers and in-house legal departments are evolving and adapting to this new landscape, where the risks are increasing (employment policies, vendor obligations, privacy), but so is pressure to drive efficiency. Essentially, the mandate is do more, but do it differently.
In the current environment, legal teams must move fast, be nimble and employ the right skill sets. This will require a different way of thinking about ‘legal’ roles and considering the creation of diverse career paths. M.E. Reidy, UK General Manager at Axiom, explains the changes we can expect to see in the legal sector.
Historically, the legal profession has focused on, and competed over, how to identify, attract and retain talent. Yet for decades the way the industry has approached recruiting and professional development activities has stifled diversity, inclusion, and innovation.
Now is the time for the industry to reimagine and restructure. This is beyond changing recruiting efforts to target a more diverse pool of talent from a wider net of law programmes – though an important step. We’re talking about reimagining the idea of what working in the legal sector means.
Expertise has long been the barometer for what makes a good lawyer good. But now the bar is higher. Lawyers need to be lawyers+. They need to have the business acumen to understand how to not only drive revenue, but also how to balance risk. It’s about understanding the business’ strategy and complementing it with an appropriate legal strategy; it’s creating a commercial partnership while keeping one eye on the potential legal pitfalls.
Expertise has long been the barometer for what makes a good lawyer good. But now the bar is higher.
Alongside this pivot to commercial partnership, forward-thinking legal teams will augment their practices with non-lawyers, bringing a different skill set and value to the business. In fact, these allied legal professionals, such as project managers, data analysts, business analysts and financial managers, will play a critical role and significantly influence the effectiveness of legal teams in the future. Incorporating this kind of talent will be an investment. It will require the segmentation and unbundling of legal work to identify what work will benefit from a different type of expertise and/or process management. It will require having open, and potentially painful conversations about inherent inefficiencies and mean ceding control on certain project aspects.
But the result will be worth it. Broadening the make-up of the legal team will enable greater adaptability, creativity and productivity. It will allow employers to gain insights from multiple perspectives, deliver beyond siloed expertise and will naturally bring a more diverse group to the table, providing better legal and business outcomes. An additional consideration in the diversification of roles is understanding how to deploy fee-earners into new roles to build their skill sets, or potentially hiring for alternative skills, rather than sector experience.
The legal sector needs to reconsider how to attract the right kind of workforce, to best position itself for this new paradigm. Part of this is offering access to alternative career paths vs. the traditional legal model, such as training and apprenticeships in place of law school, or an increase in in-house apprenticeships, instead of law firm training contracts.
[ymal]
‘Partner or bust’ is an outdated rallying cry that has caused younger generations of lawyers to step away from the industry or seek a different path within it. This break with tradition will only accelerate post-pandemic, as lawyers experience not only a virtual workplace, but a growing awareness that there may be greater efficiency to be had in how work is managed and allocated. This distance has allowed for reflection on what’s next, professionally, and personally. An interest to work in law remains, but now is paired with a curiosity to explore other careers within the sector - the power of data, the clear benefit of strong project management will be ‘side effects’ of the pandemic and are career paths in their own right. Repurposing a legal skill set to bring a new value to the legal team will see growing demand. What will separate the forward-thinking teams is the ability to maintain and effectively realign talent into non-traditional, yet pivotal commercial roles.
As new careers within law take root, the importance of pedigree and provenance will give way to a focus on collaboration, agility, experience, results and competency. The legal sector’s efforts towards embracing new models to improve the effectiveness of its teams and promote and support lawyer empowerment, flexibility and choice, as a result, will need to accelerate.
Legal organisations must look at how their business is structured, how legal work is done and how their talent is utilised. By offering career models that are rooted in self-determination, and flexibility, and a culture that champions diversity and inclusion, the legal industry can improve productivity, deliver more well-rounded client service, and future proof their organisations.
Several major law firms have announced plans to observe the Juneteenth holiday, either by allowing staff to take a paid day of leave or by closing their offices entirely.
These firms include Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Debevoise & Plimpton; Ropes & Gray; Dechert; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Sidley Austin.
Skadden was one of the first firms to make the announcement, with managing partner Eric Friedman sending a company-wide email to inform staff that Juneteenth would be recognised as a firm-wide holiday.
“It was in 1865, on June 19th, that enslaved black people in Texas learned that the Civil War had ended and that they were free, more than two years after the effective date of the Emancipation Proclamation,” Friedman wrote.
“We hope this day will provide an opportunity for us to pause from our daily routines to reflect on issues around racism and its impact on our country.”
Skadden was also one of the earliest law firms to issue a statement on the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police, which sparked weeks of protests across the US and the world.
Activists are continuing to push for greater recognition of Juneteenth, including its potential designation as a national holiday and official recognition by Wall Street and the New York Stock Exchange.
The way we work is changing. ONS reported that only 5% of the UK workforce worked from home on a regular basis in 2019, whereas now this is almost 50% of the workforce and most office workers. What does this mean for city firms post-pandemic? Is it the end, or a reimagining? Patrick McCrae, CEO of ARTIQ, one of the UK’s foremost art consultancies, offers his opinion on the continued necessity of physical offices.
Coronavirus, in spite of its damage to the global economy and our physical and mental health, is ushering in a change that has been afoot for some years: that of purposeful work. Those firms who can re-emphasise their purpose to all stakeholders will thrive as the best legal candidates assess how their employers reacted during this crisis.
The new reality we find ourselves in is generating some serious questions: Why do I work? Why do I work for this legal firm? Why am I exchanging my time for money with this specific company? This is fundamentally a question of company culture, which is, without regular human interaction and with restricted funds, being tested to breaking point in many city firms.
Following the slow easing of lockdown, it will be increasingly important to have a place to not just work, but to talk, to socialise, and fundamentally, to humanise the legal work we do. The office could evolve from a place of work to the physical and cultural hub of a legal business.
[ymal]
Many firms exist for more than just profit, and for those businesses the office is already representative of company culture – how the business and those who work within it perceive themselves. In the office this often means excellent facilities and design. One of the many ways to signal this is through artworks.
Many of ARTIQ’s legal clients use art collections as a tool for employee engagement. An APPG study found that 60% of people believe art helps them to work more productively and another recent study discovered that individuals work 30% more quickly in workspaces they have had agency in curating themselves. Art can therefore be used to reassert company values.
For example, lawyers Mayer Brown, as part of the changing art collection earlier this year, chose to curate an entirely female and non-binary collection of artists in their client suite to emphasise their support of International Woman’s Day and the work they have been doing around breaking the glass ceiling. Global law firm Herbert Smith Freehills have, for almost a decade now, sponsored the Graduate Art Prize with ARTIQ where the best emerging artists are supported through a group show, mentorship and a cash prize. Their clients and staff alike enjoy art in the offices, but are also reminded of Herbert Smith Freehills’ desire to support emerging talent in the art world as well through their trainee intake and entrepreneurial business, both in their clients and their partners. This is one of the many things legal firms can do to underline their values and purpose.
Many firms exist for more than just profit, and for those businesses the office is already representative of company culture.
It has already been widely reported that we are entering a global mental health crisis as a species, with 80% of adults in Great Britain concerned about the impact of coronavirus on their lives. The global lockdown has created often confusing rules about our private lives, widespread isolation and concern for our heath and the health of our family, friends and colleagues. Business-saving schemes such as the furlough scheme (that 79% of firms are using) have also shaken our sense of financial security. 61% of workers rated their wellbeing positive before lockdown restrictions, dropping to 35% since lockdown has been in place.
For lawyers, whether significantly or not, working from home – sometimes in isolation, sometimes with our families, sometimes with flatmates, occasionally in our purpose-built home offices – has been at times productive, and at times plain awful. Minimal social interaction to structure a day and the omnipresence of our home office set-ups means we’re working 20% longer hours.
It would be ignorant to argue that having a nice office is a magic cure or that mental health issues didn’t exist before lockdown. However, an office that is well-designed, offering a place to socialise and be reminded of company culture, and that is full of art and engagement opportunities, will help. The benefits are tangible: in 2017 the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Arts, Health and Wellbeing in the UK published a comprehensive report collating research showing an undeniable positive link between art and mental wellbeing.
With data showing that after engaging with the arts, 82% of people reported greater wellbeing and 77% engaged in more physical activity, the benefits of art and wellbeing are undeniable. Art is one of a menu of items the cultural hub could offer its staff.
An example of ARTIQ's work with Mayer Brown.
Indeed, already half of all office users believe that artwork makes them more effective at their job, while 61% believe that art inspires them to think and work more creatively. 82% of people consequently believe that artwork is an important addition to the workplace. These stats show how legal employers can help their staff be happier and more engaged.
In terms of clients, with more people working from home, offices are likely to become a key point of difference for businesses wanting to communicate their messaging and purpose to clients, engage employees, and attract new talent. There should be joy in going to the office. A reminder for staff, in the wake of some serious shake-ups of headcount, that they are working for a stable and purposeful legal business. We foresee an attitudinal shift after lockdown, with firms taking a greater interest in how they utilise the office, and how to foster company culture with people increasingly working remotely.
While there is no doubt home working is here to stay, flexibility is vital – holding the office as a legal hub, a central space for people to go and meet their co-workers and their friends, for company culture to be reasserted, for purpose to be underlined, and for those people whose time we are asking for to know that it’s all actually worth it. Legal firms should seriously consider the benefits of the office before they cut into that overhead, weighing equally the need to keep budgets under review with the transformative agency that activated offices have on our wellbeing and business culture.
Plaintiffs Radiya Buchanan, Ann Dagrin and Lindsay Field, represented by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP, have filed a federal lawsuit against several Trump administration officials for actions taken by law enforcement in dispersing a crowd of protestors in Lafayette Park so that President Trump could attend a photo-op at a nearby church.
President Donald Trump, Attorney General William Barr, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Secret Service Director James Murray, US Park Police Acting Chief Gregory Monahan and DC National Guard Commanding General William Walker, are each named as defendants in the case (no. 1:20-cv-01542). All are sued in both their official capacities and personal capacities, with the exception of President Trump, who is sued only in his official capacity.
In addition to the individuals named above, the lawsuit also names “John and Jane Does Nos. 1–50” as “members of the federal law enforcement agencies who were present in Lafayette Park on the evening of June 1, 2020, and authorized, planned, and participated in the violent attack.”
The lawsuit alleges Bivens damages, ultra vires conduct in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, and violations of the plaintiffs’ First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.
In the introduction to the complaint, the plaintiffs’ attorneys describe the administration’s ordering of law enforcement to clear away protestors with tear gas and pepper balls as “a gross abuse of executive power that violated First Amendment free speech rights, Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable force, Fifth Amendment due process rights, and long-standing federal law prohibiting use of such military force on domestic targets.”
The case has not yet been assigned to a judge.
On Thursday, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issued a fine of £64,046,800 to Lloyds Banking Group for failing to deliver fair treatment of mortgage customers.
The FCA said that Lloyds Bank, Bank of Scotland and The Mortgage Business (brands all owned by Lloyds Banking Group) did not obtain enough information to properly assess mortgage customers in payment difficulties or arrears, potentially delivering unfair treatment to more than a quarter of a million customers between 2011 and 2015.
Compounding the issue, cuts by the bank meant that most call handlers dealing with customers in mortgage arrears were new to their role and unable to consult more experienced staff.
Mark Steward, the FCA’s executive director of enforcement and market oversight, said in a statement: “Banks are required to treat customers fairly, even when those customers are in financial difficulties or are having trouble meeting their obligations.”
“Customers should still pay what is owed, but banks are obliged to treat their customers fairly when making new payment arrangements,” he continued, adding that other firms should “take notice” of the FCA’s actions and ensure fair treatment of their own customers.
A Lloyds Group spokesperson said: “We have contacted all customers who were affected between 2011 and 2015 to apologise and have already reimbursed all who were charged fees at the time. Customers do not need to take any action.”
