Fri, 1 May at 17:01
Dear Mr Panigrahi
Thank you for your email. My email to you did not confirm that Shoosmiths may apparently be dealing with your case- it was to explain and make clearer the process by which solicitors assess cases. It is for the individual solicitor to make this decision on whether they can provide legal representation.
For clarification and avoidance of any misunderstanding, I have provided you with details of solicitors who are accredited by AvMA in clinical negligence cases for you to seek advice on whether you have a claim relating to your psychiatric or other medical treatment. These details have not been provided in relation to employment claims or litigation relating to a blog and the solicitors I have given you details of do not specialize in such claims and therefore would not be able to consider taking you on as a client for such matters.
You made an enquiry to Fletchers which raised an issue of the adequacy of the warnings about medication and he responded that he is not a solicitor who deals with product liability claims.
I can give you some general information on such claims:-
Product Liability Claim/Group actions The Consumer Protection Act 1987 allows a cause of action for personal injury arising from a defective product. You do not have to show negligence however you do have to show that the product was defective, which has been defined as meaning ‘not what people are generally entitled to expect’. In general, even if a product causes an injury, even if these are of the utmost severity, this does not in itself mean that the product is defective. The main ways to show a drug is defective are to prove that there has been a fault in manufacture, or a design defect which was known or should have been known about. The absence of satisfactory warnings of side effects can also render the product unsafe, however, if the manufacturer conveys this information to an intermediary such as a doctor or pharmacist, this may be sufficient to discharge this duty. Claims under this legislation need to be made within three years but also have to be made within 10 years of the product coming on the market.
Again, you would have to prove that the defective product was the cause of the injury you allege, and this is to the civil standard (51%) and if this cannot be proved, then a claim will not proceed.
If you wish to find a solicitor to give you advice on such claims please see:-
I am sorry that the advocacy service is no longer responding to emails. I do not know the reason for this and cannot comment on what the Advocacy Service have done or not done to help you. The service should have a complaints procedure and should investigate if you have any concerns that things have not gone right with how they have helped you to raise your concerns. I am afraid that I cannot find their complaints procedures online but they should provide this on request.
T J Minns
From: Shan Panigrahi
Sent: 01 May 2020 05:50
To: Tracy Minns
Cc: Andrea Rusbridge ; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; Enquiries@ibblaw.co.uk; Enquiries ; Alice Barwell ; QB Issue & Enquiries ; LONDONSOUTHET ; Enquiries Central London County ; EATGeneral ; EATAssociates ; ON BEHALF OF Bobbie Yarwood-Unachukwu ; Wordpress Restore ; ServicesLegal (KENT AND MEDWAY NHS AND SOCIAL CARE PARTNERSHIP TRUST) ; Cedr Info ; PRACTICE Shah (NHS MEDWAY CCG) ; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; Phso Enquiries ; Lucinda Phillips ; Sheffield Road
Subject: Re: Your email copied to AvMA
Dear Tracy Minns
(Action Against Medical Accidents)
1. Thank you for confirming that out of the several solicitors that you provided me details of, Shoosmiths may now be apparently dealing with my litigation at the High Court in accordance with the attached: ToTrevorWard(FletchersLawFirm)30Apr2020b.docx that I did not receive a response to from Fletchers nor from the Queens Bench Judges Listing Office.
2. I fully accept your decision that Shoosmiths should have the right to do the investigation of risk assessment and let me have their reply in due course. In the meantime I am continuing with the medication until the new revised medication regime is clarified by the Mental Health authorities at the GP Surgery. I had informed Canada House that I was suspending these medication in because of a deteriorating physical and mental health and concerns about further impositions - I have once again vomited this morning after waking up at 4.00 am and so await the advice of Andrea Rusbridge on the next steps in the progress of this litigation in light of the renewed persecution from VOPA as shown in the attached FrVOPAshitbags30Apr2020.docx.
3. I have still not received any communications from ABS Solicitors (see ToABSSolicitors(LawFirm)29Apr2020.docx) nor from Anthony Collins (ToAnthonyCollins(LawFirm)30Apr2020.docx.
4. I fully understand now that Solicitors in the United Kingdom are free to take on a case or not take on as a business decision, and so their regulation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Legal Ombudsman are pointless lip service so that the citizen's approach to them has proven futile. I am accordingly copying this email to both these so-called authorities and the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution in light of the attached Dr Panigrahi SC1 Ack.pdf.
5. If I do not get a response from any of these solicitors by 10 am this morning, I will assume that I have no proceedings anywhere be that in the Employment Tribunals (Case No 2302960/2014 Panigrahi v Clearly Business Solutions Ltd & others) or the Central London County Court (Claim Number E35YM660) or the Queens Bench Division of the High Court (Claim Number HQ17X01773, and that my Blog https://shantanup.wordpress.com will never be restored by the Company.
6. If any of the above information and assessment are incorrect please let me know as soon as possible so that I do not resume my litigation in person (LIP) as stated by High Court Judge Amanda Tipples.
7. Dr Odesanya not only stopped me from contacting Julie Palmer of KMPT Complaints or viaduct for communications, Canada House state that they have no imformation whatsoever on a list of local Mental Health Solicitors whom I could contact. Medway and Swale Advocacy Partnership have not replied to my letters and emails it has not returned my complaint against Charles Stigant to Jill the Manager. PoHWER say that it is unable to represent me in Medway area.
8. I am copying this email to Lucinda Phillips to let her know that I am in the process of sending her the questionaire after 10 am that will finally see the end to this matter should I not get a considered reply to this email from any of the parities that I am copying this email to. I will then take my decision on whether to engage in any further communications with Dr Odesanya of Canada House.
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
3 Hoath Lane
Kent ME8 0SL
On Thursday, 30 April 2020, 17:01:26 BST, Tracy Minns wrote:
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi AvMA have been copied into an email to you sent to Shoosmiths solicitors.
I thought it may be helpful to write to you again and to more fully explain how solicitors assess which clients to take on. This was explained in the leaflet I sent you a link to in my first email to you:-
Making a claim for compensation -the tests and procedures you need to know about:- https://www.avma.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Legal-action-England.pdf
Solicitors firms are not obliged to offer legal representation or services to all people who approach them for help. On receipt of a request for legal help a solicitor should consider if the matter is one they have the specialist knowledge to assist with and if, with regard to the complexity of the matter, they have the capacity to take on the potential claim.
If they think that the case is outside their specialist knowledge or they lack capacity, they may not be able to take the matter any further but should inform you of this decision. If they do feel that they may be able to assist, they will carry out an initial risk assessment on any information you have to hand such as the complaints response or medical records, to see if they can take the case on. In order to move on to the next stage-the investigatory phase -they will have to assess that your case has at least a 50-51% chance of success and that it is a proportionate claim for them to be able to investigate. If they cannot reach this threshold, they may then be unable to take the matter further at that stage. They will not take action in relation to a case which has a less than 50% chance of success.
If they can assist the solicitor will then assess the funding options for the claim and discuss these with you and a contract between you and the solicitor would have to be agreed. Until this is done, the solicitor is not representing you and cannot therefore take steps such as issuing legal proceedings against any potential defendants.
In most cases this is not done until the initial investigation phase has been completed. If your case is taken on ( the technical expression is if a retainer is signed), the solicitor will then obtain a full copy of all the medical records and notes held by the doctors or hospitals concerned. The solicitor will often need to obtain copies of all the client's records even if they are not directly relevant to the claim. These must be checked carefully by the solicitor to ensure that no important documents are missing. These are then forwarded to an independent medical expert from the relevant field who will be asked to prepare an opinion on the case. In most cases, if the initial report is supportive, the solicitor will then need to obtain reports from other experts to ensure that all the relevant issues have been addressed. A barrister may then be instructed to provide an opinion on the strength or weakness of the case, and to advise on whether or not legal proceedings should be issued. It would be for the solicitor to assess the amount of compensation which can be claimed, and this often needs very careful assessment and expert and barrister’s input. It is not simply matter of selecting the highest amount of compensation which can be claimed. I hope that this makes the situation clearer for you as you need to have realistic expectations of what a solicitor may be able to do and what the system entails, or you are likely to be very disappointed with the process.
I am also concerned that you have mentioned to the solicitor that you are stopping taking medication including that being given for physical health reasons until they decide on whether to take on your case. This is not a consideration which the solicitor can have regard to in their decision making process or risk assessment on your case. Patients should generally only stop taking medication after consultation with their GP or specialist on the risks of abruptly stopping medication and the longer term health implications and I would suggest that you do not stop taking medication such as atorvastatin until you have followed manufacturers instruction in the patient information leaflet to speak to your doctor or pharmacist.
T J Minns
T J Minns-Senior Medico Legal Worker
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here.