I believe that that people are not cheap by nature and feel that they spend money based on priorities.

This helps to explain why people are more willing to splurge on family vacations instead of fancy food. Many will be willing to spend a lot on computer hardware but will choose open source or free software for their machines. And some will actually spend huge amounts of money on a car but will scrimp on the insurance. It is all really about priorities.

Interestingly, health is one of those things that are low on the priority list. Perhaps it is because so many people take their health for granted; they do not attach a high value to it. That is, until they are in danger or losing it.

It is for this reason that most people do not set aside budgets for health. They may set aside money for a vacation, a computer, and a car, but not for health insurance or even things like vitamins. So it is no surprise that when they are victims of medical negligence, they have absolutely nothing set aside for treatment.

This is where the benefit of no win no fee medical claims come in. It is designed so victims of medical negligence do not have to go out of their way to realign their budgets in order to pay for medical expenses they never should have had in the first place.

Under a no win no fee arrangement, victims can hire a lawyer and never have to worry about paying his legal fees because if the case wins, it is the other party that foots the bill. And if the victim should lose the case, they still do not have to pay their lawyer because that is part of the agreement.

By going through no win no fee medical claims, victims can continue with their lives. They can continue to work with their priorities, which means not having to tighten budgets for their vacations, computers, cars, and other items that make life worth living.

Many lawyers underestimate the role of willpower in winning No Win No Fee claims. These laborers of disputation rely too much on abstruse theories and principles, forgetting that these principles and theories do not work absolutely. Yes, unlike natural law, the claiming process will only work with active and positive human intervention. Without human minds to think about them and human bodies to act on them, the rules of jurisprudence would cease not just to work, but to exist altogether.

The confusion, in other words, is engendered by thinking that jurisprudence is like the natural sciences. It comes about when we think that it has rules which can be reduced to definite, abstract laws, applicable everywhere and every time, just like the laws of gravity and of thermodynamics. But this is incorrect. For the science of jurisprudence, assuming it to be a science at all, has for its subjects of inquiry human beings, beings who possess properties which no one has yet been able to explain fully. What philosophers and metaphysicians inform us about human nature can be condensed into one line: so long as human beings have free will, they will forever resist compartmentalization. In other words, human nature is impossible to define with scientific precision. To make it as the basis of any science therefore, will only end in futile speculation.

Thus, jurisprudence is an open game. Claiming No Win No Fee lawsuits being a part of this department, shrewdness will have its respective effects when applied properly to it. As filing lawsuits leave much space for human ingenuity, as it is not a closed system trapped by walls of irrefutable and really scientific theorems, strategizing and planning well will reward claimants.

And so will the belief in one’s inevitable victory. Willpower and self-confidence, in short, have many roles to play in winning claims. In fact, I have seen in the past claimants whose claims were not as meritorious as they insisted but nevertheless won their cases out of sheer persistence. On the other hand, I have also seen claimants with Goliaths of a case, virtually impossible to lose, but nevertheless did lose, because the gargantuan merits of their claims were presented with the puny and nervous personalities of their claimants.

Here are some tips on how to prevent work accidents. It can be applied to any industry. Read on and make sure to practice in your workplace.

Obey the law.
Sounds so stiff and commanding? No not at all! It’s a reminder that will spare lives from an accident. It sounds simple. It is easier said than done. But it’s worth it. Follow the health and safety law and it will help prevent accident.

Both employer and employee need to dance in tango. What? Dance in tango? It takes two to tango. So both parties need to dance with the music. The first one needs to be responsible to provide a safe and healthy place for the second. Employees should follow to avoid accident. Training should be provided and should be attended. Safety clothing should be worn, maintained and stored. Good housekeeping can make a difference. A simple cleaning of wet floor will save someone from slipping. Simple yet it can be an extra ordinary task.

Get organised.
Many work accidents happen because people are disorganised.  Things like cluttered cable, crumpled carpet, scattered tools on the floor, messed up table and supplies thrown on the floor. These are obstruction that might harm individuals. If only the workers have an attitude of returning items after use or organizing all the materials, it will not injure others. Store all the materials properly so that it won’t scatter around. Organise everything from paper clips to big boxes.
 
Be careful all the time.
Always be careful. It’s a piece of advice that is meaningful. Being considerate of others counts a lot. One should not be selfish to think not only of himself but also take care of others. This applies to all industries working in the office, retail, food service, manufacturing, mining, transport and many others. If a worker is irresponsible, others might be affected by his negligence. If a machine was not maintained properly, the next person might hurt himself if it’s defective. 

Obey, organize and careful – three words that can be helpful to the working people. Go on and try to practice it. It’s effective.

Work, work and more work. Where do you fit in? Are you willing to take risks?

Can you stand the sight of blood and work irregular and long hours? Then you can be a healthcare professional such as a doctor, nurse, physiotherapist or surgeon.

Is it ok with you if you take orders from a demanding customer in the restaurant? You can work as food service staff that runs to and from taking orders and delivering food to the customer in a restaurant or hotel. Sadly, they receive low pay.

Do you have a compassionate heart and willing to listen to the stories of abused kids and families? Are you willing to help them with their needs? You can fit in as a social worker who is kindhearted.

Are you creative with wide imagination? You can be an artist or an entertainer.

Are you willing to teach and loves children? A teacher is an appropriate job for you.

Do you know that administrative support staff taking instruction from a superior and work unpredictable days? You might want to work that way

Is it okay with you to always fix what is broken and work long hours? That’s what the job of maintenance staff.

Truly, these occupations perform challenging tasks that is physically demanding, emotionally exhausting and financially challenging. Their work is risky and may encounter an accident at work in the UK. They need to have enough strength to carry out their duty and take an extra care to avoid getting injured. 

As a breadwinner they need to sacrifice to provide for their family. As an employee they need to fulfill the task and follow rules. As a citizen they need to be law abiding citizen and not only protect themselves but others also.

A healthcare worker should be careful with his job so as not to be charged of medical negligence. A food service staff should be careful in running to and from to avoid slip or trips especially in wet area.  A maintenance staff needs to be alert all the time to prevent any injury whilst working on a difficult job. Taking extra care can make a difference.

Of course observing people is fun. If only we could see, really see, the things that we do to others and to ourselves, then I wonder if we could ever be interested in watching reality shows or movies ever again.

Take those who are demanding No Win No Fee claims, for example. Before their accidents they were usually happy-go-lucky people, the sort of people you usually predict leading mean and women of books ought to be. Always thinking that life is all for the good, that God will prohibit anything bad to happen, especially to them, and expecting things to always go on as planned, they become traumatized the moment these frames of mind are crushed by an injurious accident.

I would not have commented on them, except for the fact that after their accidents, I see them to undergo several psychological transformations, the end of which is to make me wonder if I could ever consider their new broken and hurt identities to be similar to the ones before.

This is what I mean. As if they were in denial, not really in a kind of understanding of how the world works, their injuries completely shatter their worldviews. Unlike people who are not so optimistic in life, these cheerful people after their accidents almost always lapse into a morose cynicism. It was as if the short moment of the injurious accident contained years and years of maturity that forced itself onto their consciousness without their having expected it.

Yes, that is probably the right term. That is, people who are recovering from an injurious accident and decide to file No Win No Fee claims experience not so much a learning process, but an aging process. They simply grow old.

This is what unperceptive people fail to realize. When they talk to people recovering from an injurious accident, they should not look at them as if they were still substantially who they were before the incident. Far from it, they should look at them as new individuals, as beings who have felt a dark enlightenment and forced to modify their old personalities to suit their new realities.

The day I quit from law school is the day I won my life back. You see I’ve been a consistent honors student ever since pre-school until my days in college. I was a solicitor after I graduated and decided to pursue my studies in the law to become a barrister.

My whole life was ahead of me. I could see myself being called up by important people asking for legal advice, given special treatment wherever I may go, and most of all, earn a hefty paycheck every time I win a case. Who knows? I may have even been elected to Parliament.

Nevertheless, I cut my dream short the moment we talked about car accident claims in class. We talked about this case, the name of which I refuse to divulge, in which the person who was injured by a rushing van lost his car accident claims. As I found out, since he was the one who was technically at fault since he was crossing the road not at the pedestrian lane or by looking carefully at the road, he did not merit the compensation he was asking for. The person who injured him, who happened to be quite an obnoxious man, even had the gall to demand him afterward, arguing that being demanded a claim against was “emotionally traumatic.”

That was the time I knew I was not fit to be a barrister. This is not because I am squeamish at all. I have three pet tarantulas and I recently bought a new bulldog. Rather, my problem was with the legal interpretation which our justice system takes for granted. Apparently, in the positivist tradition, the tradition which largely dominated our country’s jurisprudence, the law must be followed to the letter, except in extreme cases.

The one which shocked me was not one of those cases. Thus, the injured person not being given a break by our lawyers, he had to suffer a legal defeat in addition to his physical pain. What bothers me about this is that it appears as though our legal system has lost touch with morality, as if we could dispense with the ideas of good and evil, so long as we obey the law literally. Moreover, it also seemed to me that our justice system has forgotten that the law is supposed to harmonize relations in society. This is not at all what I think it does.

So I left law school and started studying medicine. My parents, who are paying or my tuition, are not at all too happy about my change of heart. But I know deep inside, they love me too much to ever bear a grudge.

I understand that as I am not a lawyer, whatever it is that I have to say about lawyering and the courts will not be too convincing. But I used to be a claimant. Therefore, even if I might not possess the technical knowledge requisite in performing legal duties, I have had the experience of watching the same duties performed firsthand.

And from what I saw, our justice system is still far from perfect. Although it is public knowledge that our courts, because of their excruciatingly slowness, will require years to finish a case, this piece of information can only obliquely strike the heart. You must experience this maddening slowness for yourself before you can say that you truly understand it. And be outraged about it.

But I am not here to talk about the courts. Rather, I am here to offer some simple solutions to overcome the indignation which naturally rises up in the soul of any justice-seeking claimant whenever he contemplates our courts’ tortoise speed.

The first is to encourage legal advisors, especially No Win No Fee solicitors, not just to talk about their clients’ cases but to talk about their lives as well. Many such people are so concentrated on whether or not the claimant’s case has a chance in court that they forget to orient him as to what he should expect when he pursues his claim. My advice is simple: such advisors should make an effort to be extra-honest, the kind of honesty which will leave no room for obfuscation. Nothing could be more depressing and disorienting for claimants that the treatment some No Win No Fee solicitors today are now giving to them. Instead of being talked to as people, they are talked to as potential money-making schemes. Instead of understanding the pain of the client, surveying the emotional terrain so to speak, they jump straight onto the statistics and probability of winning, seeing in the people in front of them not people but pieces of meat that are either plump and juicy or old and dry.

Finally, such advisors should also not raise false hope in their clients. This is what happened to me. My solicitor told me that my case had a good chance of winning. Apparently, the courts thought otherwise. I lost quite a lot of money, but I don’t regret it. I like to think that I did not waste my money, but instead used it all up to buy experience in life.

How accident claims ever get to be completed at all has always been a wonder to me.

I am aware of course that injury claims get settled every day. Some plaintiffs, unable to bear the burden of a protracted lawsuit, choose to drop their cases altogether. Or this can happen to the defendant. There are cases too when the case gets settled by the court, after many rounds of procedure by personal injury lawyers.

It is in the last of these that I am interested in. As a philosophy major, I am infatuated with the idea of how the truth ever gets to the fore when people file accident claims.

For one thing, the claimant can only imperfectly understand the facts of his case. For he participated in it. He was not a spectator who could coolly judge of what really happened. More likely, his version of the event will be one that exonerates his guilt or negates it altogether.

Next, he will then be compelled by the system to talk about his imperfect version of the truth. This would not be a problem at all except language is an imperfect instrument in itself to transmit facts. In fact, I would even go so far to say that the moment we articulate facts, we subject them to the restrictions of grammar and so lose their authenticity.

But this is not all. As if transmitting his imperfect version of the truth using an imperfect instrument of communication were not enough, it must be added that this doubly problematic event is aggravated furthermore by the fact that the agent who will receive this corrupted information can only imperfectly understand it too. For lawyers will never be able to remember everything, nor will they be interested in everything that their clients say.

Finally, the imperfect knowledge which was transmitted imperfectly and received imperfectly will have to undergo one more round of communication. The lawyer, then, will have to represent his client to the defendant or the judge.

How much changed the truth will be after all of these events is truly something interesting. But alas, it seems only for us philosophy majors. Highly ironic that those who have least to do with claiming are the same people most interested in the truth. No puzzle is more enigmatic than reality.

I do not think it at all bad if anyone encounters trouble in his life.

This is not to say that I enjoy watching other people suffer. I once saw someone who had an accident on the street, an accident which he used as a basis for his personal injury claims. Unfortunately for him, his claims lost because the defendant was the local government, and well, nobody wins against the government.

But there was something else that he won though. He won his right to live. After the event, this man discovered that he had been taking his life for granted. He saw that more than caring for his family, his work, and his friends, he was only breathing and passing through his very existence. A sort of auto-pilot mode, if that makes sense. Not anymore.

As soon as he recovered from his shattered kneecaps, he asked himself what it was that he really wanted. He found out that he wanted to be community worker. So he quit his job writing speeches for sleazy politicians and applied for an opening at a non-profit organization specializing in giving free medical assistance to the poor. A sort of dignified charity work. He went there and won the position. Perhaps he also won his freedom. A passport out of the live he never wanted to live.

Troubles, as I see it, are not necessarily a bad thing. They are merely the short circuits which jolt the faulty wiring of our lives, reminding us that somewhere something needs to be fixed. And by us. Thus, troubles are the helpers we never positively acknowledge, and even detract. The tragedy of man lies in his inability to see who are his real friends and enemies.

Another time, I saw a person who was too shy to be around women. In his apprehension before going on the first date of his entire adult life, he crashed his vehicle and incurred whiplash. The person he crashed onto also incurred whiplash and filed personal injury claims against him. Mr. Shy Guy was forced to settle—and to cancel his date. But afterwards, realizing that his date still wanted to continue their forfeited night out, his confidence grew. It was as if, having encountered the worst thing that could have happened, and still be in “the game,” as he used to tell me, he discovered that maybe his car crash wasn’t such a bad thing after all.

That was what I was telling him all along. Troubles are the mirrors of our soul and the gateways of chance. They show us who we are not and who we can be.