On yer bike!

Everywhere you look you can’t help but notice the latest push for everyone to consider the environment and their own carbon-footprint. Environmentalists throughout the world are telling us that unless we take action now to save our planet there won’t be a planet left for our children. The drivers amongst us are all too aware that a litre of petrol has now passed the one pound mark and you would have to be living in a fuel’s paradise not to appreciate that oil is a finite resource. So why not try and do something to help by getting a push bike?

In 1999 the Finance Act introduced tax incentives for employers to provide employees with bicycles and accessories as a tax-free benefit. The exemption applies so long as bicycles are used, at least in part, for your journey to and from work. The Cycle to Work scheme is part of the Government’s initiative to promote healthier transport and reduce pollution. What could be healthier than cycling to work? It’s a great way to get some exercise and do your bit for our planet. It also avoids all the hassle of city parking and filling the parking meter with change.

Employees taking advantage of the scheme will save up to 50% of the retail purchase price of their chosen bicycle. You can opt for the salary sacrifice scheme and payment of the bicycle is by way of deductions to gross pay. This provides tax and national insurance savings for the employee and national insurance savings for the employer too.

But don’t forget the safety issues when using your bike. As a personal injury lawyer, I have to say helmets are a must but they only provide protection if they are sized and fitted correctly. If you are unfortunate enough to have a collision you should get your helmet replaced, even if it was just a minor blow. If you are uncertain about your cycling skills then get some practice in first away from busy city streets.

It’s also worth investing in some high visibility kit which can also be purchased under the scheme. You don’t want to find yourself in the position of Mrs Read, the 80 year old cyclist in the case of Read v Edmed. Mrs Read was straddling a `give-way’ line when she was knocked off her bike by Mr Edmund. It was a cold morning and unfortunately Mr Edmund had failed to clear his windscreen before driving off and had hi head out of his side window to get a better view of the road!

If you want to reduce your own carbon footprint and get some exercise into the bargain the Bike to Work scheme could be just for you .

Find out more about the Bike to Work scheme by calling Samantha Robson of Slee Blackwell Solicitors, Exeter on 01392 423000

ALL I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS…

Is there a better time to be a parent than at Christmas?

The answer to that question may depend upon your view of Christmas in the modern world; many people are understandably dismayed by the commercial product-fest that seems to arrive a little earlier each year.

For some, Christmas may provide an opportunity to reflect upon how a child has developed over the course of a year. Growth and maturity may be noticed with delight. The sophistication, expense and length of the annual “Christmas list” is more likely to be met with dismay!

Lawyers who work with children are often asked about the point at which a child’s wishes begin to be recognised in law as having a bearing upon decisions about their lives. Parents ask with some trepidation; children often ask with determination and, occasionally, with a glint in the eye.

In common with many questions about the law, the answer is not straight forward.

In most cases where courts are being asked to make decisions about a child, the child’s welfare is directed to be the court’s paramount consideration and this will sometimes result in a parent’s view being overridden.

A child’s wishes and feelings are also required to be considered, but the weight to be given to them can vary. Many people think there is a magic age at which a child’s views suddenly start to carry weight, but although age is relevant, the more important factor is the level of understanding and intelligence which a child is able to bring to bear in exercising a capacity to make considered decisions.

Parental rights are not absolute. In this sense the law reflects life, as parents gradually need to “let go” and empower their children to make their own decisions. The famous judge Lord Denning summed it up nicely when he described the right of a parent as:-

“…a dwindling right which the courts will hesitate to enforce against the wishes of the child, the older he is. It starts with the right of control and ends with little more than advice.”

“Sound advice” is unlikely to find its way onto many lists this December, but arguably, there is no better gift. Merry Christmas!

Legal 500 recognises Samantha

The latest edition of the prestigious Legal 500 has listed Slee Blackwell personal injury solicitor Samantha Robson as a specialist in women’s issues.

The 2008 directory refers to Sam’s niche practice “advising on claims related to cosmetic surgery, institutional sexual abuse, rape and sexual assault and date rape”.

Say’s Sam:

“I am delighted to be recognised for my work in this field. Women who find themselves in difficult and traumatic circumstances need to be able to access specialist legal advice and representation. The cases are often difficult, but when I am able to achieve a successful outcome I find it personally very rewarding.”

Samantha Robson can be contacted on 01392 429163 or at samantha.robson@sleeblackwell.co.uk

Purchase of Moorfield House

Care Concern (Leeds) Limited has made an asset purchase of Moorfield House nursing home for a total of £4.4m.
Care Concern (Leeds) Limited bought the assets of Moorfield House on the 17th of July 2007. Moorfield House is a residential care home on Fieldhouse walk, Leeds, with a long-standing contract with Leeds City Council to provide care and respite beds to the elderly and infirm. The Business was run by Spectrum Care Homes.

Emma Reed, partner of the Corporate commercial department of Slee Blackwell, 10 Cross Street, Barnstaple led the deal for the Buyer. Stephen Reed of S.M.Reed and Co acted for Abbey National PLC, who part funded the deal. Stephen Lopeman of Kuit Steinart Levy acted for the seller.
Emma Reed commented: "Slee Blackwell who have acted for the Directors of the Buyer for a number of years on a variety of transactions all,over the country, would like to take this opportunity of wishing them every success with their new acquisition."
Stephen Lopeman of Kuits Steinhart Levy acted for the vendors. ACQ

"Slee Blackwell who have acted for the Directors of the Buyer for a number of years on a variety of transactions all over the country, would like to take this opportunity of wishing them every success with their new acquisition,"

JJS acquires Ashley Manor

JJS Care Limited has acquired shares in ACG Management Limited, the company that runs Ashley Manor care home in Waterloo, Liverpool. The shares were bought for a total sum of £4.4m in June of 2007.
Ashley Manor is a family run business, owned by Mrs Joyce and her three daughters, and is being sold due to a retirement decision.
Currently, Ashley Manor has 75 residents housed in 61 single rooms and 6 double rooms, with a separate day care centre for up to 65 people.

Slee Blackwell assisted in the transaction with the team being led by partner of the Corporate/ Commercial team, Emma Reed. She commented:
"Slee Blackwell have national expertise and a wealth of experience to bring to any transaction and as we are based in the South West our overheads a~re low. We are therefore extremely competitive on price and offer the clients value for money with a tailored efficient service."
"The deal was a straightforward share purchase, however the freehold of the prol;>erty was held outside of the Company which neEessitated a simultaneous transfer of the freehold upon completion of the share acquisition and therefore a double charge to tax.
"We wish the directors of JJS Care Limited and all at Ashley Manor every success taking the business forward. ACQ

"Slee Blackwell have national expertise and a wealth of experience to bring to any transaction and as we are based in the South West our overheads are low" Emma Reed

Slee Blackwell V's North Devon Estate Agents

The Cricket Pavilion at Instow has stood since the late 1700’s but never in it’s 300 year history has it witnessed a battle like that fought by the gallant players of Slee Blackwell versus the North Devon Estate Agents & Surveyors XI. For while the collapse of the England squad may have caused despair for the cricket fan had they cast their eyes towards the estuary of the Taw and Torridge rivers instead, there would perhaps have been more than a glimmer of hope that this country still breeds talent.

The NDES XI took to the crease first and allowed Slee Blackwell’s fielders to warm up with a flurry of shots to the boundary and beyond. But then with their eye firmly in, bowling from Brett Lawrence and Paul Jordan in particular sent batsman after batsman scurrying back to the dressing room. Thirty overs later and the NDES XI declared.

In a time of ball tampering and match fixing the dirty tactics of asking Slee Blackwell to bat after tea was underhand and it was unfortunate that umpire Richard Smith of Phillips Smith and Dunn did not step in and cry foul. As it was, the fact that the team had to return to the field of play after sandwiches (two types - cheese and ham), cakes (chocolate and Victoria sponge) and scones (jam and cream) was unfortunate and next years Wisden will surely attribute this to the somewhat slower run rate.

The final score was not important. That the NDES XI were victorious is not the memory that those who witnessed the game took away with them. They will recall the five wickets taken by Andy Clarke of Clarke & Hood Financial Services or the wondrous thirty struck by Jeremy Gilham of Samuels. They will remember the glorious sunshine and sense of occasion and for those who took part they will always remember the difficult they had walking properly the following day.

Slee Blackwell would like to thank Roger Berry and Richard Smith FRICS of Phillips Smith and Dunn, Mark Cowling and Simon from Cowling Commercial, Andy Clarke from Clarke & Hood Financial Services, David Northridge MRICS from Abercorn Surveyors, Lester Bird MRICS from Passmore Wright & Co, David Edwards FRICS from John Smal and David Kivell. All of whom turned out for the NDES XI as well as Toby Barnes and Simon Allin from BHR, Jeremy Gilham from Samuels and John Gay from Wright Property Management who more than ably assisted the Slee Blackwell team.

CRIMINAL FOOLISHNESS?

On 24th April this year, a Mr Anthony Young from Gloucester made a small piece of legal history. He was awarded compensation by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) for injuries he had suffered a year earlier when his motorcycle had collided with a 12 year old boy, Robert Davis, who was playing "chicken" across the A4174 near Bristol.

Mr Young was completely innocent. He was riding well within the speed limit and perfectly properly. He could do nothing to avoid hitting Robert, who died from his injuries. Mr Young suffered serious injuries himself.

We have to assume that there was no insurance policy for the lad which might have provided compensation for Mr Young. There is no doubt that, at the age of 12, Robert knew how dangerous it was to play chicken on a busy A-road, and no doubt that he was negligent in law for doing so; but with no insurance fund at the end of the day, how could Mr Young and his lawyers hope to obtain compensation for him?

The novel answer was to apply to the CICA. This scheme provides compensation for those who suffer "criminal injury", which typically covers attacks where there is no realistic hope of obtaining compensation from the attacker; either because they cannot be identified, or because they have no assets.

Mr Young's solicitors argued that by knowingly running across the road, Robert had committed a "violent act" and that since Mr Young had been injured as a result, he was entitled to compensation from the CICA. The CICA accepted this argument, despite the scheme being quite clear that "criminal injury" means injury directly attributable to "a crime of violence". A CICA spokesman stated that Mr Young "…was the victim of 'reckless' behaviour on the part of the young boy and therefore entitled to a payment." He then went on to deny that this case was a legal landmark, saying that it had always been the case that a motorcyclist injured by the reckless actions of a pedestrian could claim compensation.

That is quite true, but such a claim would up to now have been possible only against the pedestrian personally. What makes this case special is that the CICA seems to have accepted that recklessness (that is, being wholly indifferent to the results of one's actions; or not even applying one's mind to the possible consequences) can be equated with criminal intent as far as the CICA scheme is concerned. Since crossing the road, even foolishly, is not a criminal offence and since it has to be assumed that Robert never intended to injure Mr Young, this new interpretation can only be a conscious decision to extend the scope of the CICA scheme and it will be interesting to see the results. At the very least, it offers a possible route to compensation for innocent victims injured by the recklessness of others, when those others have no assets to make it worth pursuing them personally.

Mike Clarke
Slee Blackwell Solicitors
01237 427921

Fatal RTA

A fatal traffic accident on the southbound M5 in Gloucestershire in April 2005 led to the death of 2 drivers and a particularly tricky claim for the family and other dependents of one of them. For reasons which will remain a mystery, both cars were travelling at speeds well in excess of 100mph, with only feet between them. They came into contact, both went out of control and left the hard shoulder, going down an embankment and hitting some trees. One of the drivers was our client, and he had not bothered to put on his seatbelt. He left behind a girlfriend of 4 years whom he was going to marry in June that year, a young son, his girlfriend's daughter whom he was going to adopt, a former wife with whom he was still on good terms, and a son from that marriage, who still enjoyed his company camping and fishing.
His earning history was patchy and we had hard work to put together a picture of just what his finances really were and how he spent his money between the various members of his families, who all had potential claims for compensation, since they were deprived of the benefit of his income for the future. To the layman, it may seem harsh that the claims of those innocent persons were reduced to reflect the undoubted part the dead man played in his own death, but the law is quite clear on that aspect. If the man had survived and pursued a claim against the other driver for his injuries, his compensation would undoubtedly have been significantly reduced to reflect his own partial blame for (a) driving far too fast; and (b) not wearing his seat-belt. The law states that any claim by a dependent of the deceased has to be reduced in the same way; logically, this must be right, since although innocent, the people left behind should not be in any better position over a claim than the deceased would have been himself.
The insurers of the other driver took a realistic approach in this case, despite the lack of evidence about earnings, and we secured a settlement worth £80,000. Sadly, because of the factors mentioned above, the deal was on the basis that both drivers were equally to blame for the crash, which meant only £40,000, half that overall value, was to be divided up between the dependents. A sad cautionary tale on the dangers of a moment's recklessness.

Exciting times in PI today......

Trussing chickens with elastic string is not "manual handling"- says the court of Session in Edinburgh. Joking apart, the 1992 Regs refer to "transporting or supporting a load" and the court felt that picking up a dead chicken for a moment to truss it did not fall within that definition.

This could have interesting implications for man hand injuries from small, occasional or modest moving of things. If anyone gets a bright young thing from NIG taking this line, I would be interested to know.
Hughes -v- Grampian Counrty Food Group Ltd, Time LR, 04/06/07

BANK TELLER INJURED IN FREAK ACCIDENT

A counter clerk at a North Devon NatWest bank miraculously escaped being blinded when a security device exploded in her face while she was serving a customer in July last year.

Her till contained a "raid bundle" of banknotes, concealing an explosive device and a special dye. Such bundles are designed to be handed to a robber in the event of a raid on the bank; when they are taken past the bank doorway, an electronic signal detonates the charge in the bundle, showering the criminal with dye which stains skin and clothing a bright pink colour.

A bank investigation was inconclusive, but it seems likely that the signal from a mobile 'phone or some other unshielded source operated the detonator, causing the bundle to explode.

Mike Clarke of Slee Blackwell's Bideford office, who is handling her claim, said,

"She was fortunate to be wearing spectacles, which probably saved her eyesight, but she suffered severe contamination of her eyes, acute pain and was unable to bear light for many weeks. We are awaiting expert medical opinion on the injury and hope she will escape any long-term damage. This is a unique accident in my 20 years of injury practice. The bank's insurers admitted liability with commendable swiftness, and both parties are now working towards an amicable settlement of the claim."

Mike can be contacted on 01237 427921; or at 12 Mill Street, Bideford; or at www.sleeblackwell.co.uk

Slee Blackwell fundraisers perform feats of heroism (or at least one does)

Erin Clarke, conveyancing assistant in our Bideford office, has just raised over £500 for Breast Cancer Care and tackled her fear of heights by jumping from a light aircraft at 10,000 feet with only a pocket handkerchief sized parachute for company. We salute her.

Somewhat less heroically Andrew Burke of the Barnstaple Property team raised an undisclosed sum for the Matt Hampson Trust by failing to take part in the Exeter half marathon. Andrew took the tactical decision that an early start to next year's training programme was the way forward, and paid the sponsor money he would have raised instead, in an unsuccessful attempt to deflect abuse.

Home Information Pack latest.

Property lawyers, estate agents, pundits and the public remain bemused by the farcical saga that is the governments Home Information Pack (HIP) legislation. Having geared up for a blanket introduction on 1 June, the property industry now gears down for the limited introduction on 1 August, and Estate agents brace themselves for a flood of instructions to sell 3 bed houses with studies/box rooms/games rooms etc. Many in the property industry cling to the hope that Gordon Brown will promote Yvette Cooper (the Minister who has doggedly plodded on with the legislation in the face of increasing levels of incredulity from all sides) and allow the doomed project to quietly die a death. This, sadly, is an unlikely outcome.

Sellers therfore will need to consider if a HIP is necessary post 1 August. Buyers will need to be aware that even if they purchase with the benefit of a HIP including searches they may still (ludicrously) have to pay for their own searches costing upwards of £200 - because the government has allowed unofficial searches into HIPs which some solicitors and lenders will not accept. Another spurious justification for HIPs is thereby exposed - at the cost of buyers and sellers whose time and money will be wasted.

Property team welcome Samantha and Caroline

Samantha Millington has joined our Property team in Barnstaple. After a successful career as conveyancer in the Home Counties, Samantha is now enjoying the delights of North Devon. Based in Northam and working in Barnstaple, Samantha is already working successfully for many clients on their sales and purchases.

In September Legal Executive Caroline Chandler joins us from premier Salisbury firm Wilsons where she has acquired many years experience representing private clients in their property dealings. caroline too has been seduced by the beauty of North Devon's coast and country, and is looking forward to acting for clients locally and nationally.

Firm consulted on introduction of Speedy Summary Justice

Chris Jones, managing partner of Slee Blackwell's criminal department, is representing Defence Solicitors in high level discussions concerning the introduction of the Government's new initiative 'Speedy Summary Justice' in Devon and Cornwall. The scheme, which is aimed at dramatically reducing the number of Magistrates Court hearings, is scheduled to be introduced in North Devon in early July. Similar arrangements will then be rolled out across the rest of the region by the end of the year.

It is proposed that in most cases there will only be one hearing. If a 'Not Guilty' plea is entered then the trial date will be fixed there and then. In many instances the trial will take place within 2 months.

This revolutionary approach has been developed over a period of months with additional resources being made available to the Police and CPS. If successful the initiative will reduce the time involved in Defence preparation thereby reducing the costs which those no longer entitled to Legal Aid (following the introduction of means testing) will have to pay.

Chris Jones Appointed Solicitor-Advocate

The February meeting of the body responsible for regulating solicitors decided that Chris Jones, a partner with lawyers Slee Blackwell specialising in Criminal Law, should be approved as a Solicitor-Advocate.
After over 20 years representing clients in the Magistrates Court, this qualification now allows Chris to appear and represent clients in the Crown Court.
The appointment comes in recognition of the extensive experience Chris has gained over the years in a range of Courts and Tribunals including Courts Martial and Coroners Inquests.
Chris commented
'It is very pleasing to be recognised by the Law Society in this way. Although it will not change Slee Blackwell's practice of employing the best barristers to represent clients in the Crown Court in cases that require it, the qualification does extend opportunities to the firm to represent clients through to a conclusion in the Higher Courts when necessary. We now have the scope to assist with all criminal cases through from investigation to conclusion in whatever Court the case is dealt with.'
Chris will join the Solicitors Association of Higher Court Advocates and make use of their specialist training and support.
Solicitor-Advocates now regularly deal with cases in the Crown Court throughout the country wearing black gowns and wing collars. They are not yet allowed to wear the traditional barrister's wig but this distinction continues to be discussed and has become less important over the years.
Chris is believed to be the first solicitor in North Devon to be recognised as a Solicitor-Advocate in this way.
Slee Blackwell already have Solicitor-Advocates qualified to deal with Civil Proceedings based at their Exeter Office.

www.sleeblackwell.co.uk

The End of Innocence?

In the 2002 Spielberg movie Minority Report our hero (played by Tom Cruise) is in charge of a 'pre-crime' unit which catches and incarcerates (without trial) would be killers before they commit their crime, on the basis of psychic evidence. Readers who have not seen the film should look away now, because I have to tell you that the ending is not a happy one for those who find this vision of pre-emptive justice an attractive one.
While film goers did not have to be psychic to realize that locking people up for crimes they had not committed on the basis of evidence flimsier than a dodgy dossier was never going to work, it appears that John Reid and Tony Blair are not fans of Mr Cruise or Mr Spielberg because, guess what? Another day, another criminal justice proposal, and you guessed right – its catch the blighters before they do it.
The Sunday Times 14 January 2006 reveals that the government proposes to introduce restrictions on potential yobs even before they have committed an offence. Orders – like existing Asbos – could ban recipients from living in their home area, associating with their friends or family, and impose curfews. Any breach of an order would render a recipient liable to up to 5 years imprisonment.
Super Asbos for violent thugs must be a good thing. After all its got super in the title, and Lord Falconer says that they wouldn't be an infringement on individual freedoms because there must be evidence before they are issued. So that’s all right then, isn't it?
Er, no, actually. Its not. Here's why. Leave aside the lawyer's concerns that the existing Asbo regime has been used to dilute the centuries old burden on the prosecution to prove a criminal charge beyond reasonable doubt, that hearsay evidence from which the citizen has been protected for centuries isallowed in Asbo cases, and that the accused has no right to a jury trial in front of his or her peers.
Leave aside the fact that Asbos have been used to criminalize a generation of children, and disproportionately used against vulnerable people including the homeless and those with mental health problems.
Even, if you will, ignore the fact that 40% of Asbos are breached and that by and large they do not work.
But consider if you want to live in a society where you could be locked up for breaching an order, before you have committed a crime, when the state decides it doesn't like the way you were brought up, because you have a history of substance abuse or because you have mental health or cognitive difficulties.
And when you are considering, remember that Mr Spielberg is only in charge in Hollywood and Mr Cruise will not be around to rescue you.

ANDREW BURKE
Residential Conveyancing Solicitor
www.sleeblackwell.co.uk

PI Dept.'s Legal 500 Entry

From The North Devon Journal

Personal Injury Department Gains Entry to The Prestigious Legal 500

The highly prestigious law directory, The Legal 500, has singled out the Exeter and Bideford offices of Slee Blackwell as one of a handful of firms excelling in personal injury law.

Says partner Lee Dawkins,

“We are delighted that the firm has been recognised by an influential and independent publication as one of the region’s leading centres for personal injury law. This is a reflection of the professionalism and expertise of our team of personal injury specialists.”

The firm has been developing a growing reputation for dealing with personal injury law and represents claimants from all parts of the country in what has become a national practice.

Mike Clarke Half Million Compensation Claim NDJ

From The North Devon Journal

Bideford solicitors recover £1/2m compensation for local man

Slee Blackwell’s Bideford office has secured compensation of almost half a million pounds for a former engineer with T J Brent who suffered devastating head injuries in an industrial accident.
Adrian Pile, a former Army electronics specialist from Torrington, who now lives in Bideford, was aged 25 when his head was crushed by heavy machinery. He suffered multiple skull fractures which left him with severe brain damage, loss of sight in one eye, and permanent effects on his ability to taste and smell.
His solicitor, Mike Clarke, said:
"Mr Pile recovered very well from injuries which could easily have been fatal, but his promising career as an engineer has been destroyed. He will suffer significant difficulties for the rest of his life and the size of the settlement reflects that. He is a very determined man of high intelligence, who has made great efforts to keep working and remain positive, despite the drastic effect this accident has had on his life."
Liability for the accident was admitted by Brents but agreement on the amount of compensation was reached on the case only this week, shortly before it was due for trial.
For further information please contact Mike Clarke on 01237 425225 or by e-mail at michael.clarke@sleeblackwell.co.uk

Licencing act 2003 - One Year On

It has been almost a year since the implementation of the Licensing Act 2003 since then the Courts have been kept busy clarifying how the Act should be interpreted in terms of the way Licensed Premises are run.
One thing is clear, people are not afraid to contest the decisions made by the Licensing Authorities. Challenges can be brought by Judicial Review or by an appeal. Appeals can be costly for the Premises Licence Holder especially since the High Court ruled that if an Authority has acted 'reasonably and in good faith' in reaching its decision legal costs should not be awarded against them even if ultimately the decision is flawed.
There are many appeals currently ongoing throughout the country and there have already been several interesting decisions. Perhaps the most significant one so far concerns the Department of Culture and Media which has been forced to clarify what is meant by the requirement to have a Designated Premises Supervisor (DPS) or Personal Licence Holder 'present' when alcohol is being sold or supplied. In Yorkshire one Licence Holder was forced to return from holiday under threat that if they failed to do so their premises would have to be closed. This led to questions being raised in the House of Commons and a revision of the DCMS Guidance. The revised Guidance now specifies that the DPS must give a specific statement to the person delegated to take over responsibility and that there must be regular monitoring by the absent personal licence holder. It would therefore be our advice that a written statement be given by both the DPS and the person taking over their responsibilities during their absence.
Hopefully these appeals and judicial reviews will continue to bring much needed clarity to the law so that Licensing Authorities and Premises Licence Holders alike will have a better understanding of what the Licensing Act 2003 actually requires.
If you need any help or advice relating to Licensing matters please contact specialist solicitor Emma Napper on 01271-349924 or e-mail emma.napper@sleeblackwell.co.uk
www.sleeblackwell.co.uk