Feb 3, 2014

Litigation Britain; Marks & Spencer pay £2,000 compensation to a woman, who alleged she was electrocuted.


The company states she received a minor injuries from static electricity but nevertheless compensated her.  We want to know of other cases, where seemingly excessive compensation has been paid by large organisations, without due regard to the nature of the injury.

In July 2013, Sandra Baker, a benefits claimant, alleges she was ascending the escalator in Marks and Spencer store in Chelmsford, when she was, “electrocuted” and received injuries, sufficient for her to visit her GP – she had no blistering, bruising or reddening of the hand, which received the, “shock!”  Nevertheless, Mrs Baker contacted a firm of “conditional fee” (no win - no fee) solicitors and Marks and Spencer compensated Mrs Baker by paying her £2,000, even though it appears Mrs Baker had no lasting injury and even less evidence to support her claim.

An investigation by the company revealed the “shock” was generated by static electricity and that Mrs Baker’s injuries were “minor.”  Marks and Spencer admitted there was a fault with the escalator but stated Mrs Baker’s “shock” was caused by static electricity.

If this is the case, it is likely Mrs Baker was the source of the electrical charge/discharge and the shock occurred as she “grounded” her hand on the moving bannister of the escalator.  Mrs Baker alleges another person, a man, received a similar shock.  Marks and Spencer have denied this and have not explained why they paid such a large amount of compensation to Mrs Baker for a minor injury, when they appear to have had no legal liability.

If you worked in the store at the time and can throw some light on the events, then please contact us.  If the escalator was defective and Mrs Baker did receive an electrical shock, rather than a “static charge,” we need to know – we are currently making enquiries with the HSE.

If as Mrs Baker states, another person was, “electrocuted” or was the subject of a “static electrical discharge” on the same day, we would like to identify him.

If you work for Marks and Spencer and can explain to us the Company’s, “compensation policy,” we would like to hear from you, particularly if you can tell of other claims, which have been settled, without detailed investigation, or settled for unreasonable amounts.  We are sure the Marks & Spencer Chief Executive and Shareholders would like to know more.

If you know of other claimants, who have received compensation, when you believe they were not entitled to it, then contact us, whether the company is Marks and Spencer or another organisation.  Likewise, if you have had a genuine claim against a “household name” company and have been met with resistance, we would like to hear from you.

Please confirm that you are a real person by entering the letters from the image
This is a captcha-picture. It is used to prevent mass-access by robots. (see: www.captcha.net)

Top of page