- Although
49 revised claims had been received, these were incomplete and
did not use the standard forms as requested
|
- Examples
of problems were discussed
|
- There
are references to possible qualifiers who do not appear to be
represented by Irwin Mitchell and whose involvement (particularly
in care) had not been included in the Main Application or seperate
Claim Form for Care.
|
- The
Trustees considered 4 claims that illustrated these problems.
|
- The
'questionnaire' had been finalised and is now referred to as the
Main Application.
|
- An
Update had been sent to Irwin Mitchell and other solicitors for
onward transmission to the victims families. It has been posted
on the website.
|
- Charles
Russell wrote to Irwin Mitchell on 14th May 2002 with an update
of the principles that the Trustees had adopted. This letter was
not intended to be passed to the families, as it did not provide
sufficient explanation of the basis of the principles for non-lawyers.
The contents caused understandable upset to the families.
|
- Dr
Knight and Mr Mclean had produced the Stages of Illness and Care
Implications.
|
- A
meeting had been provisionally arranged for 21st June 2002 to
discuss whether any principles had been agreed between the families'
representatives and the Department of Health's. The meeting would
be attended by Sir Robert Owen, Richard Vallance and David Body,
and it was hoped that Justin Fenwick QC and Stephen Irwin QC would
also be able to attend.
|
- The
Minutes of the previous meeting were agreed.
|
- The
Resolutions for the previous meeting and for the interim payments
made at the end of May were signed
|
- A
draft article had been prepared which alerted neurologists to
the existence of the Trust.
|
- It
was confirmed that the separate Claim Form for Care requested
details of any care provided by the state.
|
- It
was resolved that a diagnosis and confirmation of residency by
one of Dr Knight's Registrars at the National CJD Surveillance
Unit would be sufficient.
|
- No
final decisions on the 4 claims would be made, pending the outcome
of the meeting with David Body.
|
-
Irwin Mitchell has not usually provided certified copies of Letters
of Administration and Grants of Probate. Confirmation that the
documents had been sealed would be required.
|
- The
importance of taking all reasonable steps to identify whether
there are any people who may have a claim for compensation but
are not represented by Irwin Mitchell was emphasised. Uncertainties
as to potential applicants will result in delay. Charles Russell
will make contact with the personal representatives of estates
to seek their approval of who should receive the payments.
|
- v
As the separate Claim Form for Care had not been completed in
the cases submitted to date, it has usually not been possible
to apportion payments for care. Carers should therefore have the
option of reverting to the Trustees with further details of who
provided how much care if they are not able to agree between themselves
how payment should be apportioned.
|
- v
Contrary to the earlier decision and to expedite payments, the
Trustees agreed to decide cases on a piecemeal basis, leaving
claims for loss of earnings and psychiatric injury to be considered
in due course
|
-
In relation to loss of earnings claims, the relevant sections
on the Application Forms had usually been left blank, although
the schedules originally provided by Irwin Mitchell indicated
an intention to make claims.
|
- v
Charles Russell gave a presentation of the vCJD website
|
- Meetings
were confirmed for 28th June and 19th July.
|
|
Previous
Meeting
|
|
 |
|
Next
Meeting |
