Self-Actualization through Accident Claim Help

Others as Means
Fortunate, truly fortunate, are claimants who look at the claiming process as more than a mere procedure to obtain their compensation. Because they see the same as an opportunity to shatter their personal limits and transcend their misconceived restrictions, they finish the process not just with an impressive bank account but also with a new personality, a new humanity, a more hopeful and invigorated will to life. A fundamental question which serves as a marker discriminating those who end up renewed in spirit and those who end up enriched in a materialistic way only is “How should claimants approach accident claim help advice?”

Those who answer that they should rely on other people’s advice frame their experiences within the paradigms of dependence and stupefying subservience. In their apathy or perplexity, they are more than willing to sacrifice their intelligence in exchange for ease and leisure. They finish the process without learning anything because they have not exercised any mental muscle. We look at them and turn away in pity and disgust. Those, however, who answer that although other people are the starting points of learning, that nevertheless it is our duty as autonomous individuals to evaluate what they say and adapt them to the unique circumstances of our case, its inherent special qualities that only we are cognizant of, will end up feeling reborn and worthier of their compensation. They have done the law – and their sense of dignity – justice.

The Umbilical Connection
Why should looking for a person who can offer us excellent accident claim help be an issue when it is generally understood that all the advice that we will ever need will be presented to us by whoever we hire to act as our lawyers? Why should there still be a need to listen to other people, especially laymen, when it can be proven that not only are their pieces of advice untutored in the technical school of law, but are also sometimes conflicting with what our solicitors say?

The answer is simple: lawyers make mistakes too. Even if laymen are not qualified people to correct lawyers, this does not mean that they can never teach them anything. What laymen and the claimant himself can contribute to the legal process is a more judicious ascertainment of facts. Lawyers are experts only on the matter of the law. But cases are decided not just on legal points, but also on factual points. Whether or not anything happened in a certain way can only be answered by those whose minds are not confined within a complicated theory. Simple people, even children, can be used to bolster assertions of fact because they are credible, despite their want of knowledge in the law.

Understanding Lawyers

You wonder why lawyers, whether accidents at work claims lawyer or whiplash claims lawyer or holiday claims lawyers, are all grumpy and impatient. You see them frowning whenever the conversation turns to subjects unrelated to the point. You hear them curse when summoned from the piles of paperwork they are submerged in. You smell the unmistakable odor of nicotine or alcohol in their breaths. When you grasp their hands for a handshake, you feel nothing more than an automatic tug, a movement so devoid of sympathy and life, symbolic of their eternal discontent with social formalities and mundane ceremonies.

You then judge them.

You think them inconsiderable boors. You look at their work and their faraway stares and think them impolite, arrogant, snobbish, myopic, putrid, ambitious, vain, and speculative. You smell the aroma pervading their offices, an odor so unwelcoming even mice and roaches dare not trespass. You hear them talk and in the undercurrent of their voices you trace hints of concealed superciliousness.

You then judge them all the more.

You should not. For all kinds of lawyers, especially those who work in the industry of tort claims, such as accidents at work claims, are only unsociable because of the backbreaking burden they carry. Contemplate their lives and you will see why. Imagine their lives so far, having worked for numerous years tirelessly memorizing and annotating laws and codes, many of which can be traced back to the time of the Romans. Then imagine the sleepless nights they had to endure in order to prepare for examinations and recitations, every day feeling the pressure to excel and the fear of failing. Imagine them finally graduating and then witnessing a disorienting revelation, the kind which wracks a fresh graduate’s soul, the tremendous earthquake of disjunction echoed by the conception that law school litigation is different, very different, from real life litigation.

Thus, let lawyers be.

They have to bear the burden of representing others. They have to bear the burden of understanding both sides of a question. They have to bear the burden of the public’s intrusive gaze. But most of all, they have to bear the punishing stereotypes of a world which hates lawyers and tolerates them only because its inhabitants cannot live in peace.

Customs and Medical Negligence Claims

When Proscribed
As doctors and physicians, your patients expect you to be aware of certain protocols. In case you deviate from these protocols, then you will be subject to medical negligence claims. The basis of such claims is that in deviating from the rules, you have caused them considerable harm and suffering. There is really no issue here because the medical community is all too aware that they deviate from such rules at their own peril. Except for one case, the case where some of the members of this community see certain rules as nullifying or potentially nullifying customs they hold dear in their heart.

Take the following case. Now, it may be the custom where you grew up in that people should not eat a certain kind of meat, say, pork. Now, if you were suddenly confronted with a patient whose condition would be precisely cured by prescribing him to eat pork and only this kind of dish, and you did not inform him of that because of your loyalty to your reservations, then you should at least do so understanding that you can be sued against in case a complication happens. Customs do not excuse a person from the administration of his duty, especially one whose effects is beneficial to a person’s rights and to public policy.

The Need of Proof
Arguing that a deviation from the standard practices of the medical community is justified because of a custom you believe and grew up in will not be immediately palatable to the courts. You can still be demanded medical negligence claims over them. There are two reasons why.

To begin with, not all customs can be practiced with impunity. Those which are contrary to the law, public policy, public order, and morals are rightly banned. If they were not, then all acts, even those which can be termed criminal and harmful, would have to be permitted, even to the demise of the body politic. This obviously cannot be. The principal end of law is precisely the survival of society. It cannot be said to have ordered its own execution. Suicide whether in the body of a person or in the body of society is reprehensible.

Second, even if you can prove that a custom is not contrary to the good sense of the public, you are still beholden to show that such a custom is really a custom. In other words, you have to subject said custom to the courts and let it decide, after examining the evidence, to see whether it is really so. The reason is simple. If it were not required to be proved, then anyone can easily disobey the law and conjure the custom blanket in his defense.

Why Demanding Claims Intimidates Me

I cannot help but cringe whenever I recollect the time I filed medical negligence claims in the past. After undergoing spinal surgery at one hospital I will not name here, I discovered that my spine, far from returning to normal, became worse. Before the operation I only felt minor tingles at my lower back which occasionally swelled into fits of painful bursts. After the operation, those bursts never ceased. They exploded at some dark region above my posterior and electrified my entire body. It was unbearable. I was unable to do what most people my age could still do, such as walking, bending over, sitting upright, and even taking a bath.

So I called up a lawyer and filed medical negligence claims. They went all right and I received a laudable amount of compensation in return. But what pain! What sacrifices! In order to make my claims meritorious, I had to recollect and divulge to my doctor all the details concerning my surgery, even the private ones. I had to inform him that my back problem was intermittent and began when I first made love. I had to inform him that I tried asking different surgeons about it and nobody among them could explain my condition. I had to inform him that this particular doctor which made my condition worse promised me that he could cure me if only I paid him a generous advance, which I did. I had to inform him that he must win my claim because the advance I gave was supposed to be spent on my children’s college tuition. What a nerve-wracking experience.

If ever you might blame me for acting haphazardly, then I beseech you first to place yourself in my position, living a life under the constant dread of suffering from lightning jolt attacks emanating from your back that flowed into the rest of your body, crushing and trampling every sensory receptor, ramming and ramming its burning pikes of horror until you succumb to the pain and devolve into an inert being, a pathetic and immobile wreck, the victim of torpor, the prisoner of a disease nobody knows how to cure, crushed under the ruins of an existence no longer tenable, in which the advent of death, far from arousing fear, stimulates instead sentiments of joy, respite, liberation, and other great expectations.

Making Things Simple

My policy in life and the one which I adopted when I demanded No Win No Fee claims is one of simplicity. That is to say, I refrain from making things more complicated than they should be. You could call me the personification of Ockham’s razor. Or that I worship as a credo Einstein’s injunction to make things simple, but not simpler. I don’t know why I am possessed with this inflexible partiality for making things easy and straight to the point, but that’s how it is.

Hence, you can understand why I am piqued by my No Win No Fee lawyer. For although I understand that the law is an open-ended subject, that its contours cannot be determined with precision because it deals with the variegated outlines of life itself, that this is so true that even more astute lawyers than he had failed in taming its wild fits of uncontrollable jargon, blah blah blah; I still could not reconcile myself to the tardiness of my case.

It seemed to me that he was using the sophistication and complexity of the law to retard my case, to apply them for no other reason than as a dilatory measure, in order for him to fleece and milk me more. Let this post be a warning to all such lawyers: claimants are not as moronic as you take them to be! We may not be privy to the technical understanding of the law, but that does not mean that we can never understand even just an iota or particle of its substance. The mere fact that statues and laws are written in plain English should have made you more circumspect. Yes, laws can only be deciphered by those who are aware of precedents, hearings, civil procedure, and jargon, but laymen have access to these things too, not by themselves, but by asking other, more honest and noble and generous men of the bar!

That there exist such people as I have mentioned I can verify based on my own experience. For as I was wringing my hair in despair, I fortunately came across one. I promptly retrieved my papers from my previous solicitor, slammed the door, and signed a new lawyer, and slept like a babe.

Benefits of Habituation

How do you make demanding No Win No Fee claims easier? The answer is habituation. That is to say, instead of saving up your energy for sudden and short bursts of activity, you should plot a clear enumeration of the things that you need to do and to consistently do them on a given time basis. The only way you can make the claiming process work for you is to make it as less dramatic and as predictable as you can. In other words, you should treat it just as you would treat any other piece of work that you have to finish within a given timeline.

For one thing, you can make your No Win No Fee claiming experience easier by making a routine. You can segregate your innumerable tasks, for example, into two. You can allocate all evidence collection and witness interviews in the morning, while all consultations with your lawyer at night. Of course this does not mean that you should be rigid. Not at all. Rigidity is the cause of many endeavors’ downfall, not just lawsuits. What it only means is that you should be as organized as much as this is possible.

Another thing that you can do is to stick to your routine. Now, the most difficult part of any plan is the execution, but it is also that part which when done guarantees success. Again, you must follow your schedule as much as this is possible. You can even obtain things that you know will inspire you, such as a diary, success stories, inspirational movies and music. You can also call on your friends and family members to function as your support group. In any case, the real aim here is to provide that thing or service or person which you know will enable you to persevere and complete your claim.

At this point, it is easy to moralize about planning and executing, but you must not forget the premise of these two things. That is the fact that you should do everything in your power to understand the claiming process and the steps involved. For without understanding it, you cannot break it down into manageable pieces, and so you would not be able to formulate any feasible plan, much less execute one.

Connections Questions

When discriminating whom to hire as your No Win No Fee solicitors London, a friend once told me that I should pick those who were close with the judge, either because they are blood relations or friends. Whether we like to believe it or not, he said, judges are human beings too. We should not believe the crap others tell us that they are so rational that they will be deaf to the yearnings of their hearts. Go for broke, he added, You can never go wrong.

Well I think my experience in dealing with the courts and No Win No Fee solicitors London has falsified his claim. My case, an accident at work claim, prospered last year even though the defendant’s solicitor was the judge’s own brother. It’s strange, but it’s real. The main weakness of the argument of my friend, and which life all too eagerly brought up, was this—just because people are friends does not mean that they cannot be professional. Judges and lawyers are not too keen on applying undue influence to the outcome of the case for the simple reason that they know they can be sanctioned, even disbarred, if caught. Whoever thinks that victory in one case at the price of losing a lifetime’s worth of prestige and effort is a bargain is clearly out of his mind. Lawyers and judges are smart people, despite their ambition. They know they cannot act willy-nilly, especially when people are all too ready to suspect collusion between them.

Another thing my friend forgot to take into consideration is that more than the fear of disbarment and loss of honor, judges and lawyers may not be in good terms with people presume them to be close with. Relatives may quarrel with each other, friends may hold grudges, and the proof of this is provided by life itself. Unhappy families and broken friendships are all too common in the world today, but even more so in an extremely competitive environment such as the world of jurisprudence. That lawyer is close to that judge, some say. Therefore we must hire him. But I ask: how do we know that they are really close? And even if they were, how do we know that nevertheless they are presently in good terms?