Dental history

A patient attended his dentist to have an upper right second molar extracted. Unfortunately the tooth fractured and the dentist was unable to remove the remaining pieces of root.

The area of the tooth became infected. After a week the patient needed penicillin. He returned two weeks later complaining of severe pain and a bad taste from the socket. A dry socket was treated and the patient returned two months later when he complained of a dull ache and a bad taste. He was referred for surgical removal of the remaining root and this was performed five months after the original extraction. A claim ensued.

Expert opinion

An expert advised the DDU that there was no negligence in fracturing the tooth or failing to remove the remaining pieces of root immediately, but the dentist should have taken a radiograph of the area of the tooth and should have made arrangements for the root residue to be extracted at an early stage.

The claim

With the dentist's permission, the DDU attempted to settle the claim. The patient was self-employed and claimed loss of earnings for 17 months, at a rate of £1200 a month. When formal proceedings were issued, the claim was even more optimistic and he claimed a further £58,000 because of a deal that had fallen through.

The patient produced no evidence that he was permanently disabled during this period or evidence of the true value of the lost deal. The costs of fully investigating the validity of the claim were out of proportion to its value and with the member's agreement, it was decided to make an offer of £500 on economic grounds plus £1,000 for the pain and suffering which followed from the infection.

The patient refused this offer. Then his solicitors reduced the claim and eventually they accepted £1,500

An optimistic claim

Related articles

Membership in your pocket