Within hours of it emerging that Darren Hanison, the owner of Fortitude Law, had been intervened into by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, message boards on mesh support groups were alive with women in despair.
Dozens of women who received disastrous pelvic mesh implants were suddenly unrepresented and unsure if their claim was ever going to be completed. ‘I’ve not slept, I am still shocked and numb,’ said one member of the support group Sling the Mesh. ‘Never been so gutted in my life,’ added another.
Information about the trigger for the intervention was sparse: the SRA said there was ‘reason to suspect dishonesty’ on the part of Hanison but has made no further comment.
The Fortitude website is closed and Hanison has said nothing publicly. He has not, as yet, been charged with any misconduct. For now, former clients are advised to contact the Law Society for information about alternative representation or seek out the charity Action Against Medical Accidents for help and advice.
Kath Samson, founder of Sling the Mesh, said: ‘Having given their most personal and upsetting details of mesh injuries, and put their trust in this man, women must now start over again to find a new lawyer. Some feel too tired, ill or worn down to do it.’
Fortitude Law had run a persistent campaign advertising for victims of the mesh scandal and regularly posted on Facebook looking for clients. The most recent such post was five days before the SRA intervention.
The firm described itself as ‘leading experts in this extremely specialised field of medical negligence law’ which had ‘developed a well-established, unique approach which has meant we’ve been able secure significant compensation’.
‘We should not have to fight through the legal system to receive compensation for ruined lives’
Kath Samson, Sling the Mesh
But several former clients have contacted the Gazette to say they felt let down by the progress of their case or the outcome they achieved.
One woman had complained to the SRA alleging she was given assurances that her claim was progressing when it had run out of time and was effectively dead. She is now unsure if there is any possibility of ever securing compensation for the years of pain and suffering she has endured.
Another former client said she was told by Hanison her claim might be worth £800,000 after she required bladder and hip operations. Her final compensation came to £25,000, of which £6,000 was held back by Fortitude to cover a shortfall in recovered fees. ‘The compensation money was used up long ago and means nothing compared to what I have been through and what I have to pay out on a constant basis.’
What is especially galling for the hundreds of victims of the scandal is that they should not have to fight to secure compensation at all. Their suffering began when mesh implants were used in the surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse and to manage stress urinary incontinence. The use of these implants has been linked to crippling, life-changing complications.
The First Do No Harm review by Baroness Cumberlege in 2020 said patients’ stories were ‘harrowing’, with common themes that they struggled to be heard, were dismissed and abandoned by NHS trusts and suffered life-changing consequences. Families were broken, victims lost their jobs and homes, and children became their mothers’ carers.
Cumberlege found ‘institutional and professional resistance to changing practice even in the face of mounting safety concerns’ and identified a ‘culture of dismissive and arrogant attitudes that only serve to intimidate and confuse’.
Crucially, the review recommended a redress system for compensating victims that ‘should not feel like a battle’.
The government apologised on behalf of the health sector but did not commit to immediate action on compensation. The issue was once again raised last year by the health and social care select committee, with chair Steve Brine MP lamenting that victims were still unable to get redress.
The Patient Safety Commissioner, Henrietta Hughes, is putting together a report with patient minister Maria Caulfield MP, which is due out this summer. This will answer whether financial redress from the government will be given to mesh-injured women and also to those whose babies were harmed when they took epilepsy drug sodium valproate.
Women living with the daily effects of this debilitating surgery are incredulous at the time it has taken to act on the Cumberlege recommendations. Those who turned to Fortitude Law now face the further challenge of rescuing claims.
Samson said: ‘The situation is a stark reminder that financial redress must be given to women in a timely and non-adversarial manner as outlined as a key recommendation in the Cumberlege report. We should not have to fight through the legal system to receive compensation for ruined lives.’
Despite repeated attempts, the Gazette was this week unable to contact Hanison or Fortitude Law.
