Video Surveillance destroys Claim
compensation claim Over Aldi product, Destroyed by Video Evidence
A claim for compensation that occupied the Brisbane District Court for five days has resulted the claimant being judged as having “grossly exaggerated” her injuries.
Most damaging to the claim was clandestine video footage of 40-yr-old Lovissa Williams conducting massage on a private investigator – interrupted by a visit from police – at her Murrumba Downs studio. In April 2008 – the day after it had been purchased from Kallangur Aldi - Williams had been sitting on an inflatable gym ball, studying. It suddenly burst, tumbling her to the floor.
Aldi admitted its product was defective
Aldi admitted its product was defective and all that was in contest was the extent of any injury to Williams and the amount of compensation she should receive..
For her part Williams claimed the fall injured her lumbar spine, crushed her right ulna nerve, brought on complex regional pain syndrome and resulted in anxiety and depression.
She also asserted idiopathic symptoms, including sensory disturbance to light touch that according to medico-legal specialist Greg Gillett was “just not anatomical”.
No musculoskeletal pathological process that could explain any of her symptoms
In his view there was no “musculoskeletal pathological process that could explain [any of] her symptom complex.” As it happens, neighbours had called the constabulary to report the not-so-secret snoop lurking near Williams’ home earlier in the day the undercover video was captured.
On their arrival mid-treatment, he retired outside with the police officers to justify his wholesome intentions and then returned to the massage table – with what manner of explanation to Williams that remains unexplained in the judgement – so she could finish his bodywork.
The significance of this somewhat comical occurrence apparently did not dawn upon Williams – who claims an IQ of 134 – until sometime later.
no ongoing physical injury and certainly no evidence of conditions
Even before they viewed the undercover video, orthopaedists Greg Gillett, David Gilpin and Andrew Patten; neurologists Nicole Lindberg and Noel Saines and anaesthetist Frederick Walden all concluded there was no ongoing physical injury and certainly no evidence of the disabling ulna nerve and CRPS conditions she contended.
Their position was confirmed upon viewing the footage, all largely agreeing with Dr Gillett that the tape exposed absolutely normal function, no fatigue and no outward signs of pain during the strenuous one hour rub. According to Dr Patten, the tape demonstrated “absolutely no functional impediment at all” and “no avoidance behaviour” of the affected limb.
Williams’ court room portrayal – “bent over, taking small steps, trembling” – was entirely at odds in His Honour’s opinion, with her video presentation as fully functional.
Such disparity could not be explained merely by the “unpleasant to say the least” demands of “the adversarial process that is our system of justice”.
a minor soft tissue injury
The evidence of those specialists who did attest to some incapacity – neurologist Frank Tomlinson, psychiatrist Andrew Byth and therapist Lesley Stephenson – could not be accepted as its authority wholly “depended upon the [un]truthfulness of Ms Williams”.
In a measure of mercy to the embattled claimant, the court acknowledged the occurrence of a minor soft tissue injury to the right upper arm that resolved after about five months.
For this, the total damages award including 5 months loss of income, was $27,000.
✔ There is only a small window in which you can make compensation claims in Queensland
✔ Even if you think your actions may have contributed to your injury, you may still have a claim well-worth pursuing
✔ Just press the button below, there is no cost, and no obligation to review your case