Other topics
Accommodation 
Beyond the stage of treatment and rehabilitation, one of the first things to deal with is accommodation. Serious injury often causes a requirement for adapted housing, either by alteration of an existing property or by moving to somewhere more suitable. It can be proven that security of reasonable accommodation of the claimants choice can provide the foundation for quality of life and improved outcome overall. The objective is to create a plan which covers all the foreseeable eventualities of the claimant's life and does so in a way which is entirely acceptable to him and his family.
The plan for lifetime accommodation must be realistic and it should take into account all of the uncertainties which are likely to surround the claimant's life. For example, people on average move home every seven years, so one house may not be enough. However, if there is no pressure to move created by a job or by the need to climb a career ladder, that may mean that more stability can be achieved. Also, if the home has to be adapted to cope with the effects of injury, that may suggest that it is financially sensible to stay in that house for as long as possible.
Type of property
The first area of choice is whether a house, bungalow or flat would be most suitable. The principle is that a sensible and reasonable decision should be made to suit the injured person and the family. A bungalow is not always suitable, even for a paralysed person or one with serious mobility problems and the injured person and the family may decide that they would prefer a house. This decision is one which has to be explored with care and without making assumptions about what type of accommodation would be appropriate. For example, if the injured person and the family decide, after careful explanation of the options, that they really would prefer a house, then it is the lawyers' job to arrange it.
To stay or move?
Once a decision has been made about the most suitable type of property, the next question is whether it is desirable and possible for the injured person and the family to remain in their pre-accident home. Again, different families in different circumstances take different views; sometimes they are keen to remain in a house where they have been for years, in an area which they like, where their family and friends live. Other families may not have the same attachment to the house or the area or they may be in a house which cannot be suitably adapted.
Finding a suitable property
If the injured person and the family decide that they need to move, the next step is to find a suitable property. This means a thorough search, viewings of sufficient properties and good reason for rejecting the ones said to be unsuitable.
A choice should not be restricted because of cost, but likewise extravagance is not always the way to comfort and happiness and an extravagance without justification can often do more harm than good when in front of the judge.
Consideration should first be given to the area including the location of schools, shops, pubs and clubs, bus routes and other important considerations. They should then obtain as many particulars of apparently suitable properties as possible and visit as appropriate (remembering that it can be very difficult for disabled people to visit homes which have not been adapted and that visiting can be difficult in any event). Records should be kept of all properties, noting what was wrong with the ones rejected.
When an apparently suitable home has been found, it should be inspected by the specialist architect or surveyor selected by the legal team. That expert may have advised already on the basic requirements of suitable housing, but nevertheless it is desirable for him or her to inspect. If he supports the choice, it means that there is less likely to be difficulty persuading the judge that it was a sensible and reasonable choice.
Adapting the home
Whether a client moves home or stays in the same property, necessary alterations and adaptations will need to be made. These include the installation of stair lifts, floor lifts (where stair lifts are not practicable) and ramps. Other alterations may include the widening of doorways, modification of the kitchen and bathroom, moving electrical sockets and switches and installing any other additional equipment.
Because this is taking place within the ambit of litigation, it may be necessary to consider using a proper tendering process with different estimates and possibly a professional selection of the contractor. An accurate account must be kept of all costs for work done.,
Future accommodation needs
When considering the issue of future accommodation, families must not assume that there are any standard restrictions. It is frequently thought that, if the family decide to move house in order to cope with the effects of the injury, that move is the final one. This is definitely not the case. An obvious example is when a young person has been injured. Most people would expect that person to return to live with his or her parents on discharge from hospital, either in their pre-accident home or in new accommodation, depending on their wishes and the timescale. However, as the child grows up, one would normally expect him or her to seek independence at or around his or her twenties; this is probably what would have happened had the person not been injured and it definitely should not be assumed that injury removes the need and desire for independence. On the contrary, it can make separate living all the more important. In this case, options need to be reviewed and the most appropriate solution costed.
Considerations and alternatives to independent living
It is not always achievable or desirable for the injured person to live in his or her own home, either with his family or with a care regime. There are alternatives, ranging from sheltered accommodation through to institutional care, though the latter would be a last resort and an alternative should always be sought, if the family felt that was appropriate and realistic (or sensible and reasonable).
An important consideration is whether a specific housing solution will create social isolation, if the injured person lives on their own with a support package and becomes isolated. This can be avoided if suitable arrangements are made, for example, if the injured person's home is sufficiently near his family and if suitable transport and equipment is made available. Brain injury case managers and spinal cord case managers can supervise the care and leisure arrangements.
Lawyers and doctors should listen to their clients and make quite sure that they understand precisely what is required both now and in the future. Sometimes a client may have unrealistic ambitions or desires, in the sense that the judge would not approve them. Lawyers have a duty to explain this to the claimant and that this sum would not be recovered. This does not however necessarily mean that the ambition is impossible to achieve, or that it is inappropriate. Obvious examples are a swimming pool or an indoor hydrotherapy pool which some people find an attractive idea.
What has to be remembered is that there is likely to be a significant sum of money which does not have a specific, allocated future purpose (usually, the award for pain, suffering and loss of amenity and the award for loss of earnings If someone chooses to spend their own money, out of a total claim amounting to hundreds of thousands or millions of pounds, on a facility which will provide enjoyment, they are entitled to do so.
