Cosmetic Surgery Negligence Solicitors

Cosmetic surgery negligence occurs when surgeons provide care falling below standards reasonably expected in aesthetic surgery, causing harm. Examples include poor surgical technique causing asymmetry or scarring, unsuitable procedures for patients’ anatomy, inadequate risk warnings, or unrealistic promises about outcomes.

Surgeons should provide detailed information about risks, alternatives, and realistic outcomes. A claim may be possible where surgery was technically negligent or consent was inadequate regarding material risks that occurred.

Aesthetic disappointment alone doesn’t constitute negligence unless results clearly fell below what a competent surgeon would achieve or you weren’t properly warned about possible outcomes. Surgeons do not guarantee perfect results, but they should exercise reasonable skill and aim for results within acceptable clinical ranges.

Claims require expert evidence establishing surgery fell below acceptable cosmetic surgery standards. Before-and-after photographs are crucial. If surgeons made unrealistic promises or didn’t explain limitations, consent claims may succeed even if surgery was technically adequate.

Breast surgery complications include implant rupture, capsular contracture, asymmetry, implant malposition, infection, poor scarring, or nipple sensation loss. Some complications are recognised risks even with proper technique. Negligent complications result from poor technique, inappropriate implant selection, or inadequate warning about risks.

For example, significant asymmetry from poor implant placement is negligent, but minor asymmetry is often unavoidable. Capsular contracture can occur despite proper surgery but is more likely with certain techniques. Expert evidence distinguishes negligent complications from unavoidable risks.

Cosmetic surgeons should explain the procedure, material risks, realistic outcomes, alternatives, and what happens if you do nothing. Material risks include common complications and serious rare complications reasonable patients would want to know. Surgeons should be honest about achievable results and avoid unrealistic promises.

Adequate cooling-off periods are important for informed consent. Pressure to proceed immediately may invalidate consent. A claim may be possible where material risks were not explained and then occurred, or where promises about results were inconsistent with realistic expectations.

Injectable treatment claims arise from dermal filler vascular damage causing skin necrosis, botox complications causing drooping or asymmetry, or permanent scarring from poor technique. Practitioners should have appropriate training, use correct products, and warn about risks including vascular complications.

Dermal filler vascular damage is rare but serious, requiring immediate treatment. A claim may be possible where a practitioner lacked appropriate training, did not recognise complications, or did not provide adequate warnings. Expert evidence establishes whether technique met acceptable aesthetic medicine standards.

Compensation covers pain and suffering from the negligent procedure, costs of all corrective surgery and revision procedures, travel costs for treatment, lost earnings, and general damages for aesthetic disappointment and psychological impact. Awards vary significantly depending on severity.

Compensation depends on the severity of the outcome, the corrective treatment needed, and the impact on your life. Every case is assessed individually. Severe disfigurement or permanent disability attracts higher awards. All corrective surgery costs are recoverable including procedures at private clinics.

Many cosmetic surgery claims involve private clinics or practitioners. These claims are handled by practitioners’ insurers rather than NHS Resolution. Some cosmetic practitioners lack adequate insurance, creating recovery difficulties if you win. We check insurance position before advising on claims.

For clinic chains, company structures affect who you sue. Some clinics arrange finance making them credit providers with additional responsibilities. Claims may combine negligence against surgeons and financial mis-selling against clinics. We advise on all potential claims arising from private cosmetic surgery.

If you paid for treatment by credit card, you potentially have a claim under Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 against the credit card company, if the negligently carried out procedure cost more than £100 but not more than £30,000.

This is a particularly helpful means of redress where the cosmetic clinic or practitioner has no adequate insurance cover.