News

Man awarded £65,000 after losing eyesight following wrong diagnosis

Published

7 years ago

January 29, 2019

A ‘FIT AND HEALTHY’ grandad of four lost his sight, had a stroke and a double heart bypass, and will eventually lose his eye, after an on-call ophthalmologist failed to investigate his symptoms on New Year’s Day.

When 74-year-old Andrew Baker of Narberth, woke up on January 1, 2017, with black spots in front of his eyes, never could he have imagined that just days later he would have lost all vision in one eye.

When the black spots started to turn into floaters, redness, pain and loss of vision in his right eye later that day, Mr Baker – who had never experienced issues with his sight before – took the advice of his GP son-in-law and went straight to A&E at Glangwili General Hospital.

Mr Baker was seen by a doctor and his condition was discussed with the on-call ophthalmologist over the phone but, as it was New Year’s Day, the ophthalmologist failed to attend to examine him. Diagnosed with vitreous haemorrhage and with a plan put in place for him to be provided with ointment and analgesia, Mr Baker went home.

Had Mr Baker been examined by an ophthalmologist, it would have been confirmed as an ophthalmic emergency and he would have undergone a vitreous biopsy and antibiotic injections, which would have saved some of the sight in his right eye.

The following day, Mr Baker woke up to find that he was completely blind in his right eye and in severe pain. He attended the Tysul Eye Unit at Glangwili General Hospital on January 3, 4 and 5 – and was diagnosed with endogenous endophthalmitis – a very severe sight-threatening condition. Mr Baker was then told that a mistake had been made and that the two days in between his symptoms first appearing and his condition being confirmed had been critical with his sight loss.

The first 48 hours from this condition developing are vital in attempting to save the vision in the eye and the on-call ophthalmologist’s failure to attend the hospital to examine Mr Baker and the wrongful diagnosis of vitreous haemorrhage meant that Mr Baker’s eye sight could not be saved.

On January 6, Mr Baker was operated on to try to save the vision in his right eye, however this proved unsuccessful and he lost complete vision in his right eye. He subsequently required an operation to repair the inward turning of the eyelid and in the future, will need an operation to remove the eye.

Mr Baker contacted Fletchers Solicitors to commence a medical negligence claim against the Hywel Dda University Health Board on his behalf.

Fletchers successfully pursued the claim and Mr Baker was awarded £65,000 from the hospital for the delay in diagnosis.

Andrew Tindall, litigation executive in the medical negligence team at Fletchers Solicitors, said: “The facts of this case go to show just how important physical examinations of patients are, and that in some instances a diagnosis over the telephone can have devastating consequences.

“If the on-call ophthalmologist had attended to Mr Baker as he/she should have done, he would still have some sight in his right eye and would not require the removal of his eye in the future. No amount of money will bring the sight back in Mr Baker’s eye, but I do hope the compensation awarded can go some way to helping Mr Baker with his future needs.”

After his operation, Andrew’s health went rapidly downhill. He had a mini-stroke due to endocarditis and had to have a double heart bypass. In September 2017, Andrew had a recurrence of endocarditis, was put on an intensive course of intravenous antibiotics and was in hospital for six weeks.

Mr Baker commented: “I am bitterly upset at my loss of vision; particularly because I have been told that if I had been treated in time, it could have been saved.

“I just wanted an apology and someone to say that they were sorry for letting this happen to me. I’ve known people who have lost their vision, but I didn’t appreciate the impact it has on your life – it’s completely ruined my life. I can’t drive or read anymore; there is so much that I am no longer able to do.”

“I was a fit 72-year-old and now I’m like an old man. I used to walk about eight miles a day but now I’m lucky if I can manage 600 yards. Some days I don’t even want to get up in the morning because I know I’m not going to be able to do the things that I want to do. I had such a good life and I’ve lost so much.”

Mr Baker has had three operations to try to repair his eye and give him some vision back, but each operation has failed.

Mr Baker added: “Andrew was extremely efficient, and I was very, very pleased with all his efforts on my behalf. He was amazing throughout the case.

“The compensation was greater than I ever expected, and it will help with things that I need in the future, but nothing can compensate for what I’ve lost.”

Crime

Drunken rampage sparked safety fears at Home Bargains

Published

2 minutes ago

December 16, 2025

Sarah Jane Absalom

Customer admitted becoming ‘violent and unpleasant’ when drinking

A COURT has heard how staff and customers at the Haverfordwest branch of Home Bargains feared for their safety when a customer went on a drunken rampage inside the store.

Staff member Christine Campion became aware of the growing concern on the afternoon of October 23 as Christian Teeley, 22, began hurling drunken abuse at shoppers.

“She heard people shouting ‘Get him out,’ and could see Christian Teeley swearing at random members of the public,” Crown Prosecutor Ryan Colamazza told Haverfordwest magistrates this week.

“She asked him to leave the store, but he then started swearing at her and began walking towards her. She was concerned that he was going to be violent.”

Although Teeley did not physically assault the complainant, magistrates were told that his actions caused her to fear immediate violence. As a result, he was charged with common assault, as well as using threatening and abusive words and behaviour. He pleaded guilty to both offences.

During a subsequent police interview, Teeley admitted that he becomes “violent and unpleasant” when under the influence of alcohol.

The court was also told that the incident took place just three months after Teeley had received a conditional discharge for behaving aggressively while drunk towards staff at Withybush General Hospital. The latest offence therefore placed him in breach of that sentence.

Teeley, of Cherry Tree Close, Milford Haven, was sentenced to an 18-month Community Order, during which he must complete 20 rehabilitation activity requirement days. He was also ordered to wear an alcohol monitoring tag.

He must pay a £114 court surcharge and £85 in costs.

Crime

Teen found asleep at wheel was more than twice drink-drive limit

Published

7 minutes ago

December 16, 2025

Sarah Jane Absalom

A NINETEEN-YEAR-OLD motorist was discovered to be more than twice the legal drink-drive limit after being found asleep at the wheel of his car in Tenby.

Police were called to Tudor Way, Tenby, on the night of Saturday (Nov 30) following reports from a member of the public about the standard of Miller Phillips’ driving. His Ford Focus had been seen mounting the pavement before coming to a standstill.

“He was attempting to start the vehicle, but it wasn’t going anywhere,” Crown Prosecutor Ryan Colamazza told Haverfordwest magistrates this week.

A roadside breath test proved positive, and further tests at the police station showed the 19-year-old had 80 micrograms of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath. The legal limit is 35.

Defence solicitor Mike Kelleher said the consequences of the offence would stay with his client for a long time.

“The decision to drive that night is going to haunt him for a considerable length of time,” he said.

“He was asleep at the wheel when police arrived, and the vehicle had hardly moved at all. But he fully accepts that he drove it that very short distance.”

Phillips, of Hop Gardens Road, Sageston, pleaded guilty to the offence. He was disqualified from driving for 17 months, fined £400, and ordered to pay a £160 surcharge and £85 court costs.

Crime

Woman ‘terrified in own home’ after ex breaches court order

Published

15 minutes ago

December 16, 2025

Sarah Jane Absalom

Former partner jailed in suspended sentence after travelling from Birmingham to Milford Haven

A WOMAN has told a court she lives in fear after seeing her former partner standing outside her home, despite him being banned from approaching her under a two-year non-molestation order.

Haverfordwest magistrates heard this week that the woman believed her ex-partner, Michael Walden, had been living in Birmingham since the order was imposed in July.

However, on December 15, footage from her Ring doorbell showed Walden standing outside her property in Milford Haven while she was collecting her children from school.

In a statement read to the court, the woman said: “I was very scared. I’m terrified of being in my own home, and I was feeling scared about taking the children to school the following day.”

The non-molestation order prohibited Walden from attending the woman’s address or making any direct or indirect contact with her.

Crown Prosecutor Ryan Colamazza said the woman’s fear was heightened by her belief that Walden had been residing in Birmingham following his previous court appearance.

But defence solicitor Mike Kelleher stressed that no direct contact had taken place.

“He was not there to make any sort of trouble or threats,” he said. “He just wanted to ensure that his children were well.

“There was no direct contact with the woman – he was simply seen on the Ring doorbell.”

The court also heard that when Walden was arrested, police discovered a quantity of cannabis in his possession.

Walden pleaded guilty to possession of cannabis and breaching the non-molestation order.

Sentencing him, the presiding magistrate said: “The fact that this was pre-meditated and that you travelled down to Pembrokeshire from Birmingham, knowing you were prohibited from attending the woman’s address, crosses the custody threshold.”

Walden was sentenced to eight weeks in custody, suspended for 12 months. He was ordered to pay £85 costs and a £154 court surcharge. A forfeiture and destruction order was also imposed for the cannabis.