In August 2015, Mr RW attended an Opticians, having been experiencing flashing lights in his right eye, floaters and fluid and the perception of a shadow. The symptoms had been present since the previous day.

He was examined by an Optometrist, under the primary eye care assessment and referral service, and visual field tests were carried out. The Claimant’s intra-ocular pressure was also tested. The results were noted, and the Claimant was advised that no further action was required, given a leaflet and advised to undergo ophthalmic examination if the floaters in his eyes got worse. At that stage, the Claimant queried if he had suffered a detached retina in his right eye, in view of the fact they were consistent with the symptoms he had suffered previously when the same had occurred in his left eye. He was advised that it was not.

The Claimant returned a few days later, complaining of deteriorating symptoms, and was examined again. Testing was repeated and a nasal retinal detachment was identified. It wasw noted that the Claimant’s right eye was dilated. The deterioration was to a level of registered blindness.

The Claimant attended the Hospital Eye Unit for further assessment on the same day and was seen by an Ophthalmic Surgeon who noted that he had only had movement vision on the right side and diagnosed an extensive subtotal macula off retinal detachment. The Claimant underwent vitrectomy, laser retinopexy and gas and oil injection on the same day.

Treatment and further testing continued until November 2016, but prior to this, in September 2016, the Claimant was medically retired from his position as a Police Firearms Officer because of his compromised vision. His vision loss is now permanent.

It was alleged that the failure of the Defendant to refer the Claimant for an ophthalmological assessment on the first attendance given his symptoms, his medical history and the results of testing, resulted in his eyesight deteriorating in the way in which it did, and had referral been made, then the Claimant would not have gone on to develop an extensive retinal detachment or the extreme deterioration in vision. Liability was in dispute, but the case was settled by Samantha Sims for £185,000.