HBM Sayers, Glasgow based Solicitors specializing in high profile incidents involving multiple injuries or fatalities.

Complaint: I was making a claim against my former employer for a work related illness. After reading the report from the Expert Witness, Dr Dorward, hired by HBM Sayers to prevent my claim from succeeding, I found it hard to believe such behavior would be tolerated by the Scottish Courts.

When I read the Guidelines to Expert Witnesses such as: (the expert when preparing a report for use in and when giving evidence at court, must remain independent of the parties, as the expert’s overriding duty is to the court, not to the party who instructs/pays him/her. Experts should be limited to factual and/or opinion issues within the experts’ expertise: legal liability is not a matter for experts to discuss or decide) I soon realized HBM Sayers were allowing Dr Dorward to produce a report that failed to comply with these guidelines.

After visiting the HBM Sayers website (www.hbmsayers.com/environmental_claims) I noticed a statement on their website that reads (Often the critical decision depends on the choice of the medical and/or technical expert. Thanks to our past experience we know which experts are most likely to assist in the defense of different types of actions).

That statement above, along with Dr Dorward's report on myself that failed to comply with Expert Witness Guidelines, have led to me personally believing HBM Sayers have been encouraging expert witnesses to produce reports that do not comply with the Expert Witness Guidelines. I also believe any such cases they have won using these tactics should be reopened.

The HBM Sayers website is in my opinion, one of the most sickening websites I have had the misfortune to visit. Below and right are a couple of extracts from their website.

Catastrophic and Large Loss
High profile incidents involving multiple injuries or fatalities inevitably result in insurance claims and need careful, expert handling.

Over the years we have acted for insurers in connection with the Ibrox Football Stadium disaster, the Piper Alpha Inquiry, the West Street bus crash and numerous other major incidents.

We acted on behalf of the insurers of parties prosecuted and sued in connection with the largest outbreak of E-coli in the UK, which occurred in Lanarkshire in 1997.

Today we are acting on behalf of the insurers of Rosepark Care Home in relation to a major fire which occurred in 2004 and on behalf of the insurers of Stockline in connection with the explosion at their factory in Maryhill in 2005.

Chambers UK Guide to the Legal Profession 2007 comments that we are 'particularly adept at complex catastrophic injury cases'.

Contact: Alastair Leggat

Environmental & Disease
Our specialist unit has expertise in all types of industrial disease claims.

We have acted for a large number of companies and insurers in defending actions relating to asbestos, HAVS, deafness, occupationally related cancers and stress. We have also acted in less common claims, including those arising from organophosphate poisoning and dermatitis.

All such claims have particular complexities – identifying dates of knowledge, or acceptable exposure limits, for example - that require careful handling. Often the critical decision depends on the choice of the medical and/or technical expert. Thanks to our past experience we know which experts are most likely to assist in the defense of different types of actions.

Contact: Ian Leach

My solicitor seemed unwilling to challenge this company and their expert witnesses stating he used that expert witness whenever he could. After my own doctor was told by my solicitor that Dr Dorward was representing the other side and my solicitor sent him a copy of his report, my doctor changed his original report to almost the same as Dr Dorward's report.

My doctor seemed so reluctant to face Dr Dorward in court he even went to the extent of giving false test results. This doctor is now under investigation for giving false test results that he knew were to be used as evidence in a court case.

The inaccurate reports of the expert witnesses and withheld test results led to the case being dropped.