Glasgow man burned at work receives £6,500 after previous law firm said he didn’t even have a claim

Thomas Cairns worked as a hygiene specialist for a major bakery company. 

He was responsible for ensuring the factory met strict cleanliness standards and to do his job he had to use industrial chemicals stored in large drums – the liquid was then accessed via a short hose that opened with a valve.

The 59-year-old completed this task many times before but on this particular morning the sodium hydroxide solution poured onto his foot. 

It turned out a colleague accessed the drum the previous day and failed to properly close the valve - this caused a build-up of fluid which splashed Thomas as he manoeuvred the hose. 

The chemicals soaked through Thomas’ shoe and began to slowly corrode his skin. 

He tried to wash it and carry on but things were so severe he sought help from his GP.  

An urgent referral to hospital saw Thomas undergo two skin grafts and additional surgery to repair damaged tendons. 

He was unable to walk properly for nearly five months – he had to stop working, needed help with domestic tasks and had to give up his hobbies. 

Thomas said: “I can’t stand on my feet anymore due to the pain. I’ve had to retire and I’m now classed as disabled.

“I’ve also been forced to give up my hobbies like golf and five-a-side football. I was just forced to get on with it.”

In August 2023, one month after the incident, Thomas asked a law firm he thought could help.

But after sitting on the case for six months his initial lawyer told Thomas he didn’t have a claim. 

Thomas felt completely dejected but his partner encouraged him to keep going and speak to Digby Brown.

That’s when Matt Leckie, Partner in our Glasgow office, got involved – he looked into a workplace injury claim and from his experience knew Thomas definitely had a claim. 

In legal papers Matt argued Thomas’ employers failed to follow the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 and the Provision of Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998. 

He believed splashes of liquid chemicals was a reasonably foreseeable risk which could have been addressed by providing proper PPE, proper training and ensuring there was a procedure in place that prevented any leaking issues with the hose valve.

The insurance company for Thomas’ work denied any liability – they even went so far as to say he was “the owner of his own misfortune” and that Thomas had a duty to take care of himself. 

With the court hearing approaching the insurer offered to pay Thomas the sum of £6,500.

After a thorough review of the evidence and discussion about the offer, Thomas was happy to accept and received his compensation shortly before Christmas 2025.

He said: “It wasn’t so much about the money for me but about what they had done - I wanted them to admit they were wrong and the compensation means I’m right.

“I’ve tucked it away and it will help now I’m retired.

“After the first firm I went to turned me away I felt a bit fed up because they made me think I had no case – it was my partner who then insisted I not give up and speak to Digby Brown. 

“And I’m so glad I did because Matt fought so hard for me. He was brilliant.

“While the first firm just didn’t seem to care, Matt and Digby Brown did everything for me – and the whole process was much quicker and smoother than I could have imagined.”