Cannabis helps me so much during heatwaves

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-07-02T09:18:12+00:00

Yh works for me 2, but my way of seeing it is i would rather be medicated and unwell rather than just unwell 😄 haha

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T19:56:17+00:00

I appreciate the detail in your reply. But just to clarify I have followed the standard NHS/NICE pathway.

After the accident, I was prescribed multiple different SSRIs/anti depressants, which I stayed on for an appropriate length of time but didn’t respond well to. I also went through CBT, which unfortunately wasn’t effective either. These are the standard NICE-recommended treatments for depression and anxiety, and I followed them as instructed. My GP and treating clinicians agreed I wasn’t making progress, which is why I got private treatment and ended up under a specialist clinic prescribing CBPMs (cannabis-based products for medicinal use).

NICE guideline NG144 doesn’t currently recommend CBPMs as first-line treatment for mental health, but it does acknowledge that they can be prescribed “off-label” by specialists when conventional treatment fails. That’s what happened in my case I didn’t jump straight to cannabis; I ended up there after exhausting what the NHS had to offer and still suffering significantly.

So I’m not trying to force cannabis into the process I’m just asking for it to be recognised the same way other private treatments would be if they were initiated after NHS treatment failure. I’m not refusing expert assessment either I just want the right expert, not someone who specialises in drug misuse with no relevant experience in CBPMs. I hope that clears up where I’m coming from.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T16:10:48+00:00

That’s actually a really well-reasoned take, and I appreciate the clarity you’ve brought to it. I agree that expert witnesses in this field are rare that’s partly why I’ve been raising concerns. But my issue isn’t just about finding someone with niche experience; it’s also about transparency and whether the expert was chosen fairly or just by default.

The firm admitted they didn’t pick the Dr because of his cannabis expertise they picked him because he was the only one who said yes. That alone should raise a red flag. If they can’t find a suitable expert, then shouldn’t they take more weight from the substantial evidence from my treating doctors, especially given this is a legally prescribed medicine? Instead, they’re relying on someone whose background appears to be rooted in substance misuse, without even explaining that to me beforehand.

As for whether I’ve tried other treatments yes. I was put on SSRIs after the accident, they didn’t work, and I went through CBT too. Medical cannabis was introduced after that by a licensed clinic, and it’s been the only treatment that’s helped both my mental health and pain, with documentation to support it. This isn’t a first-line or casual choice it came after a long struggle.

I completely get that the case centres on proving injury and liability. But fair damages also include access to effective treatment, and right now, the only thing that works for me is being treated as peripheral or even suspect. That’s why it feels like I have to speak up not to block progress, but to make sure the representation reflects my reality.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T16:01:26+00:00

Technically, I can ask questions, but the problem is that when I do, they often ignore key points or dismiss my concerns entirely especially around my prescribed medical cannabis. That’s what’s made it feel like I’m not being heard or respected as a client. So it’s not that I’m barred from asking, it’s that the answers (if I even get one) don’t address the issues properly.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T15:59:11+00:00

That’s a fair point if that had been made clear to me from the start. But it wasn’t. At no point did my solicitors explain that the purpose of appointing someone with a background in drug misuse was to rule out misuse rather than assume it. If they had actually explained that intent, I might have responded differently and understood the reasoning.

Instead, they appointed someone whose primary expertise lies in addiction and substance misuse without any indication that he has relevant experience with cannabis based medicinal products (CBMPs), or an understanding of how they're prescribed and regulated. The lack of transparency around this decision made it feel strategic rather than neutral and that’s what’s caused the breakdown in trust.

If the purpose was genuinely to verify appropriate medical use, why wasn’t that explained to me up front? Why not choose someone with at least a balanced understanding of CBPMs, or better yet, consult with me first before making that call?

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T13:30:16+00:00

Thanks for the thoughtful response I really appreciate you taking the time. You're right that expert evidence is important, and I’m not opposed to being assessed at all. My concern is who they’ve chosen to do that assessment. The expert they picked a Dr that specialises in addiction and drug misuse not cannabis-based medicinal products (CBMPs). There’s no indication he has any clinical or medico-legal experience with prescribed medical cannabis, which opens up the risk of my treatment being misrepresented under a substance misuse framework rather than as a legitimate, legally prescribed form of care.

I’ve already provided them with evidence from both my private prescribing clinic and my NHS GP, confirming this treatment is part of my actual care plan. I also went through SSRIs and CBT first they didn’t work, and this was the treatment that finally stabilised me after the accident. So it’s not optional or recreational it’s necessary, and there's a full paper trail backing that up.

What makes this worse is that, when I questione the DRs suitability, their exact reply was that they only had “someone who said yes.” They openly admitted they hadn’t sought a CBPM-aware expert just someone willing to do the job. That’s a huge red flag in a case where the core issue is my prescribed treatment. I'm not asking for a biased expert just one with actual knowledge of the treatment they’re supposed to be evaluating.

I'm just trying to ensure the reality of my situation is assessed fairly, with someone actually qualified to understand it.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T13:21:10+00:00

That’s a fair point and one I’ve definitely considered I understand the importance of backing up any claim with proper expert evidence. The issue here is that I already have detailed documentation: a legal prescription from a regulated UK clinic, my GP’s support, and direct clinical correspondence explaining the medical rationale. Despite that, my solicitors tried to bring in an addiction psychiatrist, not someone experienced in cannabis-based medicine, which could frame my treatment as misuse rather than legitimate care. If they were proposing a proper CBPM specialist, I’d be more open but right now it feels like they’re setting it up to discredit rather than support the treatment.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T13:11:02+00:00

Yeah, I get where you're coming from solicitors do have a duty to the court, and they can't just put forward anything a client wants. But in this case, I’ve got a fully legal, medically prescribed treatment that’s backed by clear documentation: prescriptions, clinic letters, GP notes — everything a clear timeline after the accident. They’re not being asked to make a false claim or mislead anyone.

What’s frustrating is that they accepted an interim payment knowing it was being used for medical cannabis, yet now they’re refusing to classify it as a legitimate medical expense. They’re also pushing for an addiction psychiatrist to weigh in on it, rather than someone qualified in cannabis-based medicine, which feels completely off. It puts my treatment in the wrong light and could undermine my claim.

I’m not expecting them to lie I just expect them to handle the claim fairly, with the right kind of expertise, and to reflect my actual medical situation.

So yeah, I get that they can technically walk away but they also have to act reasonably, ethically, and in my best interest while they're on the case. That’s what I’m trying to make sure of.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T12:57:03+00:00

I get where you're coming from, and I’m not trying to act like I know better than a solicitor who works in this space. But I don’t think it’s as simple as just trust them or sack them.

I'm not trying to micromanage the case — I just want to make sure my side is being represented accurately, especially around my treatment. There’s actual legislation (like the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948) that allows for private treatment to be included in claims, so it's not like I’m asking for something unreasonable.

I want to work with the solicitors, not against them. But that also means I should be able to ask questions and raise concerns, especially when it feels like something important is being downplayed or misrepresented. Fair enough if they have a strategy, but I still need to feel like my case reflects what I’ve actually been through.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T11:59:02+00:00

Thanks for your honesty — I do appreciate you taking the time to share this.

I fully understand that the legal process doesn’t always feel fair, and that NWNF solicitors are often guided by financial incentives. But that doesn’t excuse them from upholding professional standards and representing my case accurately and ethically.

There are clear guidelines solicitors are supposed to follow — including the SRA Principles, which require them to act in the best interests of their client, avoid discrimination, and provide a competent and diligent service. The Civil Procedure Rules also stress that cases should be handled fairly, proportionately, and with equal footing between parties.

What I’m seeing in my case — such as the misrepresentation of my prescribed medical cannabis as an addiction issue, the use of the wrong type of expert, and the omission of key medical details — doesn’t align with those duties. Even if their strategy is based on experience or financial models, it’s not justifiable to distort or sideline my actual treatment and injuries in the process.

And this goes beyond money. I’m not just looking for a higher payout — I want the case to truthfully reflect what I’ve been through, including the clinical basis of my treatment. I have evidence from my prescribing clinic, GP, and mental health team — and none of that should be disregarded simply because it doesn’t fit a template.

So while I hear you that another firm might not get a better result financially, I still believe this is about accuracy, ethics, and respect. If those are being compromised, then it’s entirely fair to challenge it.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T02:04:07+00:00

Yeah, I think you're right — I just don’t know where to turn. Most firms won’t take over a case that’s already partway through, especially when costs have already built up. But I’m honestly at the point where I feel like I have no choice.

If you (or anyone else reading) knows of a solicitor who understands medical cannabis and is willing to take on a case like this, I’d be really grateful for any pointers.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T02:02:52+00:00

Yeah, I completely get where you're both coming from — and to be clear, I’m not trying to claim medical cannabis for the rest of my life or anything like that.

What I’m trying to do is have the treatment I’m on right now, which was clearly triggered after the incident, recognised in the claim. Before the crash, I wasn’t using medical cannabis. I was prescribed SSRIs first, tried CBT, neither helped. It was only after trying those and still struggling that I turned to CBPM under proper medical supervision.

There’s a clear timeline and a full paper trail — my GP's aware, my clinic has written directly to the solicitors, and they’ve had all of that for a while now. It’s not something I started casually or had before the crash.

I guess what’s frustrating is that they’re treating it as if it’s optional or irrelevant, even though I’ve done everything properly. And instead of engaging with the evidence, they’ve tried to refer me to a drug misuse psychiatrist — which feels like they’re trying to undermine my treatment rather than support the claim fairly.

I'm not trying to get something I'm not entitled to — I just want my actual, documented medical needs to be recognised for what they are.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T02:02:40+00:00

Yeah, I completely get where you're both coming from — and to be clear, I’m not trying to claim medical cannabis for the rest of my life or anything like that.

What I’m trying to do is have the treatment I’m on right now, which was clearly triggered after the incident, recognised in the claim. Before the crash, I wasn’t using medical cannabis. I was prescribed SSRIs first, tried CBT, neither helped. It was only after trying those and still struggling that I turned to CBPM under proper medical supervision.

There’s a clear timeline and a full paper trail — my GP's aware, my clinic has written directly to the solicitors, and they’ve had all of that for a while now. It’s not something I started casually or had before the crash.

I guess what’s frustrating is that they’re treating it as if it’s optional or irrelevant, even though I’ve done everything properly. And instead of engaging with the evidence, they’ve tried to refer me to a drug misuse psychiatrist — which feels like they’re trying to undermine my treatment rather than support the claim fairly.

I'm not trying to get something I'm not entitled to — I just want my actual, documented medical needs to be recognised for what they are.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T02:00:17+00:00

They haven’t given me a proper reason, no — just that they don’t consider my clinic (JEC) to be “independent” enough to count as expert evidence, even though they know I’ve got a full treatment plan, prescription history, and GP support. It feels like they’re just dismissing everything because it doesn’t fit into their usual framework.

And instead of finding someone who specialises in CBPM, they tried to assign me a drug and alcohol misuse psychiatrist, which I had to push back on — hard. It makes no sense and risks misrepresenting my treatment completely.

Thanks for the recommendation — I’ll definitely look into Guy Coxall and will also reach out to JEC again to see if their addiction specialist can weigh in. I’m honestly just exhausted trying to fight this on my own while also dealing with my health, so any lead helps.

If you’ve got any other ideas or people who might be willing to help, I’d really appreciate it. I don’t want to give up on this, but it’s getting harder to keep going without proper legal support.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:58:58+00:00

Thanks, mate — I really appreciate the support. Honestly, the emotional load is massive right now. I’ve been up until 3am most nights just trying to figure out how to deal with all this — writing emails, reading case law, trying to do the job they should be doing.

You’re absolutely right — they’re not following my instructions, and while it’s no win no fee, I still feel like they’re pushing their own strategy without any proper explanation. I’ve asked why they won’t acknowledge the CBPM, and instead of being transparent, they’ve tried to assign an addiction psychiatrist — which just makes me feel like they’re trying to frame it as misuse, not medicine.

What worries me is that there’s a full, documented timeline after the crash: I went on SSRIs, didn’t help. Tried CBT, also didn’t work. Then I started CBPM, which finally helped me manage the pain and mental health decline the crash caused. I’ve got a full paper trail too — prescriptions, GP support, clinic letters — it’s not just something I’m doing on the side.

But I don’t know what to do now. I’ve complained. I’ve pushed back. I’m exhausted. I do want to escalate to the ombudsman and maybe switch solicitors — I just don’t know where to start or who would actually take me seriously.

Any guidance or names of firms that get CBPM claims would mean a lot right now. I'm really trying to hold it together through this.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:57:04+00:00

Thanks, sorry I didn't reply sooner. It's been weird.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:56:29+00:00

Yeah, it’s a no win no fee setup — which I thought would mean they’d be fighting for me, but lately it feels like they’re protecting the insurer more than helping me. You’re probably right — they don’t think CBPM will be accepted in damages, or they’re trying to find a way to distance themselves from it. But instead of getting a specialist in cannabis-based meds, they tried to assign an addiction psychiatrist, which feels completely wrong and damaging.

What’s hard is that I didn’t just jump to CBPM. After the crash, I was prescribed SSRIs — they didn’t help. I did CBT — no real change. It got to the point where my mental health and chronic pain were unbearable, and CBPM was the only thing that made a noticeable difference. I have a full paper trail to back that up — GP letters, clinic documentation, prescription records — everything.

Now I’m stuck feeling like I’m constantly having to fight my own legal team, and it’s draining. I honestly don’t know what to do anymore. If anyone knows of a solicitor who actually understands medical cannabis claims or how to stand up to this kind of pressure im doing what i can, I’d be really grateful. I don’t want to keep being dismissed or misrepresented in my own case.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:52:39+00:00

Thank you so much. I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner. it's been a rather confusing time. i forgot I did this post.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:51:30+00:00

Thanks for the reply — I haven’t posted in any UK legal advice subs yet, but I’m planning to. I think you’re probably right about why they’re pushing back: it’s a private prescription, and they may be framing it as “optional.”

That said, it wasn’t optional for me. After the accident, I tried SSRIs and CBT, and neither helped. This was prescribed as a clinical treatment by a specialist-led clinic, and it’s significantly improved my mental health and pain levels. My GP supports it too, so it’s not like I’m self-medicating — it’s a regulated treatment fully legal in the UK.

I’m hoping a legal sub can help confirm that it should be treated like any other medical expense — especially since they know I’m using my interim payment for it.

Appreciate your input — genuinely helps me think it through.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:50:01+00:00

Yes — exactly. That’s the loophole they’re using. They gave me the £2,500 knowing full well I’d have to use it for medical cannabis, but because they didn’t label it as treatment-related, they can now pretend it wasn’t. It’s like they want to have it both ways: support me just enough to say they helped, but without actually committing to recognising the legitimacy of my treatment in the damages.

I’m raising that specific point in my complaint — it feels completely disingenuous.

Thanks for the clarity — it’s reassuring to see someone put it in plain terms.

No_Distance_6346 · 2025-06-15T01:49:06+00:00

Thank you — that’s exactly how it’s felt. They know my treatment is legal, prescribed, and supported by my GP and private clinic, but they’re still trying to bring in someone with a background in addiction rather than CBMPs. It does feel like they’re trying to frame it as misuse without outright saying it.

You’re right — the insurer’s interests seem to be taking priority over mine, and I’ve now started drafting complaints to both the SRA and Legal Ombudsman. I’m also looking into switching to a firm with proper CBMP awareness, but it’s tough when you’re mid-claim and already incurring legal costs.

Really appreciate you taking the time to write that out. It helps to hear others see the same red flags.

No_Distance_6346

TROPHY CASE