Year of Call:
Rachel Vickers has over 20 years experience undertaking personal injury and clinical negligence cases. During this period she has been involved in cases covering nearly all areas of clinical specialism.
Rachel undertakes work in the Coroner’s court, CICA and has litigated a civil jury trial.
In recent years she has gained considerable expertise litigating high value birth injury, neurological and spinal injury claims. She is instructed on behalf of Claimants and by the NHS Resolution, MDU and MPS and is totally dedicated to achieving the best result for her clients in a wholly compassionate manner.
Hogan v Bond [November 2015]
Settlement of £1.65m, lower limb amputation following RTA. Acting for Defendant.
ST v Mead & Magna Housing [May 15]
Settlement of approx. £800,000 for psychiatric injuries following RTA.
JS & NT & DW v AH & DG & D&M [October 14]
Multiple party claim following collapse of residential property undergoing renovation. Acted for home owner and negotiated minimal contribution to overall settlement.
KM v Ross Aird [March 14]
Head injury following RTA, Claimant left minimally conscious. Settlement of £2m lump sum plus PPO of £300 pa.
FW & AW v Thompson [January 13 & November 2015]
Fatality of wife and mother following electrocution in bath. Husband’s claim settled for £800,000 daughter’s claim settled for £60,000.
Appointments & Memberships
Rachel Vickers is regulated by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and holds a current practising certificate. If you are not satisfied with the service provided, please click here.
Areas of Law
“Her attention to detail is unparalleled.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2019
“Forensic, intelligent and approachable.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2019
“Excellent.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2019
“A very impressive advocate. She is very thorough in complex cases and gives clear advice.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2018
“Assertive, clear and confident.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2018
“She is highly intelligent and pragmatic.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2017
“Very thorough and shows a high level of attention to detail.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2017
“She is forensic, intelligent and approachable.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2017
“She is incisive, intelligent and does not take any prisoners.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2016
“Rachel Vickers is a very impressive cross-examiner. She presented a case very nicely in court.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2016
“She is very personable and straightforward and has a ‘can do’ attitude.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2016
“She is always thoroughly prepared, and knows her cases inside out.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2015
“Offers very thorough and trustworthy advice. She’s quick-thinking, very committed and her trial preparation is excellent.” “She brought a sense of calm to the proceedings which was second to none. Her forensic analysis on complex medical issues is extremely impressive.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2015
“She provides crisp, clear advice, while retaining empathy with distressed clients.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2014
“She’s one of my first choices. The way she deals with clients is very methodical, detailed and intelligent – you feel like you’re in safe hands when you’re working with her. She is very personable, and able to empathise with clients.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2014
She reassures instructing solicitors by leaving “no stone unturned.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2013
“Thorough and reliable” and always produces carefully prepared opinions. Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2012
Rachel Vickers impresses with her “intellectual sharpness.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2012
“Extremely well thought of” and is appreciated by clients for her “incredible eye for detail.” Clinical Negligence, Chambers & Partners 2011
Rachel Vickers is “thorough, easily accessible and great with clients.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500, 2011
“Thorough”, “tenacious” and “extremely capable.” Clinical Negligence, Legal 500 2010