By Paula Hansen, managing director, World Accessible Holidays
In clinical negligence and catastrophic injury claims, future needs must be costed carefully and realistically.
Accommodation, therapies, equipment and care are typically supported by expert evidence so that the figures presented are both justified and practical. Holiday costs should be approached in the same way.
Too often, travel costs are still estimated using broad assumptions rather than specialist input.
A standard package price may be used as a starting point, or comparisons may be drawn with pre injury holidays without properly accounting for how a client’s needs have changed. The result can be a schedule that does not reflect what is genuinely required for safe and workable travel.
The issue is not simply that accessible travel is more expensive in general terms. It is that the market is narrower, availability is more limited and the viable options are shaped by the client’s actual needs.
Adapted rooms, for example, are not always priced at a premium in themselves.
More often, the accessible room exists within a higher room category or within a hotel that sits in a higher price bracket, because suitable options do not exist at the lower end of the market.
In addition, limited supply and high demand mean that lower priced accessible rooms may not be available when needed.
A realistic costing therefore needs to reflect the mid range of the market rather than an entry level price that may rarely be achievable in practice.
Destination choice must also be grounded in reality. A location may appear cost effective on paper, but if essential equipment is not available locally, it is not a viable option.
A client who requires a shower trolley, for instance, cannot be costed to travel to a destination where that equipment cannot be sourced.
A different destination may need to be selected because the necessary infrastructure exists there, even if that results in a higher overall cost. In this context, the increased cost reflects feasibility, not preference.
There are also practical restrictions that are often overlooked when costings are prepared without specialist input. Not all hotels accept external equipment.
If a client requires a profiling bed or other large items, the accommodation must be suitable not only in layout, but also in policy.
A hotel that appears appropriate on paper may refuse delivery or installation of equipment due to space constraints, health and safety policies or operational limitations.
Costing a holiday based on a property that cannot accommodate the required equipment risks producing figures that are either artificially low or unnecessarily high, depending on how the issue is addressed later.
Pre injury comparisons require similar care. A claimant may previously have travelled in three star accommodation, but their post injury requirements may now mean that this standard is no longer suitable.
Features such as level access, accessible bathrooms, sufficient circulation space and facilities like pool hoists are more consistently available in four star or higher properties.
The relevant comparison is not what the client chose before injury, but what can now be delivered safely and with dignity.
For solicitors and deputies, the challenge is to ensure that travel costs presented to the court are both defensible and deliverable. Underestimating costs may leave the client with insufficient funds to travel safely in the future.
Overestimating, without clear justification, risks challenge during the litigation process.
Expert travel input helps bridge this gap.
By working with specialists who understand accessibility, availability and the practical realities of travel, legal teams can obtain costings based on what can genuinely be delivered.
This includes appropriate accommodation standards, viable destinations, equipment provision and the operational constraints that may affect a booking.
Pricing incorrectly at the pre settlement stage carries long term consequences. If the figures are set too low, the client may later find that the holidays assumed within the claim are not achievable.
This can limit choice, reduce safety and ultimately restrict an important aspect of quality of life.
Travel is increasingly recognised as part of rehabilitation, independence and family life. Where it forms part of a claim, it should be supported by the same level of expert input as any other future need.
Accurate costing ensures not only that the figures stand up to scrutiny, but that they can be delivered in practice long after settlement has been reached.
Where travel forms part of a schedule of loss, specialist input can support the preparation of clear, evidence based costings that reflect real world availability and client need.
This includes destination suitability, accommodation standards, equipment provision and the practical constraints that may affect delivery.
World Accessible Holidays provides detailed travel cost reports for court, working alongside solicitors, deputies and case managers to ensure that proposed figures are realistic, justified and achievable in practice.
Learn more about World Accessible Holidays at worldaccessibleholidays.co.uk
Cygnet legal team celebrates dual shortlisting at The Lawyer Awards 2026
