A YOUNG woman who claims she was left blind after being “misdiagnosed” with swine flu has made a High Court compensation bid.

Samantha Millard, 22, has lodged a writ against the National Pandemic Flu Service Helpline claiming she was wrongly prescribed Tamiflu in December 2009 because she didn’t have the virus.

Miss Millard, of Purslane Drive, Bure Park, Bicester, claims she had a severe allergic reaction to the drug and developed the life-threatening Stevens Johnson syndrome.

It later developed into toxic epidermal necrolysis syndrome which, she says, damaged her eyesight and left her with a string of health problems.

Miss Millard is now registered blind and is cared for full time by her mother, Debbie Van Horenbeeck.

Her writ says during the conversation with the swine flu helpline she told them an ear thermometer showed her temperature was normal, reading 35 to 36 degrees.

Her claim says the helpline was negligent in prescribing Tamiflu as a high temperature was a symptom of swine flu, and her primary complaint was severe earache.

It also says the helpline failed to advise Miss Millard that swine flu was a “self-limiting” illness and “in her case she was likely to get better without taking Tamiflu”.

The writ, submitted by London based Pennington’s Solicitors, said: “For the avoidance of doubt, had this information been offered, the claimant would have declined the medication.

“The claimant’s toxic epidermal necrolysis was caused by her taking Tamiflu.

“But for the aforesaid breaches of duty, Tamiflu would not have been prescribed and she would not have taken the drug and developed the condition.”

It added: “The claimant did not in fact have swine flu. The treatment of the claimant by the defendant, its servants or agents was negligent.”

The claim says Miss Millard has “no useful vision and is registered blind” and may in the future have surgery to replace her damaged cornea with an artificial one.

The writ said: “This is a difficult procedure with no guarantee of success. Even if performed and successful, the claimant will remain unable to drive or to navigate herself on public transport without assistance.

“The claimant’s vision is unlikely ever to recover to such an extent that she can live independently.”

The writ said Miss Millard has also suffered scarring, been left with extremely sensitive skin and had pigmentation changes, which may improve over time.

It also said she had developed mild post traumatic stress disorder, and she was “handicapped on the labour market”.

The claim is asking for damages to consider past and future losses and expenses and interest.

No figure has been submitted in the writ, but the court fee paid of £1,670 is due for all claims of more than £300,000 with no upward limit.

Miss Millard, who is studying at the Royal College for the Blind, declined to comment until the case was complete.

If the matter goes to court it is expected to be heard in December 2013 or January 2014.