One of the first things Janelle Gale mentions is not being able to swim in the ocean for six years.
If she had, the tissue around the pelvic mesh placed inside her would become infected, making the pain she was in even more unbearable.
Despite having barely any leakage before her 2014 surgery, afterwards she became heavily incontinent.
She was a drag-racing champion, but that came to a halt.
She said it destroyed her marriage. She couldn't have sex. She still can't work.
"I thought my life would be so much better for having [the surgery] … And I got this present instead," the 58-year-old Perth woman said.
"I'm not the person that I used to be, and I hate that."
In September, a $300 million settlement in two class actions over the failed mesh products by Johnson & Johnson Medical and Ethicon brought some relief.
The settlement was the biggest win in a product liability case in Australian history.
But the satisfaction of the court victory has not lasted long for Ms Gale.
Shine Lawyers, which ran the suit, is proposing to take up to $99.5 million from the payout in costs, just under a third of the total sum.
That includes $38 million for past costs, up to $35 million for the future costs of distributing the settlement to the women and $26 million for the interest liabilities associated with funding the case.
Any final costs order is subject to court approval.
The firm has already received an extra $40 million directly from Johnson & Johnson as part of an order arising from the first class action.
While pelvic mesh victims have been grappling with the news this week, Shine Lawyers has flown dozens of staff from around the country to Hamilton Island for its inaugural legal symposium.
Staff members and the company have been posting photos and the videos of the event on social media — including black-tie events and boat outings.
"I can't comprehend it. I really can't," Ms Gale said.
"To hear that they're doing stuff like that — that trust that just feels broken."
A Shine Lawyers spokesperson said the conference had been many years in the planning, had been postponed several times due to the pandemic and was funded in partnership with corporate sponsors.
"The purpose of the symposium was to assist our legal teams to complete their continuing professional development units, which are a requirement for all practising solicitors, and to use their learnings to serve our clients," the spokesperson said.
Frustration over compensation proposal
More than 200 women in the class action group of about 11,000 have indicated to the ABC they're unhappy with the compensation proposal released by Shine Lawyers two weeks ago.
Representatives of the group said there was mass confusion over what compensation they might be eligible for and how many hoops they would have to jump through to receive a payment.
Many said their calls and emails to Shine seeking clarity had gone unanswered.
They were told they would have access to a $7,500 payment if they chose a 'fast track' option, which would be on the lower end of payouts.
Otherwise, they would need to go through an assessment process to determine their level of harm, carried out by a personal injury lawyer independent of Shine.
Their compensation would then be decided by Shine in accordance with the settlement scheme and consumer law.
It's not known how many women will be eligible in the pool, but Shine has indicated it will be at least 6,000.
Many of the affected women fear their hopes of substantial individual payouts have been dashed.
Ms Gale estimated she spent more than $70,000 on four surgeries trying to remove the mesh. She has withdrawn all her super.
She is on a disability pension, has no savings and struggles to pay for all the ongoing medications she needs.
"[I was hoping for] enough that could mean that I could live comfortably without worrying every fortnight… do I have enough money to get my meds this month? Or can I afford to go to the dentist because I have a broken tooth?" she said.
"So it's all those little things, I thought that the compensation would just give me a little bit more of a comfortable life."
Legal experts note split of funds is 'problematic'
Several lawyers familiar with the class actions told the ABC there were legitimate questions to be asked about the legal costs.
Michael Legg, a professor in the Faculty of Law at UNSW, said Shine's bid for $99.5 million was significantly higher than what was normally seen in class actions.
In comparison, the biggest class-action win in Australian history was the Black Saturday Kilmore bushfire settlement of $494.67 million. That included $90 million in costs.
"It's a very large amount of money, which will be going to the lawyers, rather than to the group members that have suffered loss. And so I tend to think that's problematic," Professor Legg said.
"The whole point of a class action is to achieve access to justice and compensation for the people that have been harmed.
"When you have large amounts of money going to lawyers, then that reduces what's there for the people who have really been injured."
He said while Shine had disclosed it had received previous costs from Johnson & Johnson in the settlement overview sent to the women - it did not say it was in the quantum of $40million.
"It's unbelievable that that is not clear in the information that is provided."
"That makes it very hard to determine if the additional amount that's being claimed, is fair and reasonable."
Under compensation law, a proportion of any private health, Medicare and Centrelink payments related to the women's injuries have to be paid back from the settlement.
Personal injury lawyer Nick Mann said it could drain the women's pool of compensation of up to $100 million — leaving them with just $100 million between them.
"These repayments could substantially chew up amounts payable in compensation to individual plaintiffs," he said.
In October, a Federal Court Justice lambasted Shine Lawyers for not getting together the settlement disbursement plan quickly enough, saying the delay could cause women to lose interest on the $300 million sum.
Legal fees balloon from staffing costs
There's no doubt the case has been hard fought by Shine and the women they represented.
The class action ran for 10 years and the defendants Johnson & Johnson appealed against the mesh victims' wins all the way to the High Court — leading to more lawyers and more legal fees.
Shine also took on the risk of running the case under its "no win, no fee" model.
If the firm had lost, it would have been on the hook for tens of millions of dollars.
Despite that, Professor Legg said Shine's Hamilton Island symposium was not a good look.
"Most clients understand the need to compensate their lawyers for their time and expertise," he said.
"But when you see lawyers engaging in, let's call it largesse, then that's when I think clients start to sort of say 'Well, am I am I being charged too much? Like, what am I really paying for here?'"
Barrister Peter Cashman has written extensively on the problems with class actions in Australia.
Without commenting on this particular case, he said credit needed to go to law firms for taking the risk on the action, but it was time to rein in legal costs.
"For example, a $100,000-a-year employee — a solicitor or paralegal — can be expected to generate costs or bills per annum of about a million dollars. In other words…. ten times their cost to the firm in terms of salary," Dr Cashman said.
"When I started practice [in 1975], the going rate was about three times."
Shine Lawyers will charge paralegals out at $295 per hour for future costs in the mesh case, according to legal documents tendered with the court.
The most experienced practitioners cost $790 an hour.
Dr Cashman said lessons could be learned from England, where the legal fees in class actions needed to be established before the action even started.
Changes need to be approved by the court.
"Our methods for judicial control and supervision of costs are only really introduced by and large at the end of the case after the costs have been incurred," he said.
"And in most class actions, the plaintiffs who run these cases have very little if any control over the costs."
For Gold Coast woman Marsha Healy, who had her pelvic mesh inserted in 2017, the hope is that she can salvage some of the $100,000 she estimates she's lost.
Ms Healy had four surgeries to try and fix the damage, and had to cut back on her cleaning work. She's single and has been told she won't be able to have sex again.
"I have had depression and anxiety from this as there aren't many men that will want a relationship with someone that can't be intimate. So it's been very lonely," she said.
She said from the surgeons, to the medical companies to the lawyers, she felt the women had been used.
"We're the ones suffering but everyone else seems to make money out of our suffering," Ms Healy said.
Court to rule on final settlement
A Federal court judge will examine Shine's settlement proposal on Monday to determine if it is appropriate and fair.
The court has appointed a law firm to be a contradictor, who acts for the women and will put forward reasons as to why the settlement should or should not be approved and whether the costs are too high.
A Shine Lawyers spokesperson said its position in relation to the proposed settlement would be heard in court.
"There is also a contradictor, who will assist the court in its consideration of the issues raised by the proposed settlement," they said.
"It is not appropriate for Shine Lawyers to say more about the matter while it is pending before the court."
