Had a crash? You'll need cash!

dr.fuzzenstein

I've long suspected it and was targeted with abuse when I raised it in another thread, but the old "Oh my neck hurts, quick, I need 20k" after a 5 km/h tip is a very real phenomenon.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/summit-tackles-whiplash-epidemic-133601970.html

biko

"From texting and cold-calling drivers involved in accidents, to running high profile advertising campaigns, lawyers are encouraging people to claim for whiplash injuries sustained in the most minor of incidents - which barely damage the car's paintwork, never mind its driver.

Ambulance chasers.

dr.fuzzenstein

biko wrote: »

Ambulance chasers.

Just to qualify my OP, it seems that Ireland is almost doing better in that regard, since that sort of "cash for crash" advertising has been outlawed.

Ken.

All that needs to be done is for the government to get a couple of top doctors and scientists to come out and say that they've now invented a machine/test that can prove 100% if someone has whiplash. If you have it test is free. If your chancing your arm its €50000 per test. You pay up front and get refunded if you have whiplash. I bet claims would drop 99% over night.

al28283

I've never heard of anyone having that much cash on them

Ken.

Exactly. If you've a genuine case you'd beg or borrow to get it.

maidhc

This is utter ****e. The laws in Ireland and the Uk are completely different to elsewhere in Europe, and for the most part we requre a far higher standard from motorists.

Any claim brough will always be accompanied by a medical report, and generally two to three doctors will see the person. Again, their observations are absolutely paramount.

Insurance companies are no angels either, and are well known for sharp practice, particularly in trying to settle claims in their own advantage. Also how they value cars written off has little bearing on reality on occasion.

Of course there are some fraudulent claims, but far and away the majority are genuine. And, yes I am a solicitor.

al28283

lucyfur09 wrote: »

Exactly. If you've a genuine case you'd beg or borrow to get it.

or at least let you pay by cheque or by some other method, but paying that much in cash is ridiculous. why must it be in cash?

Ken.

al28283 wrote: »

or at least let you pay by cheque or by some other method, but paying that much in cash is ridiculous. why must it be in cash?

Because anyone can write a cheque for 50k. Doesn't mean they have it.

maidhc

lucyfur09 wrote: »

Because anyone can write a cheque for 50k. Doesn't mean they have it.

So only rich people should be allowed claim of insurance?

CiniO

lucyfur09 wrote: »

Exactly. If you've a genuine case you'd beg or borrow to get it.

First of all how can you know if you are a genuine case or not.
Even after a small accident you might have a pain in your neck for few day, and you won't know if it's any serious or not.

al28283

lucyfur09 wrote: »

Because anyone can write a cheque for 50k. Doesn't mean they have it.

surely bank transfers would do. I've never tried to withdraw a huge sum like that in cash from a bank but I'd be suprised if they'd even do it. Seems very bizarre and even dangerous

bobbytables

I think the lengths the average Joe would have to go through to raise 50k cash these days would probably render that avenue pointless. It just wouldn't happen & would only create an impassable barrier for legitimate cases.

When money is the sole barrier to opportunity, the poor become poorer; rich become richer; etc.

lucyfur09

lucyfur09 wrote: »

All that needs to be done is for the government to get a couple of top doctors and scientists to come out and say that they've now invented a machine/test that can prove 100% if someone has whiplash. If you have it test is free. If your chancing your arm its €50000 per test. You pay up front and get refunded if you have whiplash. I bet claims would drop 99% over night.

... no test exists

helimachoptor

My OHs sister was involved in a crash where she was at fault.

The other party who is a friend of the family and unemployed was offered €55K for injuries.. She's still playing ladies GAA and out getting hammered at the weekend.. she said 55K isnt enough for her suffering and it wasnt even a bad crash

maidhc

helimachoptor wrote: »

My OHs sister was involved in a crash where she was at fault.

The other party who is a friend of the family and unemployed was offered €55K for injuries.. She's still playing ladies GAA and out getting hammered at the weekend.. she said 55K isnt enough for her suffering and it wasnt even a bad crash

Have you seen her medical report? This is what decided the level of compensation! Also, there may be other factors such as loss of income.

My view is that payouts for small things like whiplash are quite generous (€5k-€20k being often on the table), however this only rises slowly as injuries get more serious to €250k or so where someone is rendered quadriplegic. If you compare this to the payouts for defamation, the system makes no sense at all.

Shane Fitz

maidhc wrote: »

helimachoptor wrote: »

My OHs sister was involved in a crash where she was at fault.

The other party who is a friend of the family and unemployed was offered €55K for injuries.. She's still playing ladies GAA and out getting hammered at the weekend.. she said 55K isnt enough for her suffering and it wasnt even a bad crash

Have you seen her medical report? This is what decided the level of compensation! Also, there may be other factors such as loss of income.

My view is that payouts for small things like whiplash are quite generous (€5k-€20k being often on the table), however this only rises slowly as injuries get more serious to €250k or so where someone is rendered quadriplegic. If you compare this to the payouts for defamation, the system makes no sense at all.

What loss of income, did you not notice in the previous post that this lady was unemployed?

Gophur

There's a large measure of hysteria in some posts.
1. The OP references a foreign news report, which has no relevance to Ireland whatsoever.
2. If you are in an accident, and at fault, let your Insurance company worry about any fraud. Whether the other person gets €5,000 or €50,000 has little relevance to you. PIAB has been set up to look after claims and to verify their authenticity.

Shane Fitz

Gophur wrote: »

There's a large measure of hysteria in some posts.
1. The OP references a foreign news report, which has no relevance to Ireland whatsoever.
2. If you are in an accident, and at fault, let your Insurance company worry about any fraud. Whether the other person gets €5,000 or €50,000 has little relevance to you. PIAB has been set up to look after claims and to verify their authenticity.

Insurance companies are far to quick to settle, apportion blame without any real investigation.
And as for the PIAB, you're kidding right?

dr.fuzzenstein

Yes, it is a UK report, but usually what happens over there gets mirrored over here.
Things have improved since the ban on "cash for crash" ads and the setting up of the personal injuries board, but there is still a lot of "my neck hurts, gimme money!" out there.

http://www.insuranceconfidential.ie/CaughtOut.aspx

It states:
"Insurance fraud costs insurance companies in Ireland an estimated €100 million annually which ends up being paid by honest policyholders.

But it's not only the fraudulant cases.
Paying someone €20k because their necks hurt a bit is obscene in the extreme and of course the legal profession would defend this sort of foodfight on the gravytrain with biscuit wheels with every tooth and nail they have, it's money at the end of the day and no one wants to give up their slice.
Well it comes from people who pay taxes or insurance of any kind.
I'm beginning to think "If you can't beat them, join them", if I can get that kind of money for a sore neck, having my foot stepped on should at least be worth €5k.
Oh, that hurts, can't walk a step yeronor, life ruined, etc...
It's a compo culture out there and it's costing everyone of us real money.

maidhc

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

It's a compo culture out there and it's costing everyone of us real money.

That is why 3rd party motor insurance is mandatory! Claims do cost us money.

All ill say is be very careful about what insurance companies say is "good for you", they dont make shed loads of money and sponsor football teams for nothing.

Solicitors for the most part make very small money from personal injuries, and should you choose the PIAB process is reasonably user friendly for the layperson.

john reilly

The whole compo culture has been nutured and nourished by solicitors and judges. This is their bread and butter and very few claims no matter how weak are poor they are will result in a payout. In fact I have witnessed cases where it was proven that the alleged injured party was lying and they still got a settlement, were in fact the appropriate scenario would be for the claimant to be fined or jailed and the solicitor if they are found guilty of encouraging are exagerating the claim

pburns

I had a supermarket prang a few years ago. Minor damage, my fault, I held my hands up even though the guy was acting like an ass. Garda came down to take details, she went through the motions, asked us were we injured etc. The guy starts rubbing his neck and complaining. It was 5mph if that!

At this stage I blew a fuse, got in his face and told him if he was gonna try that **** he better be able to back it up - or words to that effect:D. He wilted. At this point, the garda was leaning on my bootlid filling in her form. She looked up, calmly explained that she was only there to record the details not to make judgement BUT she couldn't possibly see how such a small incident could cause an injury and that her report would include this observation. I coulda kissed her. Yer man's face fell for a the second time in 60 seconds.

I put it through the insurance because frankly, he was not a guy I wanted to deal with. I've had people run into me and they were fair enough. One Polish guy wiped out his Cinquencento against a wall trying to avoid me. I didn't follow him up for the minor scrape on my bumper, kinda felt sorry for him:o!

maidhc

john reilly wrote: »

the appropriate scenario would be for the claimant to be fined or jailed and the solicitor if they are found guilty of encouraging are exagerating the claim

You don't know what you are talking about, this is law already as regards claimants:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0031/sec0014.html

Solicitors do not exaggerate claims, there is nothing in it for them, as getting a % of the award is illegal. Judges throw out cases quite often if they feel the claim cannot be substantiated.

ieoinu

maidhc wrote: »

You don't know what you are talking about, this is law already as regards claimants:
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/act/pub/0031/sec0014.html

Solicitors do not exaggerate claims, there is nothing in it for them, as getting a % of the award is illegal. Judges throw out cases quite often if they feel the claim cannot be substantiated.

I have seen cases where there has been no damage to vehicles and the claimant pursued an injury claim through the Court. Evidence was heard of the minor nature of damage and injuries, the judge commented on the fact that it wasn't the person's first or second claim but still awarded 18K in compo. Many Judges are not dealing with the claim culture that has grown in this country, in fact their outrageous judgements are fuelling it.

Judges are normally very strict in a prosecution for no insurance as insurance cases are the cash cow for legal professions as they are always paid at the end.

MugMugs

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Yes, it is a UK report, but usually what happens over there gets mirrored over here.

We are very different. The UK system is so open to exploitation its shocking to think they haven't scrapped it yet.

Gophur wrote: »

PIAB has been set up to look after claims and to verify their authenticity.

Dude. PIAB is a joke and a scam. The end game is generally litigation or excessive compensation.

maidhc

ieoinu wrote: »

I have seen cases where there has been no damage to vehicles and the claimant pursued an injury claim through the Court. Evidence was heard of the minor nature of damage and injuries, the judge commented on the fact that it wasn't the person's first or second claim but still awarded 18K in compo. Many Judges are not dealing with the claim culture that has grown in this country, in fact their outrageous judgements are fuelling it.

Im personally aware of an incident where there is little damage to a car but there are three consultants reports stating there severe injury.

[QUOTE=ieoinu;76926392
Judges are normally very strict in a prosecution for no insurance as insurance cases are the cash cow for legal professions as they are always paid at the end.[/QUOTE]

Again, incorrect. The reality is most law firms are strugging. There is some money in personal injury work, but not a huge amount, and then only in the most serious of accidents.

PIAB was set up at the insurance companies behest to bypass solicitors.

MugMugs

maidhc wrote: »

PIAB was set up at the insurance companies behest to bypass solicitors.

Rubbish. If we could get the stats I'd be confident that most PIAB applications are made with Solicitors on board.

maidhc

MugMugs wrote: »

Rubbish. If we could get the stats I'd be confident that most PIAB applications are made with Solicitors on board.

That is because people (for good reason) choose to use solicitors. The result though is that claimants themselves pay for the privilege of using a solicitor for the PIAB process. Fees as a conseqence are very moderate.

dr.fuzzenstein

MugMugs wrote: »

We are very different. The UK system is so open to exploitation its shocking to think they haven't scrapped it yet.

I know, it was similar here, there where ads for "no fee, keep 100% of compensation" before that sort of thing (down with it!) was outlawed.
In this article it is estimated that whiplash can carry a payout of between E15k to E78k, being shipwrecked and barely escaping with your life from a nearly capsized cruiseship will only pay you E11k, one can only wonder where these phantasy figures and phone number awards come from?
Is there a cut in awarding these sums?
It seems the PIAB has retained the old levels of award, it's just being paid faster.
It seems that fighting these claims will only result in higher cost, so there seems to be a "just fcuking pay him/her" attitude that will only result in more claims.
If the attitude was "pay no-one, fight it to the last and haggle for every penny", people would think twice if they really want to get into a huge scrap with an insurance company that can afford to keep this going for a while and maybe even win, meaning that claiming would be difficult, time consuming and only pay if there really is grounds for it.
Throwing money at the problem obviously hasn't helped. Making it far easier, more convenient and faster to claim, certainly didn't.

john reilly

maidhc wrote: »

That is because people (for good reason) choose to use solicitors. The result though is that claimants themselves pay for the privilege of using a solicitor for the PIAB process. Fees as a conseqence are very moderate.

the good reason being they can screw more money out of insurance paying members of the public/taxpayer or whoever. my heart bleeds for all those struggling solicitors who are trying to make up the loss of earnings from the property boom when they were raking it in. so its back to the old reliables. a good solicitor who can recommend a good specialist. and a bit of coaching, sure the judges arent going to see their oul buddies starving and let their own work dry up. i would hate to speculate how many claims or fraudulent but the majority would certainly be. even in medical negilence claims into millions there doesnt seem to be a lot of emphasis on proof of any real negligence

MugMugs

maidhc wrote: »

MugMugs wrote: »

Rubbish. If we could get the stats I'd be confident that most PIAB applications are made with Solicitors on board.

That is because people (for good reason) choose to use solicitors. The result though is that claimants themselves pay for the privilege of using a solicitor for the PIAB process. Fees as a conseqence are very moderate.

Isn't that at the Solicitors behest? PIAB application is fifty quid.... Why do solicitors seek up to and over a grand up front ?

maidhc

MugMugs wrote: »

Isn't that at the Solicitors behest? PIAB application is fifty quid.... Why do solicitors seek up to and over a grand up front ?

A tin of paint is €20, why pay a painter? It is the claimants choice to engage the services of a solicitor (and yes, I think it pays to do so, but I would think that...)

I don't see what is wrong with people who are injured being entitled to claim, and what is wrong with solicitors being entitled to be paid for their professional services.

If people want someone to blame I say blame doctors, because they must be finding injuries that people clearly believe don't exist!

Damien360

I think many of you are getting the wrong end of the stick here.

The issue is not the use if solicitors or making claims for legitimate injuries but the simple fact that irish payouts appear to be huge. Stats may prove that wrong but as long as headline cases get thousands for minor injuries then we will get those who wish to profit.

Loads of such cases reported in the Indo every week of johnny with a sore toe getting silly money. That is even before taking into account solicitors legitimate entitlement to pay.

A recent claim for the guts of 350,000 from one firm of solicitors in a case reported last week does not do the profession any good. (cannot find the report online at moment)

john reilly

maidhc wrote: »

A tin of paint is €20, why pay a painter? It is the claimants choice to engage the services of a solicitor (and yes, I think it pays to do so, but I would think that...)

I don't see what is wrong with people who are injured being entitled to claim, and what is wrong with solicitors being entitled to be paid for their professional services.

If people want someone to blame I say blame doctors, because they must be finding injuries that people clearly believe don't exist!

and any good solicitor will know where to find these doctors

listermint

john reilly wrote: »

and any good solicitor will know where to find these doctors

Obviously they live opposite each other in 'rafffgarrr'

maidhc

listermint wrote: »

Obviously they live opposite each other in 'rafffgarrr'

Again, no, people invariably go to their GP as a first port of call, who may refer them to a specialist if the need arises. Solciitors rarely if ever choose the doctors, except in medical neg cases where the claimant needs assitance in locating a doctor abroad.

Again, I do take offence to the snide comments. I don't live in "raffgarr", I don't own any property, and wouldn't get loan approval for the smallest apartment. Contrary to common belief, when insurance, rent and law society "practising certs", and not to mention any wages for staff are paid there is really very little left, I would have done far better to go teaching out of college!

I don't think awards are all that high in Ireland. A little generous for "small" injuries perhaps, but very poor for major injuries.

Big Nelly

Just post this cause happened recently.

Was very windy at parents house, they have large steel gates which close over to guard tractors etc in yard. Because it was so windy they where worried about them blowing open onto road. So opened the gates. Anyway about 4 in morning the wind had died down so they went down and closed over the gates again to protect.

About 7 in morning where woke up by neighbour. At some stage that morning there was a big gust of wind and one of the gates was swung open by force....was after 6 as someone we know had passed on way to work and they where still closed........it was open out onto road but was on straight and very clear so you could see from miles away.....

Anyway neighbour was up getting in cattle and see this old banger come up the road, it turned just past his house and went back down. Next thing he heard a bang. So he jumped in car and went down to see what happened

Car had driven into the open gates, not much damage done to car but bloke was "dying" in the car. Wanted an ambulance called out.....anyway calmed down and said he needed his car towed as it was too damaged. Car was driving perfect. Just some body damage to front.

Anyway insurance company landed to pick up car. And off he went with car as he was going to pick up his replacement car for work. Parents wanted to just fix damage and not go through insurance. He rejected this. Ended up getting over 5k in damages to buy a new car???? car was worthless piece of crap....but whatever way it worked he actually still has the "crashed " car and just fixed up body work.....

We know for a fact he had driven past the gates, seen them open on road, turned around and drove back down into them....now that is what you are dealing with in this country!!!!!:(

KTRIC

Speaking as someone that actually had whiplash, the compensation didn't help with the year of pain I had to endure.

In the end I didn't really want the compo, just wanted to pain to go away. People that put their hands out for compo while claiming they have injuries should be beaten with one of their own arms.

MugMugs

Big Nelly wrote: »

We know for a fact he had driven past the gates, seen them open on road, turned around and drove back down into them....now that is what you are dealing with in this country!!!!!:(

So you brought your factual evidence to the attention of the relevant parties and had his claim rejected then.... ?

Big Nelly

MugMugs wrote: »

So you brought your factual evidence to the attention of the relevant parties and had his claim rejected then.... ?

Rang insurance company and told them, heard nothing, then week later was told it was settled.....so thats how insurance company dealt with it!!

MugMugs

maidhc wrote: »

A tin of paint is €20, why pay a painter? It is the claimants choice to engage the services of a solicitor (and yes, I think it pays to do so, but I would think that...)

I don't see what is wrong with people who are injured being entitled to claim, and what is wrong with solicitors being entitled to be paid for their professional services.

If people want someone to blame I say blame doctors, because they must be finding injuries that people clearly believe don't exist!

I'll give you one thing..... Whilst I don't fully agree with your views you accept criticism well, counter arguments even better and don't rise to the general levels of agression usually met with a query around here.

Vicxas

This whole culture of personal injury claim infuriates me, and the ads that you see on TV only seem to fuel people into commiting this utter Sh!te!

MugMugs

Big Nelly wrote: »

Rang insurance company and told them, heard nothing, then week later was told it was settled.....so thats how insurance company dealt with it!!

There's a difference between hear say and proof though....

Morlar

lucyfur09 wrote: »

All that needs to be done is for the government to get a couple of top doctors and scientists to come out and say that they've now invented a machine/test that can prove 100% if someone has whiplash. If you have it test is free. If your chancing your arm its €50000 per test. You pay up front and get refunded if you have whiplash. I bet claims would drop 99% over night.

If you made solicitors financially liable for false claims that would also reduce the numbers. Maybe have a 3 strikes rule or something along those lines.

MugMugs

Morlar wrote: »

lucyfur09 wrote: »

All that needs to be done is for the government to get a couple of top doctors and scientists to come out and say that they've now invented a machine/test that can prove 100% if someone has whiplash. If you have it test is free. If your chancing your arm its €50000 per test. You pay up front and get refunded if you have whiplash. I bet claims would drop 99% over night.

If you made solicitors financially liable for false claims that would also reduce the numbers. Maybe have a 3 strikes rule or something along those lines.

That would insinuate that Solicitors are aware that their clients are making a fraudulent claim...

milltown

Big Nelly wrote: »

Just post this cause happened recently.

Was very windy at parents house, they have large steel gates which close over to guard tractors etc in yard. Because it was so windy they where worried about them blowing open onto road. So opened the gates. Anyway about 4 in morning the wind had died down so they went down and closed over the gates again to protect.

About 7 in morning where woke up by neighbour. At some stage that morning there was a big gust of wind and one of the gates was swung open by force....was after 6 as someone we know had passed on way to work and they where still closed........it was open out onto road but was on straight and very clear so you could see from miles away.....

Anyway neighbour was up getting in cattle and see this old banger come up the road, it turned just past his house and went back down. Next thing he heard a bang. So he jumped in car and went down to see what happened

Car had driven into the open gates, not much damage done to car but bloke was "dying" in the car. Wanted an ambulance called out.....anyway calmed down and said he needed his car towed as it was too damaged. Car was driving perfect. Just some body damage to front.

Anyway insurance company landed to pick up car. And off he went with car as he was going to pick up his replacement car for work. Parents wanted to just fix damage and not go through insurance. He rejected this. Ended up getting over 5k in damages to buy a new car???? car was worthless piece of crap....but whatever way it worked he actually still has the "crashed " car and just fixed up body work.....

We know for a fact he had driven past the gates, seen them open on road, turned around and drove back down into them....now that is what you are dealing with in this country!!!!!:(

Sounds like you got taken for a ride alright and it can be hard to swallow but the fact remains, if the gate wasn't open onto the road there would be no risk to anyone nor any risk of a bogey insurance claim. It's also possible (granted unlikely) that your claimant needed to come back down the road for a legitimate reason and was meeting oncoming traffic as he got to your gate and wisely decided to take his chances with the gate instead of a head on collision.

Honestly, I don't know who pi$$ed in Dr.Fuzzenstein's cornflakes but this topic was done to death in his previous thread. Finding an article on Yahoo that agrees with his contentious opinion doesn't necessitate a new thread IMO.

dr.fuzzenstein

milltown wrote: »

Sounds like you got taken for a ride alright and it can be hard to swallow but the fact remains, if the gate wasn't open onto the road there would be no risk to anyone nor any risk of a bogey insurance claim. It's also possible (granted unlikely) that your claimant needed to come back down the road for a legitimate reason and was meeting oncoming traffic as he got to your gate and wisely decided to take his chances with the gate instead of a head on collision.

Honestly, I don't know who pi$$ed in Dr.Fuzzenstein's cornflakes but this topic was done to death in his previous thread. Finding an article on Yahoo that agrees with his contentious opinion doesn't necessitate a new thread IMO.

Sounds more like someone spotting the perfect opportunity to make a few quid, it's always the ones who suffer from "footballer syndrome", rolling around in unimaginable pain, quick, get me a solicitor!
I'm more of a rice crispy man meself.
My point is that payouts are too easy, too high, not contested enough and some people treat the compensation system as an ATM machine, hang on, got to go down the road and fall into the pothole, I fancy a holiday.
Amazing the amount of hostility that provokes, but there's a whole industry gown up around this, from the claimants, the legal profession and the judiciary. They have a lot more cornflakes than me to be pissed in.

john reilly

Big Nelly wrote: »

Rang insurance company and told them, heard nothing, then week later was told it was settled.....so thats how insurance company dealt with it!!

facts generally dont get in the way of a claim. insurance company will pay out to avoid extorsionate legal fees

john reilly

MugMugs wrote: »

That would insinuate that Solicitors are aware that their clients are making a fraudulent claim...

i would say they are more than aware. i would imagine they are the driving force behind a lot of them

bobbytables

Sorry haven't read entire thread, but if this sort of thing were to go ahead, it would massively segment the PC component market. I would straight away only be interested in non-Windows certified hardware for starters, because I don't run Windows.

This "Windows Certified" bit, in all fairness, who actually cares about it. I've never heard anyone ask "is it Windows Certified?" when referring to hardware. I have just noticed (while posting this) that a 5 year old laptop beside me has such a sticker on it. I never even noticed, nor cared. So I can't see how something like this could go ahead. Just because hardware is certified to work with Windows, doesn't mean it shouldn't be allowed to at least work in conjunction with other operating systems.

Microsoft, focus on service oriented solutions in the cloud and leave my future mobo alone. Using a legal team to secure a tech company's future is not very innovative.