€11.5 million settlement as a result of uninsured driver

spank_inferno

spank_inferno wrote: »

Any word on whether the mother faced or will face a dangerous driving charge?

Was she driving dangerously?

wing1004

Deleted User wrote: »

Was she driving dangerously?

Did you read the report?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Was she driving dangerously?

She was looking at animals and wasn't watching the road, the car crossed to the other side of the road. If there wasn't a crash but a Garda witnessed such a display would it be dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention? Either way she wasn't driving in a safe manner.

sitja

I think this is going to create great arguments for solicitors in the future, if this one can get a 11.5m for her unfortunate kid due to no fault but her own... and in reality others would be serving a jail sentence great challenge for our solicitors defending in future---- Welcome to the wacky world of ireland!!! Most countries common sense come in to factor when writing up the law, our countries just a bunch of retards and dont know how to manage money!!!

Mycroft H

Vertakill wrote: »

Sorry, but am I missing something here?

The mother was driving around uninsured and, through her own fault, crashed and ruined her son's life.... sooo the MIBI (which we pay) are now giving her son (technically, his guardians, which coincidentally is the person responsible for his injuries) 11m?

I didn't realise that's how this worked..?

No no no and no.

Lets get something clear here. The parents won't see a cent of the money. The 11.5m will be held by the clerk of the court until the child turns 18. Until then, the only way that child can access the money is for the guardians to make an application to the court and apply for a portion of the money for vouched medical expenses or education expenses or other expenses relating to the child's welfare.

Don't think the parents will be going off on an expensive holiday on the back of this.

wing1004

wing1004 wrote: »

Did you read the report?

Yea, did I miss something?

RoverJames wrote: »

She was looking at animals and wasn't watching the road, the car crossed to the other side of the road. If there wasn't a crash but a Garda witnessed such a display would it be dangerous driving or driving without due care and attention? Either way she wasn't driving in a safe manner.

I think it's called an accident.. The horrific result doesn't have any bearing on the cause. If she got distracted for a moment, it's not dangerous driving.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Yea, did I miss something?

I think it's called an accident.. The horrific result doesn't have any bearing on the cause. If she got distracted for a moment, it's not dangerous driving.

I purposely removed the horrific result from the scenario I just gave above. If it's not dangerous driving it's driving without due car and attention.

hullaballoo

Just want to point out that the mother being uninsured is a complete red herring. If she had been insured, her insurance company would have had to pay the money.

The MIBI nominates an insurance company to deal with the claim. Either way, an insurance company pays the bill.

The circumstances of this case go back into insurance companies statistical records and the actuaries adjust premiums based on the risk.

No one is going to see any noticeable increase in premiums here. I don't know why people don't see that this is a good result. At least now the child has some of the care he needs.

Francie Barrett

hullaballoo wrote: »

No one is going to see any noticeable increase in premiums here. I don't know why people don't see that this is a good result. At least now the child has some of the care he needs.

Uninsured driving - the victimless crime. Glad we've cleared that up.

langdang

To put a human face on things



Good luck to the lad,was glad to hear from a previous poster that he was able to talk to the judge and all that.

RoverJames

RoverJames wrote: »

I purposely removed the horrific result from the scenario I just gave above. If it's not dangerous driving it's driving without due car and attention.

If she didn't crash but a guard saw her looking at animals, should she be arrested for driving without due care and attention?

sitja

Deleted User wrote: »

Yea, did I miss something?

I think it's called an accident.. The horrific result doesn't have any bearing on the cause. If she got distracted for a moment, it's not dangerous driving.

An Accident??? Driving without insurance!!!! Quite dangerous and against the law!!! An if the childs head hit the windscreen I dont think he was restrained properly!!! A person who doesnt have insurance probably dont take to much care in putting in child seat correctly...

Hullaballoo its good the child gets the right care but by the person who created this mess... and she didnt look to upset in front of tv cameras today, She should of been carried away in shackles!!!

hullaballoo

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Uninsured driving - the victimless crime. Glad we've cleared that up.

It's hardly the most serious crime on the books, is it? Fine of €2,500, disqualification for one year, 5 penalty points. I've heard of worse crimes.

What does that have to do with the child being cared for?

sitja

hullaballoo wrote: »

It's hardly the most serious crime on the books, is it? Fine of €2,500, disqualification for one year, 5 penalty points. I've heard of worse crimes.

What does that have to do with the child being cared for?

Well its a judge of character isnt it??? Couldnt be arsed to get insured, couldnt be arsed to pay full attention to the road!

Vertakill

hullaballoo wrote: »

Just want to point out that the mother being uninsured is a complete red herring. If she had been insured, her insurance company would have had to pay the money.

The MIBI nominates an insurance company to deal with the claim. Either way, an insurance company pays the bill.

The circumstances of this case go back into insurance companies statistical records and the actuaries adjust premiums based on the risk.

No one is going to see any noticeable increase in premiums here. I don't know why people don't see that this is a good result. At least now the child has some of the care he needs.

That's not entirely true.
The MIBI nominate an insurance company to DEAL with the claim on behalf of the MIBI.
That particular insurance company doesn't pay the claim - that would be absolutely ridiculous. The MIBI are the ones that pay out the claim.

Can you imagine AXA getting a phone call "Hi, yeah, it's your turn so we've nominated you to take care of this next claim. PS. It's gonna cost ye's 11.5 mill LAWL!"

So to clarify, no an insurance company is not paying for this, we are indirectly.
The MIBI's fund for uninsured drivers is made up from a petty cash created by us all donating a small amount of money on top of our own premiums.
When a claim arises, the MIBI delegate the claim to be taken care of by the claims department of any of the insurance companies in Ireland.

If she'd paid, say, Hibernian her few hundred euro per year, then Hibernian would've been obliged to pay out this 11.5m from their own coffers and we, and the MIBI, wouldn't be impacted whatsoever.

mirwillbeback

langdang wrote: »

To put a human face on things



Good luck to the lad,was glad to hear from a previous poster that he was able to talk to the judge and all that.

I could be bad here, but does she look like a traumatised parent? Hair done, nails done, loving the attention?

Is that where some of the 11m is going to go

sitja

exactly bud...... I dont think a 11.5m is just handed out with affecting us!!!


And yes she looks fairly done up for a devastated mother!!!

Vertakill

Deleted User wrote: »

Right, suggest a logical punishment so.. I'm all ears.

I've no idea what the standard punishment is for driving without insurance is, despite the fact I was rear-ended by some prick without insurance a few years ago that ruined me for a year.

However, I'll go with hullaballoo's post:

hullaballoo wrote: »

Fine of €2,500, disqualification for one year, 5 penalty points. I've heard of worse crimes.

If she got that, at least that would be a start.
But to let her away with nothing is absolutely scandalous.

People seem to keep glossing over the fact that, if she HADN'T got this whopper pay out of 11.5m and she only got, let's say, 1m .... what would her son do then for the rest of his life?
I'm sorry but I don't care what anyone says here, you can't be allowed to drive around the place with a kid in the back without insurance and if you're caught, you should be punished just like every other uninsured driver that's caught.

This ruling does nothing to discourage people from doing this and especially when times are tough, maybe more people will chance their arms without paying their insurance seeing as this woman got away with no punishment.

If they'd crashed into another driver and nobody was injured, the mother here would have been done for it.

So for her punishment to be mitigated by the fact that 'ah sure she's been punished enough already' makes absolutely no sense to me because they're sending out a really, really bad message to potential people here who may have been thinking of driving uninsured to save a few bob.

sitja

I am truly bemused by this whole case... Is it the case where prosecuting judge says "ok sure you have done enough damage to your own families life we wont prosecute you"..... Is there some sort of grey area where you are allowed to get away without being insured...??

pollars4

its not about her suffering or even her childs. Its about u didnt purchase car insurance for yourself or those in your care, and you crashed so your not protected. Now you and your son will suffer for the rest of your lives because you didnt take the necessary steps to mitigate or prevent an accident happening and actually caused it. Sorry about that, that is how insurance works. No its not?? you cause the accident and you get compensated to the tune of 11.5 million. I cant get my head around this.

Vertakill

seamus wrote: »

Clearly a lot of people here have a very high standard of what they consider to be a fit parent. Would you consider someone without health insurance to be an unfit parent? What if the child got a serious illness?

For a start, driving without car insurance is illegal... living and breathing without health insurance... isn't.
So, she's committed a crime here.

seamus wrote: »

It's a unique and bizarre case, and while it's a little odd that she doesn't appear to be have been "officially" punished, it's seems a little pointless to do so considering the consequences which have already arisen.

Do you know something we don't? Has she been "unofficially" punished? She broke the law and admitted it to the media all over the entire country... why isn't she being punished?
Yes I do feel sorry for both her and her son but... she knew what she was doing by not paying for insurance so she should have to pay for it by other means.
By the looks of her in the picture, it doesn't look like she's living rough so does she just have no regard for laws or what?

seamus wrote: »

But considering her an unfit parent is more than a little reactionary when you consider the hundreds of thousands of children in far worse conditions that the state considers to be in "fit" family homes.

Well, what some people deem unfit, others might not.
As other posters have mentioned, it's a sign of her character.

To drive around with a kid not properly secured or belted in the back of a car with no insurance is just asking for trouble.
She was taking a lot of risks with a young child's life. If they hadn't won that amount of money or if they didn't win anything, god only knows what they would have done.

mirwillbeback

mirwillbeback wrote: »

I could be bad here, but does she look like a traumatised parent? Hair done, nails done, loving the attention?

Is that where some of the 11m is going to go

sitja wrote: »

exactly bud...... I dont think a 11.5m is just handed out with affecting us!!!


And yes she looks fairly done up for a devastated mother!!!

It happened 4 years ago.. Should she wear a black shawl and be in a continual state of despair? The kid would love that.

And no, its not where any of your money is going. Its going on care.

bohsfan

RoverJames wrote: »

bohsfan wrote: »

............

There's a big difference between that situation and insinuating that they Mother can sit back from tomorrow with the money in her bank account.

bohsfan wrote: »

Clear enough for you?

But sure ShadowEarth did state that the mother would be looking after the lad. Sitting back tomorrow with the money in the account suggests that she'd be doing feck all.

Shadow Heath suggested that by saying that she would be looking after him while having a cup of coffee and having access to the 11.5m all the while. Anyway, I'm not going to fight someone else's battle through you, so I'll leave it at that

sitja

Deleted User wrote: »

It happened 4 years ago.. Should she wear a black shawl and be in a continual state of despair? The kid would love that.

And no, its not where any of your money is going. Its going on care.

Well if I CAUSED that damage to my child four years on id still hold my head in shame!!!! Dont be so naive her brand new car every year will be for his care!!! Expect X5's and other luxury cars as there means of transportation for the boy...... Everyone who thinks she wont see a cent mDu

sitja

sitja wrote: »

Well if I CAUSED that damage to my child four years on id still hold my head in shame!!!! Dont be so naive her brand new car every year will be for his care!!! Expect X5's and other luxury cars as there means of transportation for the boy...... Everyone who thinks she wont see a cent mDu

I can't believe we have equal voting rights.

Saab Ed

I take it that the guards are now going to go after the mother given the extent of damage she's caused. That could have been my child she milled.

challengemaster

Saab Ed wrote: »

I take it that the guards are now going to go after the mother given the extent of damage she's caused. That could have been my child she milled.

I wouldn't hold your breath

sitja

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't believe we have equal voting rights.

Computer crashed... And of course she is going to see the money once that child turns 18... She will have alot of access to it...

And explain your equal rights jibe???

sandin

seamus wrote: »

As pointed out in another thread, this money will not be given to his parents. It is held in trust by the courts and the parents must apply to the courts to have funds released, what the money is being used for, etc.

Once the child turns 18, he applies to have the remainder of the fund released to him.

I was awarded a small amount when I was 12, and this is how it worked for me.

And also in this case, should the son pass away and his mother is still alive, then any balance is paid back to the MIBI via a probable soon to be taken court case against the mother looking for repayment of the money paid out.

Then when his mother passes away, the value of her estate is paid to MIBI as well in settlement.

So whilst the mother may get some funds for being 24/7 care worker, she will not gain substantially and also lives with her guilt.

Not the best place to be in life.

Moffett

As said much earlier in this thread, there is a lot more to this story than is been reported. If the woman had no insurance I'm sure there would be a prosecution. If on sensing the massive cost of this particular claim the insurance company sought to void the womans insurance on a technicality in order to limit their liability, leaving the woman uninsured, the DPP may decide not to bring a case on the grounds of her believing that she was acting within the law when she drove on that day. It would also appear that though efforts were made to restrain the child, that the seat may not have been fitted correctly as Hodini would have trouble escaping one...and likewise, some of them require Hodini to fit them correctly. Speculation but not unlikely. It's also possible that she left the house without a stich of insurance. In either case the result was devistating. I'm glad too see this fund used to help someone that really needs it. Suggestions of jailing the woman etc. would only serve to punnish that lad all the more by depriving him of his mother regardless of how/if she failed him on that particular day. This is such a terrible tragdey and I feel all those involved have gone through enough at this point to desrve a small amount of compassion, even on Boards! Always bear in mind, that how ever good your driving record is to this point, is that these situations do occur, touch wood none of us will see one first hand.