Insurance, claims and lack of personal responsability...

AudreyHepburn

In another thread I posted this;

I work in a Loss Adjusting firm setting up claims and nothing at all surprises me anymore in terms of what people will try to claim for. Its as if personal responsability means nothing sometimes.

I had one claim cross my desk where a woman was claiming against a fast food resturaunt because when she sat in a booth she fell asleep and fell out onto the floor.

In another case a cameraman was claiming against a tv station because there was a stampede or riot in the court he was filming in and he was hurt.

Now in all honesty in neither of the cases were the party being claimed against responsible.

People are unbelievably vindictive and will chance their arm at anything in terms of claims.

What happened to taking some responsability for your own actions? Or accepting that sometimes no-one is to blame?

As a result of my job I have come to the conclusion that nowadays people want to be allowed to claim/sue for all and sundry and not be held accountable for anything that goes wrong ever.

I'm curious as to other people's opinions on this......

SEPT 23 1989

I blame the place they call America

krudler

*insert post about woman suing for hot coffee thats not accurate and practically an urban legend now*

Boom_Bap

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I blame the place they call America

Many years ago when I was on a J1, there were ads everywhere for a claims lawyer. One of my fellow J1er's got tipped, even less than tipped, i think the breeze from a car hit them at a cross-walk. It was the type of thing where here you would just scowl at the driver and give a disapproving nod and then skip away.
But someone suggested calling the lawyer up for a laugh as it was an on-going gag. Case was taken and claim paid out. :eek:

Canis Lupus

People quite often lose all sense of shame when the possibility of free money is presented to them.

I also think the more litigious a place becomes the bar constantly rises and what would have been a ridiculous claim years ago is treated as 'normal'.

old_aussie

I strained my eyes reading this thread.

Fighting Irish

make money, fuck bitches

deandean

OP as you are in the loss adjusting business, please can you throw some light as to why in the name of sweet Jeez the insurance companies pay out on these ridiculous claims?

Would they not be better off taking a stand and fighting those cases instead of 'ach give him/her 20K it's cheaper than a court case'?

I remember the case of the burglar who cleared 150K after the running-over incident with the homeowner in Dundalk. The homeowner was later found not guilty of criminal charges; I was mad when details came out about the civil claim being settled without even involving the homeowner.

Unavailable for Comment

deandean wrote: »

I remember the case of the burglar who cleared 150K after the running-over incident with the homeowner in Dundalk. The homeowner was later found not guilty of criminal charges; I was mad when details came out about the civil claim being settled without even involving the homeowner.

See now that's where you sue the burglar. As he received a conviction he'll have a hard time mounting a defense and now that he has assets of €175000 he's actually worth it. Woohoo!

scholar007

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

In another thread I posted this;



As a result of my job I have come to the conclusion that nowadays people want to be allowed to claim/sue for all and sundry and not be held accountable for anything that goes wrong ever.

I'm curious as to other people's opinions on this......

Ireland - They advertise to discourage claims

UK - They advertise to encourage claims

Poor catholic peasant paddy is put off putting in for a haul in case people think he is trying it on.

They have a bit more self esteem in the UK.

pickarooney

So the cameraman was injured at work and put in an insurance claim for a work accident? Is there something I'm missing?

Dudess

Wow, insightful stuff OP. In the 90s "compo culture" was a turn of phrase.

People suing for stupid sh1t - how is that new?

AudreyHepburn

pickarooney wrote: »

So the cameraman was injured at work and put in an insurance claim for a work accident? Is there something I'm missing?

He was allegeing that the station's negligence caused his injuries when it was nothing to do with them...they did not cause the riot/stampede.

Stiffler2

INJURIES LAWYERS FOR YOU


NO WIN NO FEE


BUT IF WE WIN WE'LL SAY YOU CAN KEEP ALL THE MONIES BUT WE'LL STILL CHARGE YOU, WE JUST DON'T WANT YOU TO PAY US WITH THE MONEY YOU JUST WON AS IT F**KS UP OUR SLOGAN...

AudreyHepburn

deandean wrote: »

OP as you are in the loss adjusting business, please can you throw some light as to why in the name of sweet Jeez the insurance companies pay out on these ridiculous claims?

Would they not be better off taking a stand and fighting those cases instead of 'ach give him/her 20K it's cheaper than a court case'?

I remember the case of the burglar who cleared 150K after the running-over incident with the homeowner in Dundalk. The homeowner was later found not guilty of criminal charges; I was mad when details came out about the civil claim being settled without even involving the homeowner.

It's usually because the Insured puts up such a fight and creates such a fuss over what happened that the claim is paid simply to keep them happy and avoid losing their customers.

That and there are some serious sharks of solicitors out there who could literally help you get away with murder they're so tough.

AudreyHepburn

Dudess wrote: »

Wow, insightful stuff OP. In the 90s "compo culture" was a turn of phrase.

People suing for stupid sh1t - how is that new?

There's no need to sneer at me. I was just making an observation about a part of Irish culture that I had never experienced to this degree before.

I know it isn't new generally, but it is new to me.

ejmaztec

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

There's no need to sneer at me. I was just making an observation about a part of Irish culture that I had never experienced to this degree before.

I know it isn't new generally, but it is new to me.

It's been going on since some high priest was "injured" by falling rocks when they were building Newgrange. That was when solicitors were invented.

Ficheall

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

As a result of my job I have come to the conclusion that nowadays people want to be allowed to claim/sue for all and sundry and not be held accountable for anything that goes wrong ever.

Are your opinions on this not somehow at odds with your opinion that burglars should not be harmed by the owners of houses they burgle?

Reloc8

Hmmmmmmm...

OP reeks of BS

Last chance OP are you insisting your stories are true ?

*readies expose-ometer*

McCrack

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

It's usually because the Insured puts up such a fight and creates such a fuss over what happened that the claim is paid simply to keep them happy and avoid losing their customers.

That and there are some serious sharks of solicitors out there who could literally help you get away with murder they're so tough.

That's nonsense. In PI cases insurers deal initially with the claim and if proceedings are issued they will nominate solicitors to defend (or settle) the claim.

The insured is only named as a Respondent/Defendant and is not consulted at all with regards fighting the case. Insurance companies to not consider what their insured wants.

Reloc8

You said here that you were handling claims from Ireland http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=80369366

And you said this :-

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

In another case a cameraman was claiming against a tv station because there was a stampede or riot in the court he was filming in and he was hurt.

But that can't be right because there is an outright ban on privately operated audio-visual recording devices of any sort in Irish courts. Your cameraman would never have been let in the door with his camera never mind being allowed to film anything.

So why would anything you say be taken seriously ?

fishy fishy

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

He was allegeing that the station's negligence caused his injuries when it was nothing to do with them...they did not cause the riot/stampede.

are you not entitled to claim for work injuries - you are on the time of your employer - you wouldn't be there if it wasn't for work. Was he not told to go there to get the story?

this sounds like the insurance company trying to get out of paying for a work injury to me.

gnfnrhead

Reloc8 wrote: »

Hmmmmmmm...

OP reeks of BS

Last chance OP are you insisting your stories are true ?

*readies expose-ometer*

Were you just browsing near three month old threads when you found this?

Yamanoto

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Were you just browsing near three month old threads when you found this?

Seems the OP has a pet peeve

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=80369366

Reloc8

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Were you just browsing near three month old threads when you found this?

I read the locked one first before it was locked then got sent here by a mod link before posting my junk and wrecking the space time continuum