Mark Pollock sues friends for fall that paralysed him

zefer

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/mark-pollock-sues-friends-over-paralysing-window-fall-1.2294601

I wonder what he is trying to get out of this? Is he trying to get money out of them or what? I personally think it's bad form that he is suing his friends.

I know what happened to him is absolutely terrible but what he has done since, I think may get stained by him suing his friends for falling out the window

BattleCorp

zefer wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/mark-pollock-sues-friends-over-paralysing-window-fall-1.2294601

I wonder what he is trying to get out of this? Is he trying to get money out of them or what? I personally think it's bad form that he is suing his friends.

I know what happened to him is absolutely terrible but what he has done since, I think may get stained by him suing his friends for falling out the window

Greed, pure and simple.

I doubt that they are friends anymore.

Specialun

Shirley he wont win the case

MagicMarker

In fairness, putting a blind man in a 2nd floor bedroom with a window open wide enough that someone could simply fall out was pretty ****ing stupid.

Generic Dreadhead

Suing some of your best friends because of an accident that was no ones fault is shameful.
Pure money grab. I'll probably get cr@p for this but I think that's an awful thing to do to anyone.
He should be ashamed, accidents happen.

gordongekko

I'm sure the reality is he is suing his friends insurance company.

Generic Dreadhead

MagicMarker wrote: »

In fairness, putting a blind man in a 2nd floor bedroom with a window open wide enough that someone could simply fall out was pretty ****ing stupid.

Well in fairness, he wasn't "Put" anywhere as you like to phrase it

He had been offered a bed in the ground-floor conservatory but, before the accident, had opted to share a second floor room with another guest.

Don't let the actual article get in the way of forming an opinion though

Squatter

MagicMarker wrote: »

In fairness, putting a blind man in a 2nd floor bedroom with a window open wide enough that someone could simply fall out was pretty ****ing stupid.

"Mr Pollock ...... had stayed with the couple before.
He had been offered a bed in the ground-floor conservatory but, before the accident, had opted to share a second floor room with another guest."

EDIT - Cormac beat me to it!

kylith

MagicMarker wrote: »

In fairness, putting a blind man in a 2nd floor bedroom with a window open wide enough that someone could simply fall out was pretty ****ing stupid.

He was offered a room on the ground floor and he turned it down.

I wonder how he'd have reacted if they insisted he stay on the ground floor 'because your blind. So you don't fall out the window and get hurt'. He'd probably have been insulted.

arayess

MagicMarker wrote: »

In fairness, putting a blind man in a 2nd floor bedroom with a window open wide enough that someone could simply fall out was pretty ****ing stupid.

they can hardly rebuild or re-design the house for his occasional stay over.

If the 2nd floor was unsuitable he should have said so himself , he is blind they aren't and they cannot reasonably be expected to understand every nuance of his life.

I'm hoping anyway it's the home insurance is being sued rather than the people themselves.

sconhome

Very sad and likely to taint all of the work he has being doing. The headlines all portray this as a money grab, what about personal responsibility or the people who surround him as helpers and aides?

Reading the excuse that he may have thought he was "passing through a hatch in a boat" really is poor.

MagicMarker

Cormac... wrote: »

Well in fairness, he wasn't "Put" anywhere as you like to phrase it



Don't let the actual article get in the way of forming an opinion though

Squatter wrote: »

"Mr Pollock ...... had stayed with the couple before.
He had been offered a bed in the ground-floor conservatory but, before the accident, had opted to share a second floor room with another guest."

EDIT - Cormac beat me to it!

arayess wrote: »

they can hardly rebuild or re-design the house for his occasional stay over.

If the 2nd floor was unsuitable he should have said so himself , he is blind they aren't and they cannot reasonably be expected to understand every nuance of his life.

I'm hoping anyway it's the home insurance is being sued rather than the people themselves.

kylith wrote: »

He was offered a room on the ground floor and he turned it down.

I wonder how he'd have reacted if they insisted he stay on the ground floor 'because your blind. So you don't fall out the window and get hurt'. He'd probably have been insulted.

The issue is not that he opted for a 2nd floor room, the issue is they left the ****ing window open.

The least that should have been done was ''hey, mind you don't fall out of the wide open window, it's over here... "

NachoBusiness

BattleCorp wrote: »

Greed, pure and simple.

lol.

Yeah, the blind, paralyzed, greedy, charitable, bastard.

seamus

The home insurance is definitely being sued, no solicitor would advise someone to sue an uninsured individual for millions of pounds. The would be a complete waste of money.

Something about Mark Pollock and the Mark Pollock Trust has just never sat right with me. I don't know what it is. I have a gut feeling that there's something "off" about the whole thing.

omerin

MagicMarker wrote: »

The issue is not that he opted for a 2nd floor room, the issue is they left the ****ing window open.

The least that should have been done was ''hey, mind you don't fall out of the wide open window, it's over here... "

no its not.

No one has taken responsibility of opening the window, it could have been him.

poor form

hidinginthebush

kylith wrote: »

He was offered a room on the ground floor and he turned it down.

I wonder how he'd have reacted if they insisted he stay on the ground floor 'because your blind. So you don't fall out the window and get hurt'. He'd probably have been insulted.

He probably would have sued them TBH lol

seamus wrote: »

The home insurance is definitely being sued, no solicitor would advise someone to sue an uninsured individual for millions of pounds. The would be a complete waste of money.

That's more likely IMO. I don't really have a problem with that. If he was left paralysed after falling two stories, I don't see the problem with him trying to get some sort of compensation for it, and if he's suing their home insurance it's not as if he's trying to take millions from his friends pockets.

BattleCorp

NachoBusiness wrote: »

lol.

Yeah, the blind, paralyzed, greedy, charitable, bastard.

You said it.

Daith

NachoBusiness wrote: »

lol.

Yeah, the blind, paralyzed, greedy, charitable, bastard.

Just because you're blind and paralyzed doesn't mean you can't be a greedy bastard you know!

SEPT 23 1989

no mention of a guide dog or is he suing him separately?

NachoBusiness

Daith wrote: »

Just because you're blind and paralyzed doesn't mean you can't be a greedy bastard you know!

Ah yeah I know..

I was at a screening of his docu 'Unbreakable' at the Lighthouse Cinema earlier in the year, in which he was in attendance. He gave a Q&A and afterwards as I was making my way out I realized I had forgotten my umbrella. Went back inside and he was chatting to one or two of his friends and said I had just forgotten something. Mark said: "Oh your umbrella is it?" and then got up, walked over to where I was sitting and got it for me and so I won't have a bad word said about him. He's a legend of a man, as noble and honest as they come.

Menas

Its all about the window and who left it open. Looks like a he said she said situation.

They should have made sure the window in the room he slept in remained closed or at least warned Mr Pollock it was open, said the QC.
Although it was uncertain who opened it, the barrister argued that, 'on the balance of probability', it was one of the Cahills.
'There was no justification whatsoever to neglect such a risk,' he told Mr Justice William Davis.
Mr Wilson-Smith claimed Mrs Cahill had considered the danger of leaving the window open - but decided not to close it because it was a warm evening.
She 'elected to do nothing' which was a 'disastrous misjudgement', he said.
However the Cahills, of Remenham Lane, Henley, deny the accident was in any way their fault.

Don't Chute!

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Ah yeah I know..

I was at a screening of his docu 'Unbreakable' at the Lighthouse Cinema earlier in the year, in which he was in attendance. He gave a Q&A and afterwards as I was making my way out I realized I had forgotten my umbrella. Went back inside and he was chatting to one or two of his friends and said I had just forgotten something. Mark said: "Oh your umbrella is it?" and then got up, walked over to where I was sitting and got it for me and so I won't have a bad word said about him. He's a legend of a man, as noble and honest as they come.

You got legend, noble and honest as they come from him simply handing you an umbrella? Wow.

buck65

**** this is a sucky story.

magma69

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Ah yeah I know..

I was at a screening of his docu 'Unbreakable' at the Lighthouse Cinema earlier in the year, in which he was in attendance. He gave a Q&A and afterwards as I was making my way out I realized I had forgotten my umbrella. Went back inside and he was chatting to one or two of his friends and said I had just forgotten something. Mark said: "Oh your umbrella is it?" and then got up, walked over to where I was sitting and got it for me and so I won't have a bad word said about him. He's a legend of a man, as noble and honest as they come.

I met Tiger Woods when I was a young fella, I just asked for his autograph, he asked me my name and wrote a note on my programme wishing me all the best. He then proceeded to give me a golf ball. He's a legend of a man, as noble and honest as they come.

Generic Dreadhead

MagicMarker wrote: »

The issue is not that he opted for a 2nd floor room, the issue is they left the ****ing window open.

The least that should have been done was ''hey, mind you don't fall out of the wide open window, it's over here... "

Actually, you can argue both points.... .watch!

The issue is not that they left the window open, the issue is that he opted to stay on the 2nd f**king floor

The least that he have been done was say ''hey, I'm blind and I'm going to ensure I can put myself in the safest situation possible, having been blind for many years this is something I am familiar with"

NachoBusiness

black and amber wrote: »

You got legend, noble and honest as they come from him simply handing you an umbrella? Wow.

I can't believe this reply nor that it got a bunch of thanks.

The man is PARALYZED and BLIND.

How the fcuk could he see my umbrella, let alone get up and then walk over and get it :P

thebaz

as people say accidents happen - part of life - but not in modern Ireland - everything is always someones fault , in our new greedy litigious society - with judges and some greedy legal eagles happy to play along - something has to give - now all my friends are wondering why the cost of there insurance has rocketed - I wonder why ? - shame on this new greed infested culture.

The Backwards Man

NachoBusiness wrote: »

I can't believe this reply nor that it got a bunch of thanks.

The man is PARALYZED and BLIND.

How the fcuk could he see my umbrella, let alone get up and then walk over and get it :P

You're the one was there, you tell us.

NachoBusiness

The Backwards Man wrote: »

You're the one was there, you tell us.

Stunt double.

The Backwards Man

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Stunt double.

Ah. You see, now your story makes sense.

NachoBusiness

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Ah. You see, now your story makes sense.

That it didn't make sense was the joke

DeadHand

NachoBusiness wrote: »

That it didn't make sense was the joke

'Cos there's nothing funnier than blindness and paralysis...

marklazarcovic

30k in benefits whilst living in lanzarote !!!

ScumLord

It seems a bit strange. There's no mention of drink taken?

I would assume that a blind person would take some responsibility to get to know the house they're staying in, where the boundaries where, doors and obstacles. If he'd stayed in the house before, it's not like he would completely clueless to the layout of the room.

I would have also thought a blind person would exercise some caution walking around a house they're not to familiar with. You'd have to be walking with a fair amount of confidence to just fall out with no chance of either tiping the wall with is feet our catching the sides of the window. Unless this was some sort of full length window.

Unless the owners of the house moved the window to where the door was I don't really see how it's their fault?

Mr. CooL ICE

DeadHand wrote: »

'Cos there's nothing funnier than blindness and paralysis...

What about a blind and paralysed clown?

sweetie

black and amber wrote: »

You got legend, noble and honest as they come from him simply handing you an umbrella? Wow.

whoosh

trishasaffron

Possibly a setup (the litigation not the accident!) between Pollock & friends to claim off insurance (ie all of us).

That's probably why there is so much "uncertainty" as to who opened the window. Who was he sharing with I wonder and where were they whenthis happened?

Menas

In all seriousness- I thought that when you lost one sense the others were slightly more enhanced. So blind people are more tuned in to their hearing and touch for example.
If that was the case surely he would have heard that the window (ie- heard the outside) was open and could feel a draft on his skin?

pickarooney

seamus wrote: »

Something about Mark Pollock and the Mark Pollock Trust has just never sat right with me. I don't know what it is. I have a gut feeling that there's something "off" about the whole thing.

Something fishy even

He's not suing the friends personally, peoples house insurance comes into play in these circumstances. I know a man who's child was brain damaged after falling out an upstairs window, and his insurance was sued through him, as he'd been told of the faulty latch and hadn't repaired it. The insurance paid out as he should have been aware of the danger, and the childs care was provided for with the money. Not the same situation, but if a large window is left open, and a blind person unaware of it falls and gets paralysed, it's not unreasonable to try claim on the insurance. It's what it's for, after all.

osarusan

What kind of window was this that he could just fall out of?

seamus

osarusan wrote: »

What kind of window was this that he could just fall out of?

To be fair, a large upstairs window or a bay window where the windowsill is at knee height, one could easily fall out of if you didn't know where you were.
Think about it, the window is open, you walk into the windowsill and trip, put your hands out to stop yourself but....no window....and out you go.
A sighted person could probably make a quick grab for the edge of the window or something, but if you can't see what you're doing, you'll be out the window before you can even make sense of your surroundings.

Calmsurrender

There was a case in the UK a few years back
back. A girl called Kylie Grimes dove into her friends swimming pool and injured her neck.
She sued her friends father, even though he wasn't even there at the time, as he was the home owner. At the time there was much talk of personal responsibility and money grabbing. She lost the case anyway.
Turns out she actually felt it was the poor treatment she got when she arrived at the hospital - they tried to make her get up and walk and she ended up falling off the bed - that had made her injury worse and she wanted to claim from them but was advised she'd have to sue the pool owner first to rule out his (non existent) role in the accident So to
to speak.
She settled out of court with the hospital in the end.

So there could be something behind the scenes like that going on here.

sconhome

osarusan wrote: »

What kind of window was this that he could just fall out of?

It seems that he crawled through it -

The QC put it to him that he had told friends after the accident that he believed ‘he may have been climbing out of a hatch on board a yacht’ as he went through the window.

He was 10 days back on land after 1400 miles round Ireland on a yacht.

NachoBusiness

For those that don't know all that much about Mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iz9vz1H_xkk

fatherted1969

Don't really see the problem with it. He's going to require enormous levels of care for the rest of his days and while it's not an ideal scenario claiming off your friends insurance it's not like it's going to affect them a great deal (only glanced at the article so apologies if I've got it wrong) all that'll go is their friendship

BattleCorp

Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
What kind of window was this that he could just fall out of?

It seems that he crawled through it -

Quote:
The QC put it to him that he had told friends after the accident that he believed ‘he may have been climbing out of a hatch on board a yacht’ as he went through the window.
He was 10 days back on land after 1400 miles round Ireland on a yacht.

Was he drunk?

Cold War Kid

You have a duty of care to a blind person in fairness. Not that I don't feel for his friends - what a thing to have to live with, and it was obviously just a terrible mistake. But the duty of care thing is probably part of the grounds on which he has cause to claim.

valoren

I bet his friends didn't see this coming.

*bahdumtish*

Radly

For all anyone knows his friends may have approached him and encouraged him to sue. What with needing a lot of money for care for the rest of his life.

ArtyM

Cant believe they named a fish after this guy.
I, for one, will be writing a strongly worded letter to insist they rename it after someone else.