90k for a dislocated thumb!!!

goz83

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/woman-who-dislocated-thumb-in-pub-fall-awarded-90-000-1.2515485

Seen this a few days ago. How on earth can this be justified? I'm ok with people receiving fair compensation when they've been injured and are at a loss due to anothers carelessness/negligence. But, to receive €90,000 for slipping and falling in a bar is ludicrous, especially when your only injury is a dislocated thumb. If a staff member had purposely thrown a bucket of water at the woman and she fell and broke her arm, I would still think this pay-out was very excessive. I question if the same would have been paid out to a man, who likely wouldn't have been wearing 4 inch heels.

I've seen cases with far worse injuries involved and the compensation has been nowhere near this figure. Loss of earnings where someone has been out of work for a long time is what might raise the stakes, but there was no mention of this in the story.

My old man had a serious injury a few years ago when he fell out of a truck cabin due to a reported defect that hadn't been repaired. He was out of work for over 2 years and required surgery on his spine and hip replacements. His case recently settled after he returned to work and the figure wasn't much higher than the one above.

Anyone care to have a serious guess as to why such a massive figure was paid out for such a minor injury? Pull her finger and it'll cost you dearly.

Zillah

"[She has] been left with a diminution in sensation in the tip of the thumb and a reduced pinch grip."

She'll have that problem until the end of her days.

Atlantic Dawn

Usually in the compensation claims they mention something of their hobbies or career to make the claim larger like in this case they could have said they played chess or Playstation and needed a good thumb to be the best, lucky they didn't. Other cases with mild scaring people have mentioned modelling careers.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Zillah wrote: »

"[She has] been left with a diminution in sensation in the tip of the thumb and a reduced pinch grip."

She'll have that problem until the end of her days.

Doesn't justify the €90k payout. No wonder insurance costs in this country are through the roof when you have retarded judges awarding ridiculous amounts for minor injuries and injuries which are partly the claimants own fault. She was wearing high heeled shoes and had been drinking, that should have reduced the payment by 60% at least!

recylingbin

Maybe she was a thimble model and it cost her her career.

XR3i

maybe it was her bean-flicking thumb

Capt'n Midnight

Pubs and nightclubs should just get themselves car insurance.

https://www.libertyinsurance.ie/assets/Uploads/Private-Motor-Vehicle-Policy-Document.pdf

Personal accident –
comprehensive cover only
We will pay you (the policyholder) or your
legal representative €6,500 if you are
accidentally injured while travelling in or
getting into or out of the vehicle and within
three months this injury alone results in:

a death;
b permanent loss of sight in one or both
eyes; or
c loss of one or more limbs.
The most we will pay in any one period of
insurance is €6,500.
We will not pay this benefit for:
a any injury or death resulting from
suicide or attempted suicide; or
b anyone who is convicted for driving
while under the influence of drink or
drugs at the time of the accident

Cee-Jay-Cee

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

Doesn't justify the €90k payout. No wonder insurance costs in this country are through the roof when you have retarded judges awarding ridiculous amounts for minor injuries and injuries which are partly the claimants own fault. She was wearing high heeled shoes and had been drinking, that should have reduced the payment by 60% at least!

The thumb is the most important digit, try restricting it and see tge difference it makes to even mundane activities

One eyed Jack

goz83 wrote: »

Anyone care to have a serious guess as to why such a massive figure was paid out for such a minor injury?

Because it's not a massive figure to pay out for an injury that could easily have been prevented.

That really felt like this time there was a need to state the obvious.

minidazzler

I find the level of payout to be grossly out of proportion. It's a thumb, important yes, but it's now just slightly desensitised. And she is at least partially responsible, having been drinking for 5 hours and wearing 4 inch heels...

One eyed Jack

minidazzler wrote: »

I find the level of payout to be grossly out of proportion. It's a thumb, important yes, but it's now just slightly desensitised. And she is at least partially responsible, having been drinking for 5 hours and wearing 4 inch heels...

What else would anyone expect her to be doing or wearing in a bar on a night out?

Wearing waders and drinking water because the bar owner is too careless to make sure the toilets and the floor are dry so that patrons don't slip and injure themselves.

AnonoBoy

I thought this was a haggling thread.

Was going to come in way under 90k.

Badly Drunk Boy

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Because it's not a massive figure to pay out for an injury that could easily have been prevented.

Yeah, by not wearing 4 inch heels while drinking.

Car99

Alot of drawbacks to not having a fully functioning thumb , you couldn't roll up bogies and flick them for starters. Worth a few g's that in itself.

Wibbs

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

Yeah, by not wearing 4 inch heels while drinking.

Stop victim blaming you!!. Should she have gotten compensation? Yes. 90 grand? Hell no. That's beyond idiotic.

goz83

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Because it's not a massive figure to pay out for an injury that could easily have been prevented.

That really felt like this time there was a need to state the obvious.

Well, it is compared to many injuries I have heard/read about, one which I mentioned in the OP. I think having a fully functioning back is a bit more important than having a fully functioning thumb.

Plus, less has been paid out for complete loss of digits.

Nono Toure

Zillah wrote: »

"[She has] been left with a diminution in sensation in the tip of the thumb and a reduced pinch grip."

She'll have that problem until the end of her days.

Surely the boyfriend/husband should get compo too?

Maybe 45k is for him..

charlietheminxx

I fell in a Dublin bar last year on a wet slippery dance floor and dislocated my thumb... I drunkenly popped it back into place and stuck some ice on it. I was embarrassed at making an arse of myself and got the early nitelink home.

Maybe if I was more dramatic I would have a nice down payment on a house now.... That is a ridiculous payout.

Irishcrx

charlietheminxx wrote: »

I fell in a Dublin bar last year on a wet slippery dance floor and dislocated my thumb... I drunkenly popped it back into place and stuck some ice on it. I was embarrassed at making an arse of myself and got the early nitelink home.

Maybe if I was more dramatic I would have a nice down payment on a house now.... That is a ridiculous payout.

Yep , you missed a trick. The correct thing to do was scream bloody murder and start hopping up and down on the floor like a fish until the ambulance came..

Canis Lupus

charlietheminxx wrote: »

I fell in a Dublin bar last year on a wet slippery dance floor and dislocated my thumb... I drunkenly popped it back into place and stuck some ice on it. I was embarrassed at making an arse of myself and got the early nitelink home.

Maybe if I was more dramatic I would have a nice down payment on a house now.... That is a ridiculous payout.

As a man you'd have been thrown out for trying to start a fight with the floor.

suicide_circus

Idiotic judgement which hurts the consumer and society.

charlietheminxx

Canis Lupus wrote: »

As a man you'd have been thrown out for trying to start a fight with the floor.

I'm a woman though

goz83

Canis Lupus wrote: »

As a man you'd have been thrown out for trying to start a fight with the floor.

Just on that point (even though it was a bit of a joke)....the compensation for a man would have been absolutely minimal, unless his job/career were something like F1 driver, or thumb wrestler

Plus, a man would have been wearing sensible footwear unless he was a drag queen. Another poster said it...there should have been contributory negligence slapped on that claim. There was suspicion, but no actual evidence of the floor being wet. The plaintiff had been drinking a number of hours and she was wearing high heels.

While I do agree that someone should be compensated for injury/loss when the incident was at least partly the fault of another, I just think the figure was silly high and no responsibility was placed on the plaintiff, despite questionable circumstances. I doubt she had much trouble holding onto that cheque tightly when she received it.

goz83

charlietheminxx wrote: »

I'm a woman though

Quick...statute of limitations is 2 years. "Judge, I have trouble on boards.ie due to the pain and suffering when tapping away at the keyboard". :pac:

Fair play to you though. I doubt most blokes would have the balls to pop their dislocated thumb back into place. Curiously...were you wearing heels?

cowboyBuilder

I'd say her thumb is just fine, nice con job she pulled there.

_Brian

I can't understand these payments.

I'm in the process of trying to settle a case where I have permanent life changing injuries following a crash. I lost a well paying Job and have had to change line of work with less pay and give up many hobbies.

Everything I've been told is this sort of settlement isn't on the cards even though the other side have admitted liability.

There was a case in the papers last year where a woman washed her kitchen floor, then slipped on the wet floor and injured her knee. She sued the tile company and got €75k.

donegaLroad

maybe she was a really good slap-bass player.

conorhal

Wibbs wrote: »

Stop victim blaming you!!. Should she have gotten compensation? Yes. 90 grand? Hell no. That's beyond idiotic.

But Wibbs, a solicitor needs to get paid, as well as the junior counsel (who will have done all the work) not to metion the senior counsel who will breeze into court, chat to the defendants Seniour counsel (who's junior will have also done all the work) and though neither have a foggy about the case, there is a tee off time at four so they'll toss around a few numbers and head off for cocktails.
None of that comes cheap you know!

extra gravy

“People cannot be expected to look at the floor when walking across a bar. She was entitled to expect that the floor was dry and it was safe for her to walk across it,” the judge said.

So people cannot be expected to look where they're going now. That's good to know.

check_six

I presume the bar get to keep the thumb for that price.

Maybe mount it in a display case on the wall?

duffman3833

I doubt she ever worked in retail or anywhere busy like that where there is a good chance of liquid on the floor. Its hard to work and keep an eye on everything else. The staff may have been keeping floor clean, it may have been a recent spill and wasn't noticed. The workers are only human at end of day and since it was a busy night they were flat out. I think she can be entitled to an amount but not that much.

Cee-Jay-Cee

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The thumb is the most important digit, try restricting it and see tge difference it makes to even mundane activities

I don't dispyte that but 90k for an injury partly caused by alcohol and shoe type doesn't justify the amount.

I read a few lines in the paper.

Mr. Justice Barr heard the case in full in the High Court, so one can assume it was a few hours anyway. He would also have heard the input of the insurance company's well paid legal team on the other side. He has decades of experience in assessing damages, and has probably dealt with more cases than I've had hot dinners.

So not gonna do the "but it's like colossally huge and she had the big shoes" thing. Now if someone said "he got it wrong when he accepted that evidence or said this" I'd listen.

Gatling

Broke my thumb in 2 places in an accident a few years ago .
Lost no real function wondering would i get double for a double break vs a dislocation

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

Broke my thumb in 2 places in an accident a few years ago .
Lost no real function wondering would i get double for a double break vs a dislocation

If it was a genuine accident, you won't get a cent.

The first issue is liability, then quantum. The High Court accepted there was negligence in this case.

Gatling

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If it was a genuine accident, you won't get a cent.

The first issue is liability, then quantum. The High Court accepted there was negligence in this case.

But in the case mentioned didn't the judge discount the management's version of what happened with keeping the floor clean

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

But in the case mentioned didn't the judge discount the management's version of what happened with keeping the floor clean

Yes.

And?

Gatling

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yes.

And?

That shouldn't be allowed unless there is evidence that proves otherwise especially when a judge hands our an award that size for something relatively minor in the scale of injuries

ohnonotgmail

Gatling wrote: »

That shouldn't be allowed unless there is evidence that proves otherwise especially when a judge hands our an award that size for something relatively minor in the scale of injuries

well there was evidence that proved otherwise. the patch of liquid on the floor.

goz83

_Brian wrote: »

I can't understand these payments.

I'm in the process of trying to settle a case where I have permanent life changing injuries following a crash. I lost a well paying Job and have had to change line of work with less pay and give up many hobbies.

Everything I've been told is this sort of settlement isn't on the cards even though the other side have admitted liability.

There was a case in the papers last year where a woman washed her kitchen floor, then slipped on the wet floor and injured her knee. She sued the tile company and got €75k.

This.

As am I. From a motor accident, I was rear ended. Being self employed, it's a lot harder to claim loss of earnings, as I usually put everything back into the business. I had to reduce my work and almost had to stop altogether. I augmented my earnings by starting another business from home. I was in agony for a year and a half and had spinal surgery a couple of months ago. I still have pain and I am undergoing physio (appointment later today infact). There's lots more, but going by what happened this lady and her settlement, then I reckon I will be getting about 2 Million. not really. Me, I have spent circa 20k on medical expenses as a direct result of my injury and the price is still going up. Thankfully, I think I am at the recovery end now and once I'm through with physio, I should have a normal life, albeit with "a bad back" according to the surgeon and will require daily core and strength building exercises. Life changing stuff.

I remember reading about that case with the tiles. They successfully argued that the non-slip surface was inadequate and the tiles were not fit for purpose. I recall they were polished porcelain tiles. I used to sell lots of these tiles and always warned about them being slippy, but easier to clean than a rougher tile. Any gobsh1te knows they're slippery when wet. Surprised she didn't sue the manufacturer of her shoes, for failing to provide adequate grip on all surfaces. :rolleyes:

conorhal wrote: »

But Wibbs, a solicitor needs to get paid, as well as the junior counsel (who will have done all the work) not to metion the senior counsel who will breeze into court, chat to the defendants Seniour counsel (who's junior will have also done all the work) and though neither have a foggy about the case, there is a tee off time at four so they'll toss around a few numbers and head off for cocktails.
None of that comes cheap you know!

I'm thinking there's a hint of sarcasm in there, but to bite...the plaintiffs fees are generally covered by the defense. I think they deal with outstanding medical separately too, but can't be sure. However, I doubt there was a huge bill for medical expenses, so that woman walked away with 90k clear.

goz83

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well there was evidence that proved otherwise. the patch of liquid on the floor.

It wasn't proven at all. There were reports of water in the restroom beside the area she slipped, but they could not ascertain if there was actually any liquid on the floor where she slipped.

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

That shouldn't be allowed unless there is evidence that proves otherwise especially when a judge hands our an award that size for something relatively minor in the scale of injuries

Say what now?

What shouldn't be allowed? Judges not accepting testimony? Does this not happen in every single case where a version of events is not accepted?

Could you set out this proposed rule in greater detail?

charlietheminxx

goz83 wrote: »

Quick...statute of limitations is 2 years. "Judge, I have trouble on boards.ie due to the pain and suffering when tapping away at the keyboard". :pac:

Fair play to you though. I doubt most blokes would have the balls to pop their dislocated thumb back into place. Curiously...were you wearing heels?

Yeah well I think it was a mix of Dutch courage and the fact that my fingers and thumbs are all double jointed anyway... I looked at it and went "that hurts and doesn't look right" and I just popped it back without thinking. I got my mam (who has some medical training) to look over it the next day and she was happy it was all lined up ok. I had a bruise all down my wrist and across the base of my hand for a couple of weeks after, had to mostly type with my other hand and it was a bit twingey for the following 6 months, but overall it was manageable. I can't bend it quite like before though.

I was wearing ankle boots with a chunky heel and went flying where someone had spilled a drink!

ohnonotgmail

goz83 wrote: »

It wasn't proven at all. There were reports of water in the restroom beside the area she slipped, but they could not ascertain if there was actually any liquid on the floor where she slipped.

the article you linked to disagrees with you

Mr Justice Anthony Barr said Sharon Kelly’s fall was captured on CCTV and he was satisfied there was liquid on the parquet flooring at the area where she slipped.

mad muffin

Jaysus, that's fierce shîte altogether.

goz83

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the article you linked to disagrees with you

Maybe i'm only guessing here, but perhaps the company who owns the Arc Cafe Bar (luckabeg ltd) also had access to the cctv and they denied that there was liquid on the floor. So, maybe, just maybe it wasn't clear whether there was, or not, even though the judge was "satisfied" that there was.

I'm not saying the judge was wrong about the liquid. I am just saying that it's plausible, because there was CCTV footage and the company denied that there was water, so the footage mustn't have been all that clear. I have decent CCTV in my home and it's far from a busy bar and has better lighting and I couldn't tell if the floor was wet from viewing the CCTV on a 55" screen.

ohnonotgmail

goz83 wrote: »

Maybe i'm only guessing here, but perhaps the company who owns the Arc Cafe Bar (luckabeg ltd) also had access to the cctv and they denied that there was liquid on the floor. So, maybe, just maybe it wasn't clear whether there was, or not, even though the judge was "satisfied" that there was.

I'm not saying the judge was wrong about the liquid. I am just saying that it's plausible, because there was CCTV footage and the company denied that there was water, so the footage mustn't have been all that clear. I have decent CCTV in my home and it's far from a busy bar and has better lighting and I couldn't tell if the floor was wet from viewing the CCTV on a 55" screen.

well as neither of us has actually seen the footage we will just have to agree to disagree.

Carlos Orange

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the article you linked to disagrees with you

It also says "It was likely the staff were so busy serving drinks and collecting empty glasses they were not able to take sufficient care to keep the floor dry and clean, he said." so it sounds like his judgement is mostly based on guesses and not evidence (such as the cctv footage).

ohnonotgmail

psinno wrote: »

It also says "It was likely the staff were so busy serving drinks and collecting empty glasses they were not able to take sufficient care to keep the floor dry and clean, he said." so it sounds like his judgement is mostly based on guesses and not evidence (such as the cctv footage).

you missed this bit.

He accepted the evidence of two other women the toilets in the public bar had been in poor condition that night and complaints were made to bar staff about the condition of the toilets.

if the staff cant keep the toilets clean what makes you think they had time to keep the floor clean?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

The floor was wet, which caused the girl to fall. The judge didn't just pluck 90K out of thin air. There are guidelines in the Book of Quantum. There's quite a few factors taken into account, but it seems the experts of AH know better by just looking at a number and deciding it's too large. 4 inch high heels is a pretty normal size, it may or may not have effected the final payment. Don't forget that loss of payment, legal fees etc, are also calculated in the compensation amount.

Here's a link for it; http://www.injuriesboard.ie/eng/Forms-Guidelines/Book-of-Quantum.pdf

"90K? No way, that's too much. She should only get 45K. There's no real logic behind my decision, just that it's less than 90K."

goz83

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well as neither of us has actually seen the footage we will just have to agree to disagree.

In my earlier post, I said that the compensation (imo) was excessive, even if a staff member had purposely thrown a bucket of liquid at the woman.

You can disagree with me, that's your choice. But, what is clear, from the statements made, is that there was no actual evidence of liquid spillage where the lady fell. Conclusions were drawn from it being a busy night, reports of staff tending to a wet floor in the toilets and someone possibly spilling a drink. In my eyes, that's guessing and not it is not clear that there was liquid on the ground. If it was clear, the judge would have said so, rather than piecing it together from possible scenarios, where there might have been a spillage.