Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Young boy who lacerated arm on pull-out bed awarded €18,000

Options
13»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    The fact is that the person who has to write the cheque made the decision on the amount they would have done so with sight of medical report and reports on liability. The judges only role in this case is to make sure that the child's interests are looked after he did not decide on the amount.

    How would the proposed settlement amount be decided on? I can only imagine that precedent and typical payout amounts would factor hugely in the decision.

    I doubt highly that the hotel weighed up the pain & suffering caused to the child, together with the financial costs accrued and calculated the amount on that basis.

    It's much more likely that their legal team recommended a figure which was likely to be accepted by the opposing team and the hotel weighed up the pros and cons of going to court vs settling out of court.

    The misgivings about the settlement reached aren't because this figure is out of whack with what seems to be typically awarded. The misgivings are that figures of that size are frequently awarded for injuries that seem quite minor and are very far from life-changing. And we're all bearing the costs of payouts of this nature.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    DrumSteve wrote: »
    These threads some come with a complementary pitchfork and torch.

    Health and safety won't allow it.

    If someone sues everyone would be looking for a cut.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    maudgonner wrote: »
    How would the proposed settlement amount be decided on? I can only imagine that precedent and typical payout amounts would factor hugely in the decision.

    I doubt highly that the hotel weighed up the pain & suffering caused to the child, together with the financial costs accrued and calculated the amount on that basis.

    It's much more likely that their legal team recommended a figure which was likely to be accepted by the opposing team and the hotel weighed up the pros and cons of going to court vs settling out of court.

    The misgivings about the settlement reached aren't because this figure is out of whack with what seems to be typically awarded. The misgivings are that figures of that size are frequently awarded for injuries that seem quite minor and are very far from life-changing. And we're all bearing the costs of payouts of this nature.

    Again I would agree if people based their decision on what's high or not on more than a paper report and say based it on something like facts the medical reports. The insurance companies have a legitimate agenda to paint payouts as excessive and the papers they advertise in have lets say a vested interest.

    I sprained my ankle a few years ago (no claim it was my own fault was not looking where I was walking.) if it was someone's fault it would have been worth 15-20k I can tell you on cold nights I would gladly pay 20k to not have the pain.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Again I would agree if people based their decision on what's high or not on more than a paper report and say based it on something like facts the medical reports. The insurance companies have a legitimate agenda to paint payouts as excessive and the papers they advertise in have lets say a vested interest.

    I sprained my ankle a few years ago (no claim it was my own fault was not looking where I was walking.) if it was someone's fault it would have been worth 15-20k I can tell you on cold nights I would gladly pay 20k to not have the pain.

    And I could just as easily argue that solicitors and barristers have a vested interest in keeping payouts high. Judges, as part of the legal profession, do to.

    After seeing the link posted earlier to the PIAB page that indicates payment levels I'm shocked at how high they are. It would appear that this payment is very much in line with the recommended amount for a minor soft tissue injury with good recovery. It appears that even with no indication of lasting impairment or ongoing pain, you can expect up to 20,600. That is frankly ridiculous.

    Members of the public, who are suffering soaring insurance costs, have every right to question the level of payouts.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    maudgonner wrote: »
    And I could just as easily argue that solicitors and barristers have a vested interest in keeping payouts high. Judges, as part of the legal profession, do to.

    After seeing the link posted earlier to the PIAB page that indicates payment levels I'm shocked at how high they are. It would appear that this payment is very much in line with the recommended amount for a minor soft tissue injury with good recovery. It appears that even with no indication of lasting impairment or ongoing pain, you can expect up to 20,600. That is frankly ridiculous.

    Why is it ridiculous? There are very much two vested interests 1 the legal profession and 2 the insurance companies. I accept that both have an agenda but as solicitors and barristers don't advertise in the media to any large extent I wonder why the news reports carry a certain bias.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/insurance-industry-misleading-public-over-reasons-for-higher-premiums-1.2660988


    Insurance industry figures are claiming increases in the number of personal injury claims are a contributing factor in premium increases, yet published data from the Courts Service Annual Report and the Injuries Board does not support these claims.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Why is it ridiculous? There are very much two vested interests 1 the legal profession and 2 the insurance companies. I accept that both have an agenda but as solicitors and barristers don't advertise in the media to any large extent I wonder why the news reports carry a certain bias.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/insurance-industry-misleading-public-over-reasons-for-higher-premiums-1.2660988


    Insurance industry figures are claiming increases in the number of personal injury claims are a contributing factor in premium increases, yet published data from the Courts Service Annual Report and the Injuries Board does not support these claims.

    Do you think this report is biased? Are you aware of additional medical details that have not been revealed, deliberately or otherwise?

    To me, if anything, it seems quite sympathetic to the claimant. Actually the use of the word 'plush' to describe the hotel in the headline is probably the most emotive language in the article. So perhaps it is biased, but against the hotel.


    (And yes, I think that the prospect of giving someone over 20k for a minor soft tissue injury to the elbow with good recovery is a ridiculous proposition. I don't know how you want me to elaborate further on that. Are those awards reserved for someone like Bill Gates who might have to take an hour of work to recover and suffer the financial losses associated with that? Or elbow models possibly? Where is the justification for it?)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    maudgonner wrote: »
    Do you think this report is biased? Are you aware of additional medical details that have not been revealed, deliberately or otherwise?

    To me, if anything, it seems quite sympathetic to the claimant. Actually the use of the word 'plush' to describe the hotel in the headline is probably the most emotive language in the article. So perhaps it is biased, but against the hotel.


    (And yes, I think that the prospect of giving someone over 20k for a minor soft tissue injury to the elbow with good recovery is a ridiculous proposition. I don't know how you want me to elaborate further on that. Are those awards reserved for someone like Bill Gates who might have to take an hour of work to recover and suffer the financial losses associated with that? Or elbow models possibly? Where is the justification for it?)

    I commented on people on for example this forum making a judgement that the settlement was high based only on a news report and not having sight of the medical reports.

    Again the justification for this award is that it was not decided by anyone other than the defendant either accepting PIAB or agreeing with the plaintiff. If it was unjustified I would think the hotel or the insurance company would have been silly to agree a unjustified sum.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    ...I would think the hotel or the insurance company would have been silly to agree a unjustified sum.

    If any settlement, (not this case) is cheaper than an award + legal costs why not.

    Of course if they don't fight claims(not this one), it will lead to more claims.

    Which is exactly what is happening. awards getting bigger, and more claims.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    beauf wrote: »
    If any settlement, (not this case) is cheaper than an award + legal costs why not.

    Of course if they don't fight claims(not this one), it will lead to more claims.

    Which is exactly what is happening. awards getting bigger, and more claims.

    Can you show evidence that awards have jumped in last 10 years at a rate equivalent to the rice in insurance costs.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,363 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    If you read what I wrote you will find out who's fault it is.

    so not the hotels then? gotcha


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    I commented on people on for example this forum making a judgement that the settlement was high based only on a news report and not having sight of the medical reports.

    Again the justification for this award is that it was not decided by anyone other than the defendant either accepting PIAB or agreeing with the plaintiff. If it was unjustified I would think the hotel or the insurance company would have been silly to agree a unjustified sum.

    Again, the settlement proposed by the hotel would have been in line with what they believed would be accepted - not what they believed was justified.

    And yes, as I said earlier, my opinion is of course formed by the facts presented in the article. But as members of the public that is usually all we have to go on - media reports of the court cases. We do not sit in the courtroom. We do not have access to the notes. Does that mean we should not question the awards? Or the sentences passed down in criminal cases?

    If there are clear instances of bias in the media then of course that should be challenged. However, given that the legal profession has all the tools to do so, I'm inclined to wonder whether that is, in fact, the case.

    There has to be some accountability for what happens in the courts (or with out of court settlements). It usually seems as if there is not nearly enough of that in Ireland, that the judiciary are untouchable, unquestionable. There seems to be no political will to reform the process, to hold judges accountable for their actions, to reduce legal fees, to eliminate waste.

    Or is the system perfect, and I'm just taking the word of the journalists who tell me otherwise?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    maudgonner wrote: »
    Again, the settlement proposed by the hotel would have been in line with what they believed would be accepted - not what they believed was justified.

    And yes, as I said earlier, my opinion is of course formed by the facts presented in the article. But as members of the public that is usually all we have to go on - media reports of the court cases. We do not sit in the courtroom. We do not have access to the notes. Does that mean we should not question the awards? Or the sentences passed down in criminal cases?

    If there are clear instances of bias in the media then of course that should be challenged. However, given that the legal profession has all the tools to do so, I'm inclined to wonder whether that is, in fact, the case.

    There has to be some accountability for what happens in the courts (or with out of court settlements). It usually seems as if there is not nearly enough of that in Ireland, that the judiciary are untouchable, unquestionable. There seems to be no political will to reform the process, to hold judges accountable for their actions, to reduce legal fees, to eliminate waste.

    Or is the system perfect, and I'm just taking the word of the journalists who tell me otherwise?

    Nothing stoping you or any person sitting in any personal injury action and hearing first hand all the evidence same for crime or in fact most cases except family.

    I posted a link to a article by a Barrister challenging many of the claims been made by the insurance companies.

    I appeared in a case once, some months later noticed a headline about a decision of the high court it was an interesting change in the law of evidence. So I read the article in a main national paper and suddenly realised it was the case I had been involved in and not only did they get the issue wrong the article was a blatant lie it never happened as reported not one bit of the reporting was right except that a case had happened.

    No system is perfect and in claims there are two sides both with an agenda.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,040 ✭✭✭12Phase


    Does this mean all Irish hotels will now be fully padded cells and everyone will be required to wear safety gloves and crash helmets at all times?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    12Phase wrote: »
    Does this mean all Irish hotels will now be fully padded cells and everyone will be required to wear safety gloves and crash helmets at all times?

    Sounds kinda kinky!


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Nothing stoping you or any person sitting in any personal injury action and hearing first hand all the evidence same for crime or in fact most cases except family.

    I posted a link to a article by a Barrister challenging many of the claims been made by the insurance companies.

    I appeared in a case once, some months later noticed a headline about a decision of the high court it was an interesting change in the law of evidence. So I read the article in a main national paper and suddenly realised it was the case I had been involved in and not only did they get the issue wrong the article was a blatant lie it never happened as reported not one bit of the reporting was right except that a case had happened.

    No system is perfect and in claims there are two sides both with an agenda.

    I have a job, so that does stop me from verifying the facts of each case in person before forming an opinion on it. As is the case for most people.

    Did you make a complaint about the misreporting of the case you were involved in? There are a number of avenues for doing so. If it was as grievous as you say it should be easy to prove from court records. Quite possibly actionable for libel given our strict laws.


    And surely there are many more than two agendas in any claim, for a start there's the claimant, the defendant, the insurer, both legal teams, the judge, possibly the PIAB and, of course, the media.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    Can you show evidence that awards have jumped in last 10 years at a rate equivalent to the rice in insurance costs.

    You mean like this?
    Court Settlement and associated legal costs are increasing.
    The following table shows that court settlements for personal injury claims are increasing.

    High Court - Circuit Court

    € €

    2014: 304,353 13,550

    2013: 227,321 11,941

    2012: 252,146 11,452

    2011: 215,730 12,362

    2010: 219,303 12,662

    Source: Courts Service Annual Reports 2010-2014.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,629 ✭✭✭Nermal


    In the super big cases million plus the vast majority of such awards is for ongoing care of the injured person thereby taking the burden off the state.

    And putting it onto insurance premiums instead.

    The largess of our judges is anything but free. They certainly act like it is though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,087 ✭✭✭Pro Hoc Vice


    beauf wrote: »
    You mean like this?

    Would need the awards from PIAB as well also would need the total number of cars insured aswell as total insured cars must be rising aswell.

    Also you have quoted total number of cases not amounts of awards.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 475 ✭✭jimmy blevins


    It amazes me that people can defend such blatant scabs, Im sick of being fleeced through increasing insurance and red tape to cater to such people.
    Fair enough if someone suffers a life changing injury but five figure sums for something a plaster and sum HTFP could solve is taking the piss.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,622 ✭✭✭Ruu


    Used to laugh about American being a sue nation, Ireland is soon to eclipse it with the amount of charlatans taking a chance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,434 ✭✭✭Robsweezie


    Rabble rabble too much money rabble absolute joke snort compo culture snort snort disgrace Joe.

    Am I doing this right?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,651 ✭✭✭✭beauf


    You know what I can't find the figures. But then the insurances companies never really give out figures.

    Except this
    Ms Lang compared the average claim value of €304,000 in 2014 to that of the previous year (€227,000) to arrive at her figure of 34%. During the same period, the average value of assessments conducted by the Injuries Board has remained steady at €22,600.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/high-court-injury-case-awards-up-34pc-in-year-31496303.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,235 ✭✭✭✭Cee-Jay-Cee


    You can just imagine the same people then bitching about insurance premium hikes, increased fares /prices etc.

    Enjoy your few grand because it'll be clawed back from you tenfold.

    But when you've been awarded 18k for a scratch then paying it much easier than someone who doesn't have it from an exaggerated ridiculous claim.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,625 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Robsweezie wrote: »
    Rabble rabble too much money rabble absolute joke snort compo culture snort snort disgrace Joe.

    Am I doing this right?
    Meanwhile you car insurance is going up. You think it OK, you endorse it and tell everyone to pay up and shut up, so enjoy your money paying for the compo culture in this country:
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/more-motor-insurance-price-hikes-on-the-way-1.2571670

    Friends from Germany visit me every now and then, they make sure to get into accidents here, because it's better than playing the lotto.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,262 ✭✭✭✭Cienciano


    12Phase wrote: »
    Does this mean all Irish hotels will now be fully padded cells and everyone will be required to wear safety gloves and crash helmets at all times?

    No, it means they can't have sharp metal things exposed


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,622 ✭✭✭Ruu


    Robsweezie wrote: »
    Rabble rabble too much money rabble absolute joke snort compo culture snort snort disgrace Joe.

    Am I doing this right?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Cienciano wrote: »
    No, it means they can't have sharp metal things exposed

    Or have low-hanging signs in case people might walk into them, even though it's not on a walkway:
    http://www.thejournal.ie/crowne-plaza-blanchardstown-2809752-Jun2016/


    Or have a floor that people might spill things on:
    http://www.anthonyjoyce.ie/claim-for-a-slip-and-fall-injury-in-a-hotel-lobby


    Or fail to be in a constant state of alertness, ready to dry the floor.
    http://www.injury-compensation.ie/news/dublin-bar-injury-compensation-claim/
    (90k for a dislocated thumb, nice)



    Worth noting that a website about injury claims is posting articles about the UN verdict on fatal fetal abnormalities in a section called 'Irish Claims News'. Are injury lawyers going to try and exploit that as a market?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,625 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Cienciano wrote: »
    No, it means they can't have sharp metal things exposed

    Look, the awards in Ireland are in crazytown territory. For a tiny cut needing 1-2 stitches that any GP can administer in 5 minutes and a small scar remaining you would get €1.5k in Germany on a really good day.
    Whoever was coming up with awards in Ireland was on crack. Awards here are grossly out of line with any other European country. So outlandish award and the resultant fraudulent* claims are responsible for the fact that insurance costs are strangling this country. If you are OK with that, alrighty then, I won't argue with you fiddling while Rome is burning.

    *
    By fraudulent I not only mean 5 scumbags jumping into a car and staging a crash, but also anyone who claims for a bit of a sore neck and other inconsequential scratches and owies, knowing they will get a huge payout for nothing whatsoever with no risk of any consequences.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement