suing the council

Dragonfly13

So the night before last I fell on a bit of foot path that is raised and cracked, think a root from a tree is growing underneath, my boyfriend went and took pictures the next day as I felt a bit silly, he said the path is very bad all along and he's not surprised I fell, I was taken to hospital, fractured my ankle in two places and tore a ligament. They put in a metal plate and I have stitches on both sides of my ankle. I am also self employed so will be out of work for at least six weeks..could someone advise me what is the best way to go about this? Should I get any documents from the hospital before I'm discharged, thank you

Timberrrrrrrr

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

So the night before last I fell on a bit of foot path that is raised and cracked, think a root from a tree is growing underneath, my boyfriend went and took pictures the next day as I felt a bit silly, he said the path is very bad all along and he's not surprised I fell, I was taken to hospital, fractured my ankle in two places and tore a ligament. They put in a metal plate and I have stitches on both sides of my ankle. I am also self employed so will be out of work for at least six weeks..could someone advise me what is the best way to go about this? Should I get any documents from the hospital before I'm discharged, thank you

Not 100% on this but if it's natural wear and tear (root from a tree) then the council may not be liable (I think it's called malfecience spelling may be incorrect too) as they have no power over this.

sabat

A double fracture in your ankle from tripping up on a path? I call shenanigans.

nhunter100

sabat wrote:

A double fracture in your ankle from tripping up on a path? I call shenanigans.

So you were present when the op got injured and can categorically state her double fracture was not a result of this trip/ accident.

Dragonfly13

I did actually trip, and heard my ankle snap as I went down

2RockMountain

http://injuriesboard.ie/eng/How-to-make-a-claim/

seamus

Misfeasance -v- Nonfeasance

Misfeasance = the council did a poor or negligent job

Nonfeasance = the council did nothing


In general, nonfeasance is not actionable, i.e. you cannot sue someone because they didn't do something unless there was a contract between you.

However with the recent award of the hillwalker who slipped and was given €40k, falling over in public is a bit of a litigious free for all.

Get a copy of your medical records on discharge and boot an appointment with a solicitor.

JinkyJackson

Timberrrrrrrr wrote:

Not 100% on this but if it's natural wear and tear (root from a tree) then the council may not be liable (I think it's called malfecience spelling may be incorrect too) as they have no power over this.

Didnt a woman recently sue because she fell over a rock while HIKING IN THE WICKLOW MOUNTAINS. Think she got 50 grand.

SteM

JinkyJackson wrote: »

Didnt a woman recently sue because she fell over a rock while HIKING IN THE WICKLOW MOUNTAINS. Think she got 50 grand.

No, it wasn't a rock.

Kristopherus

seamus wrote: »

Misfeasance -v- Nonfeasance

Misfeasance = the council did a poor or negligent job

Nonfeasance = the council did nothing


In general, nonfeasance is not actionable, i.e. you cannot sue someone because they didn't do something unless there was a contract between you.

However with the recent award of the hillwalker who slipped and was given €40k, falling over in public is a bit of a litigious free for all.

Get a copy of your medical records on discharge and boot an appointment with a solicitor.

If the L.A was notified about that path & had'nt done anything, then an injured party can sue.

JinkyJackson

seamus wrote:

However with the recent award of the hillwalker who slipped and was given €40k, falling over in public is a bit of a litigious free for all.

Is hiking in the mountains "public"? I'm still amazed by that claim. To make it worse, she only cut her knee, no broken bones or muscle damage

iwillhtfu

OP check out http://fixmystreet.ie/ and see if there have been any reports of a damaged footpath.

As above unless if it has been reported previously and no action has been undertaken to repair then you have a fair chance of claiming damages.

I have seen successful cases where people have tripped on wooden stakes used during the initial building of footpaths.

iwillhtfu

JinkyJackson wrote: »

Is hiking in the mountains "public"? I'm still amazed by that claim. To make it worse, she only cut her knee, no broken bones or muscle damage

The problem there was that the council had installed wire mesh on the sleepers and created the trip hazard. They have a duty of care to maintain it.

The woman your talking about is an absolute........... though imo.

Mod

Offensive word deleted

LiamoSail

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

So the night before last I fell on a bit of foot path that is raised and cracked, think a root from a tree is growing underneath, my boyfriend went and took pictures the next day as I felt a bit silly, he said the path is very bad all along and he's not surprised I fell, I was taken to hospital, fractured my ankle in two places and tore a ligament. They put in a metal plate and I have stitches on both sides of my ankle. I am also self employed so will be out of work for at least six weeks..could someone advise me what is the best way to go about this? Should I get any documents from the hospital before I'm discharged, thank you

You should probably get your eyes checked if you couldn't notice the broken path.

Robbo

Guys, this isn't a thread about the woman injured in the Wicklow mountains. If you want to have a discussion on that case, the Occupiers Liability Act of 1995 and which level of duty of care should be applied, start a new thread.

plodder

iwillhtfu wrote: »

The problem there was that the council had installed wire mesh on the sleepers and created the trip hazard. They have a duty of care to maintain it.

I think that case is being appealed, rightly imo. It seems ludicrous to expect anything like the same standards of maintenance up in the mountains as on public streets. Sorry, just noticed previous post. My bad

LiamoSail

plodder wrote: »

I think that case is being appealed, rightly imo. It seems ludicrous to expect anything like the same standards of maintenance up in the mountains as on public streets. Sorry, just noticed previous post. My bad

It seems ludicrous to expect to be able to walk anywhere without looking where you're going and expecting compensation for your own stupidity, but that seems to be the way it is.

We've less nurses, less hospital beds, less Gards, less social housing etc in a large part because of these scroungers.

CruelCoin

iwillhtfu wrote: »

The problem there was that the council had installed wire mesh on the sleepers and created the trip hazard. They have a duty of care to maintain it.

The woman your talking about is an absolute gee bag though imo.

So they tried to remedy a slip hazard and were sued for creating a trip hazard.

ffsaaaaaake

Dragonfly13

LiamoSail wrote:

You should probably get your eyes checked if you couldn't notice the broken path.

It was dark, smart arse

hullaballoo

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

It was dark, smart arse

Don't mind those comments. They are not welcome in this forum. The fact is that some people just can't help themselves when they see someone suffering a bad injury and feel the need to vocalise where they see the "fault" being. They are not applying any legal standards or principles to that, it's just their own moral standards and they are higher standards than the Pope in most cases. In any event, please don't be abusive, even if you don't like the comment.

Anyway, your question has been answered to the extent that it can be. Basically, it will depend on the specific factual matrix surrounding what happened to you.

None of us know exactly what happened and the person who can find that out, as well as give you advice in relation to bringing a case is your solicitor. It sounds like your injury is serious enough to at least have an initial consultation. Your solicitor can then advise whether s/he thinks the council have any liability.

Alf Veedersane

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Not 100% on this but if it's natural wear and tear (root from a tree) then the council may not be liable (I think it's called malfecience spelling may be incorrect too) as they have no power over this.

It's likely to be classed as nonfeasance, afaik. Misfeasance is where they are negligent in the construction or repair of a road or path wheret he negligence causes an injury.

It's worth a try OP but I wouldn't be expecting the council to be found liable.

LiamoSail

hullaballoo wrote: »

Don't mind those comments. They are not welcome in this forum. The fact is that some people just can't help themselves when they see someone suffering a bad injury and feel the need to vocalise where they see the "fault" being. They are not applying any legal standards or principles to that, it's just their own moral standards and they are higher standards than the Pope in most cases. In any event, please don't be abusive, even if you don't like the comment.

It's not about high moral standards, it about personal responsibility. You've given your perspective on my moral standards, however I'd suggest that if you think mine are abnormally high, it's possibly because your own are in the gutter.

I'd rather see more hospital beds, more nurses, police, schools, teachers etc paid for rather than public money used to compensate people who can't take responsibility for their own actions, I don't see the issue with this perspective. Maybe you disagree, perhaps you're happier seeng relatives on trolleys or Garda stations closing as long as you've got your "compo".

Also, slightly ironic how you dismiss my relevant comment as not welcome, yet still ramble on for a paragraph about your perception of my moral standards. Is that more relevant?

mitresize5

I'm just back from my summer holidays in the Costa del Sol where I visited my parents who have retired there.

Some of the footpaths can only be described as assault courses, especially those in some of the urbanisations built in the property boom.

They have no claims culture over there, people are expected to take personal responsibility. I'm sure accidents do happen but no one goes about suing as they'd be laughed out of court.

There seems to be no concept in Ireland any more of accidents just happening - its always some ones fault, there is always some one responsible and therefore always some one to sue.

And at the end of the day we all pay for it one way or another.

Timberrrrrrrr

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

It's likely to be classed as nonfeasance, afaik. Misfeasance is where they are negligent in the construction or repair of a road or path wheret he negligence causes an injury.

It's worth a try OP but I wouldn't be expecting the council to be found liable.

Cheers for the correction, was years ago that I heard the terms and didn't know which was right

Pat Mustard

LiamoSail wrote: »

Also, slightly ironic how you dismiss my relevant comment as not welcome, yet still ramble on for a paragraph about your perception of my moral standards. Is that more relevant?

Mod note:
Liamosail, either move back on topic and keep it civil, or don't post at all.

hullaballoo

LiamoSail wrote: »

It's not about high moral standards, it about personal responsibility. You've given your perspective on my moral standards, however I'd suggest that if you think mine are abnormally high, it's possibly because your own are in the gutter.

I'd rather see more hospital beds, more nurses, police, schools, teachers etc paid for rather than public money used to compensate people who can't take responsibility for their own actions, I don't see the issue with this perspective. Maybe you disagree, perhaps you're happier seeng relatives on trolleys or Garda stations closing as long as you've got your "compo".

Also, slightly ironic how you dismiss my relevant comment as not welcome, yet still ramble on for a paragraph about your perception of my moral standards. Is that more relevant?

This is the legal discussion forum. It is hardly a massive logical gap to bridge that that means the discussion must be founded in legal principles. Transposing your own moral values (whether they are objectively low or high is irrelevant) onto a set of facts about which none of us know a thing is not legal discussion.

Now, I understand that people/society object to what is perceived as compensation culture. That's all fine and well, but this isn't the place for that discussion.

We are concerned here with the law and what it says. Who knows whether the OP here or in any number of other threads is correct in blaming someone else for the fall? There is a reason why some people are able to successfully sue for injuries sustained as a result of tripping over a trip hazard. There is another reason why some people are unsuccessful when they have ostensibly suffered the same thing.

My moral standards don't really come into this thread, tbh, because they are irrelevant to the topic at hand. It works the same way for your moral standards, my moral standards and everyone else's moral standards. Not relevant to legal discussion.

4ensic15

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

So the night before last I fell on a bit of foot path that is raised and cracked, think a root from a tree is growing underneath, my boyfriend went and took pictures the next day as I felt a bit silly, he said the path is very bad all along and he's not surprised I fell, I was taken to hospital, fractured my ankle in two places and tore a ligament. They put in a metal plate and I have stitches on both sides of my ankle. I am also self employed so will be out of work for at least six weeks..could someone advise me what is the best way to go about this? Should I get any documents from the hospital before I'm discharged, thank you

Who owns the tree? Has there been an attempt to repair the path?

JustTheOne

Where is this path?

I'll inspect it for you op. Might even have a fall myself if it's as bad as you say.

sabat

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

I did actually trip, and heard my ankle snap as I went down

Let me guess, you were drunk and wearing high heels?

Dragonfly13

hullaballoo wrote:

None of us know exactly what happened and the person who can find that out, as well as give you advice in relation to bringing a case is your solicitor. It sounds like your injury is serious enough to at least have an initial consultation. Your solicitor can then advise whether s/he thinks the council have any liability.

hullaballoo wrote:

None of us know exactly what happened and the person who can find that out, as well as give you advice in relation to bringing a case is your solicitor. It sounds like your injury is serious enough to at least have an initial consultation. Your solicitor can then advise whether s/he thinks the council have any liability.

Thank you, to be honest it hadn't even crossed my mind until other people had said it to me and pointed out that I will have no income for the next few weeks, thank you for the advice

sasta le

How much you looking for?

Dragonfly13

sabat wrote:

Let me guess, you were drunk and wearing high heels?

I wasn't drunk because we were on our way out, I was wearing a wedge heel though which I purposely wore because I have never fallen in them, typical! My reliable wedges weren't so reliable!

c montgomery

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

I wasn't drunk because we were on our way out, I was wearing a wedge heel though which I purposely wore because I have never fallen in them, typical! My reliable wedges weren't so reliable!

So your walking in heals but it's the footpaths fault you fell?

Emmadilema123

Let me know how you get on. Tripped on wonky footpath and shattered my wrist and elbow a while back. Never even considered suing but I could do with a dig out :-P

Grolschevik

c montgomery wrote:

So your walking in heals but it's the footpaths fault you fell?

Millions of people walk in heels every day without tripping. She tripped over something that possibly shouldn't have been there and broke her ankle.

I wish the 'high-ground seizers' around here would stop. Or go back to After Hours.

c montgomery

Grolschevik wrote: »

Millions of people walk in heels every day without tripping. She tripped over something that possibly shouldn't have been there and broke her ankle.

I wish the 'high-ground seizers' around here would stop. Or go back to After Hours.

Oh sorry, didn't realise you were there to witness the whole thing.

Grolschevik

c montgomery wrote:

Oh sorry, didn't realise you were there to witness the whole thing.

It's in the first post.

Grolschevik

LiamoSail wrote:

I fail to see how it was anyone's fault other than her own

That's the only bit of your (ninja deleted) post that comes anywhere near legal discussion. It's lucky we have statutory bodies and courts to determine matters of fact in cases such as this and compensate -- or not! -- accordingly.

JinkyJackson

Not to freeking you out OP, but it could and probably will be a lot longer than 6, weeks before you can work too. You will be in a cast for 6 weeks, then you'll need physio, especially with two broken bones, more like 10-12 weeks.

sasta le

How much and what are you sueing for?

Sue Pa Key Pa

Dragonfly13 wrote: »

Thank you, to be honest it hadn't even crossed my mind until other people had said it to me and pointed out that I will have no income for the next few weeks, thank you for the advice

Whatever the outcome OP, you'll still be without income for the period you'll be off work as this is not a quick process

c montgomery

Grolschevik wrote: »

It's in the first post.

I tend to have difficulties believing every story I read on message forums, especially from people looking for compensation.

It's more pragmatic to look at the balance of probabilities.

Grolschevik

c montgomery wrote:

I tend to have difficulties believing every story I read on message forums, especially from people looking for compensation.

c montgomery wrote:

It's more pragmatic to look at the balance of probabilities.

If we all tried to second-guess every post, discussion forums wouldn't work well.

The info in the original post is all we have to go on. Anything else is speculation or fiction. I find it best just to go with the info at face value rather than make up possible alternatives.

RossieMan

I find it abut hard to believe that you've just set up your business, see other thread recently.

You probably still get some sort of social every week. Has the business even opened yet? I wouldn't be calling you self employed if you don't pay your own wages.

Now the tree/path, the culture introduced here is disgusting for any honest taxpayer. You don't seem to have taken any of the blame yourself.

I tend to watch where I walk, so I don't fall. Perhaps others have different motives.

Robbo

RossieMan wrote: »

I find it abut hard to believe that you've just set up your business, see other thread recently.

You probably still get some sort of social every week. Has the business even opened yet? I wouldn't be calling you self employed if you don't pay your own wages.

Now the tree/path, the culture introduced here is disgusting for any honest taxpayer. You don't seem to have taken any of the blame yourself.

I tend to watch where I walk, so I don't fall. Perhaps others have different motives.

Moderation: If you can't post without having a go at the OP, please don't post on this thread again. Same goes for the rest of you.

c montgomery

Grolschevik wrote: »

If we all tried to second-guess every post, discussion forums wouldn't work well.

The info in the original post is all we have to go on. Anything else is speculation or fiction. I find it best just to go with the info at face value rather than make up possible alternatives.

Incorrect. OP followed up her original post to confirm that she was wearing heels at the time of the incident so we have multiple posts to go on.
Try to keep up

Heels must have been a contributory factor to the fall IMO .

Grolschevik

c montgomery wrote:

Incorrect. OP followed up her original post to confirm that she was wearing heels at the time of the incident so we have multiple posts to go on. Try to keep up

I meant in general for all OPs across all forums. Quite obviously subsequent information must also be incorporated.

Enough of the back and forth attempted point scoring, please.

c montgomery

Grolschevik wrote: »

I meant in general for all OPs across all forums. Quite obviously subsequent information must also be incorporated.

Enough of the back and forth attempted point scoring, please.

In a legal discussion forum it best if your clear and concise with your posts.
No point scoring on my end buddy.

Alf Veedersane

c montgomery wrote: »

Incorrect. OP followed up her original post to confirm that she was wearing heels at the time of the incident so we have multiple posts to go on.
Try to keep up

Heels must have been a contributory factor to the fall IMO .

The OP was wearing wedge heels not walking on stilts. And such footwear would unlikely be considered a factor if the council was negligent.

Grolschevik

c montgomery wrote:

In a legal discussion forum it best if your clear and concise with your posts. No point scoring on my end buddy.

"Incorrect". "Try to keep up". "Wink face".
It's not my problem if people make an unwarranted jump from the general to the specific in the space of a paragraph. My post was quite clearly talking about original posts/posters in all discussions in general.

Pat Mustard

Mod note:

We might move back on topic, please.