Injured while jogging n halting site? - that'll be €60k

frash

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/jogger-awarded-60000-after-tripping-and-injuring-knuckle-35605629.html

you couldn't make this stuff up
"A man who injured his hand when he tripped over a hole on a footpath while jogging at a Dublin halting site has been awarded €60,000 by the High Court."

GhostyMcGhost

frash wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/jogger-awarded-60000-after-tripping-and-injuring-knuckle-35605629.html

you couldn't make this stuff up
"A man who injured his hand when he tripped over a hole on a footpath while jogging at a Dublin halting site has been awarded €60,000 by the High Court."

lucky for him he landed in another black hole containing all our premiums. Those piles of €500 notes saved him from certain death

everlast75

My mother always said "if you can't say anything good then say nothing at all".


So in that case.....


....


....

Samuel T. Cogley

Fcuk me the trifector! Well done OP! Cue the outrage.

Sam Kade

He was jogging back to his caravan.

PARlance

"The defendant, South Dublin County Council, put forward the defence Mr Stokes had probably suffered his injuries while boxing, Mr Justice Anthony Barr said."

Justice Anthony Barr must be an AH regular.

Sam Kade

PARlance wrote: »

"The defendant, South Dublin County Council, put forward the defence Mr Stokes had probably suffered his injuries while boxing, Mr Justice Anthony Barr said."

Justice Anthony Barr must be an AH regular.

He's the first traveller I've heard of that goes jogging he looks fine and fit from it too :rolleyes:

Wossack

of all the places to have properly tarmac'd paths

Ol' Donie

Wait, hold on. There's pothole sort of yokey on the road I usually jog on. I stepped over it literally an hour ago.

If i'd just stepped into it, instead of around it, and gone on my arse and hurt my finger, i can go on several trips around the world? Is that the deal?

Samuel T. Cogley

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Wait, hold on. There's pothole sort of yokey on the road I usually jog on. I stepped over it literally an hour ago.

If i'd just stepped into it, instead of around it, and gone on my arse and hurt my finger, i can go on several trips around the world? Is that the deal?

Yes it's axactly that simple, absolutely nothing else too it. Jab a pencil in your eye and see.

Ol' Donie

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Yes it's axactly that simple, absolutely nothing else too it. Jab a pencil in your eye and see.

From that article, his injuries were caused when he tripped on the road.

What have I missed?

Samuel T. Cogley

Ol' Donie wrote: »

From that article, his injuries were caused when he tripped on the road.

What have I missed?

Nothing at all as I said. Literally nothing involved in the process beyond the trip, the money just rains down.

Mr McBoatface

He was in car crash the day before too. Unlucky chap suffered soft tissue damage yet still went out jogging. A real super trooper

Your Face

I'd say he was chasing the chippie van.

scamalert

The court heard Mr Stokes was involved in a road traffic accident the day before the jogging accident.

Prob worth another 200k at minimum, poor fella must been doing doughnuts with some scrap with no insurance or tax and had to burn down the yoke, ptsd for life with right solicitor.

In this country being normal person is like having a sign f**k me in the a** , but if your right egg shell coconut with IQ of 50, system bends down to help such people in tragic events like this.

makes great chat when showing off, how tough you are look at me scars that's 60k right threre

PARlance

Mr McBoatface wrote: »

He was in car crash the day before too. Unlucky chap suffered soft tissue damage yet still went out jogging. A real super trooper

The car went out of control upon entering a pothole.

velo.2010

The judge's hands were tied on this given what was presented to him. Maybe SDCC could have launched a counter claim of fraud against this guy rather than try and present something different in court when the claim was put to them?

He was involved in a crash the day before and probably whacked someone or something in anger and injured his hand. He got pissed at the damage he did to himself and went looking for a claim.

I hope he doesn't receive one cent of that money.

TallGlass

What I don't get about these claims is that prices that judges put on it, why 60k.

While I agree we can't have random holes in the road injuring people regardless of background.

Why can't the judge say 1k compo and order the council fix the pothole. Surely it would make more sense to me, leave the council with 59k and actually fix something.

topper75

"The judge said it was obvious from the content and tenor of the questions put to Mr Stokes that the court was being invited to draw the conclusion it was a fraudulent claim.

That allegation was not established on the evidence before the court, he said."


So... this sounds like the law takes that position that all claims are valid by default and ought to be paid.

WTF!!! Shouldn't the burden of proof be on the claimant?

pilly

He never "jogged" a minute in his life in fairness. Head of him.

Liam McPoyle

I'd love to see the medical report for this one.

I'm trying to figure out how he fell and broke a knuckle in his hand.

If one falls over do you try and break your fall with a fist or with the palm of ones hand?

On the balance of likelihood most people would use an open hand.

Perhaps he face planted and landed on the front of his hand however then surely there would be additional cuts, bruising, facial injuries etc.

It's shocking that awards of this nature can be made with literally no evidence of how the incident occurred other than the claimants version of events. The fact it was a late notification also should trigger alarm bells.

That's how fcuked up this country is.

You can find a pothole, say you tripped and injured yourself, provide no actual proof of how the incident occurred and you are pretty much guaranteed to get paid off.

Of course though there is no compensation culture in this county.

Its insurance companies fault alone that premiums have risen.

corner of hells

TallGlass wrote: »

What I don't get about these claims is that prices that judges put on it, why 60k.

While I agree we can't have random holes in the road injuring people regardless of background.

Why can't the judge say 1k compo and order the council fix the pothole. Surely it would make more sense to me, leave the council with 59k and actually fix something.

Don't be so ridiculous, you know as well as I do a council worker would injure is back and sue , then a passing hiker would fall over traffic cone , hurt her hoop and never play piano again.

"Rinse, repeat and do it again".

scamalert

Rod Munch wrote: »

I'd love to see the medical report for this one.

I'm trying to figure out how he fell and broke a knuckle in his hand.

If one falls over do you try and break your fall with a fist or with the palm of ones hand?

On the balance of likelihood most people would use an open hand.

Maybe he covered his face before fall to prevent further injury,or tried to block concrete with his fist all is possible :pac:

masculinist

what about injuring a finger while posting on boards ? whats the difference ? A jogger chooses his shoes and his route. A forum member chooses his keyboard etc ...

Gatling

There's a case before the courts where a child was offered 10k for a small cut on their eyebrow, but the judge thinks it's not a significant offer to cover the minor cut caused by a minor accident on a bus

neverever1

A man gets a bad injury that was caused by the roads not kept up to standard and gets compensated for it. Where's the problem?

Patrick2010

Quite a family...

http://www.sundayworld.com/news/courts/boxer-swung-hatchet-during-traveller-row

signostic

here`s another comp claim
http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/roundup/articles/2017/04/28/4139204-boy-on-bike-gets-7500-for-collision-injury/

boy on bike hits side of car, brakes on bike not working, gets 7500?

Keyzer

Utterly ridiculous.

How long is this nonsense going to be tolerated? The honest working man and woman paying their insurance premiums are being ridden senseless by this absolute horsesh1t.

€60K for a broken knuckle, jesus h bleedin jaysis christ...

Liam McPoyle

neverever1 wrote: »

A man gets a bad injury that was caused by the roads not kept up to standard and gets compensated for it. Where's the problem?

If someone is being awarded €60k there should be more proof of how the accident occurred than simply the claimant having his version of events accepted as gospel.

colm_mcm

He'll never work again I'd say.

LirW

Storytime: In January, I was 8 months pregnant, I got out of the car at the Mobhi Road post office and there are a few holes in the concrete. When I got back to my car I didn't see one of them, tripped, almost fell and sprained my ankle. I couldn't walk for days, it was all swollen and hurt really bad.
I jokingly said I should've sued the council, probably my cards wouldn't be too bad. Bring it up whenever I see that some bollox won a process like that.
Now I read this... W.T.F.

namloc1980

And does it take nearly 6 years to resolve something like this? That's ludicrous.

hurler32

If you have 6 or 7 kids ...your getting 2200 net in dole payments monthly...13-1500 in Childrens allowance...Housing Allowance..medical cards etc...a few compensation claims ...tap St Vincent De Paul once or twice a year.....??

Youd want to be earning 70-80,000 to better that........

pilly

namloc1980 wrote: »

And does it take nearly 6 years to resolve something like this? That's ludicrous.

Yeah, whatever happened to the PIAB cutting back the time to a year?

Sam Kade

hurler32 wrote: »

If you have 6 or 7 kids ...your getting 2200 net in dole payments monthly...13-1500 in Childrens allowance...Housing Allowance..medical cards etc...a few compensation claims ...tap St Vincent De Paul once or twice a year.....??

Youd want to be earning 70-80,000 to better that........

How do you know all this? :pac:

Samuel T. Cogley

pilly wrote: »

Yeah, whatever happened to the PIAB cutting back the time to a year?

PIAB and the removal of juries, both driven by the insurance lobby. Both have increased claims and/or times to deal with claims.

SEPT 23 1989

Just Google Oldcastle Park, Bawnogue, Clondalkin and witness how this beautiful ethnic culture adds to Irish society

cruizer101

What's gets me about claims is why is the claimant handed over 60k cash instead of allowed 60k towards vouched medical expenses. It would be a simple solution to massively reduce fraud claims.

F**king boils my blood this s**t

Samuel T. Cogley

cruizer101 wrote: »

What's gets me about claims is why is the claimant handed over 60k cash instead of allowed 60k towards vouched medical expenses. It would be a simple solution to massively reduce fraud claims.

F**king boils my blood this s**t

Medical expense are only part of these claims and the award taskes them into account. There is the money for the actual injury and then there were agrivating factors here too.

You sohuld sue the OP for mental distress.

neverever1

Rod Munch wrote: »

If someone is being awarded €60k there should be more proof of how the accident occurred than simply the claimant having his version of events accepted as gospel.

Were you in court to hear this case? The judge was and he found the claim valid. Maybe the judge was wrong but what proof has anyone of that exactly?

neverever1

LirW wrote: »

Storytime: In January, I was 8 months pregnant, I got out of the car at the Mobhi Road post office and there are a few holes in the concrete. When I got back to my car I didn't see one of them, tripped, almost fell and sprained my ankle. I couldn't walk for days, it was all swollen and hurt really bad.
I jokingly said I should've sued the council, probably my cards wouldn't be too bad. Bring it up whenever I see that some bollox won a process like that.
Now I read this... W.T.F.

Would you claim if it happened again?

LirW

cruizer101 wrote: »

What's gets me about claims is why is the claimant handed over 60k cash instead of allowed 60k towards vouched medical expenses. It would be a simple solution to massively reduce fraud claims.

F**king boils my blood this s**t

I mean I don't wanna step in for this guy but I think cash handouts have a simple reason: Not all of it is for medical expenses.
Just imagine you get hit by a car, that leaves you paraplegic. Not only do you have the medical bills to pay but most likely also a lot of modifications to do in your living environment. You can't step stairs anymore, you can't cook on your own anymore and so on.

Not that this is the case for 99% of these ridiculous claims but there is a genuine thought about the cash handouts.

neverever1

hurler32 wrote: »

If you have 6 or 7 kids ...your getting 2200 net in dole payments monthly...13-1500 in Childrens allowance...Housing Allowance..medical cards etc...a few compensation claims ...tap St Vincent De Paul once or twice a year.....??

Youd want to be earning 70-80,000 to better that........

Go do it then if it's so good, what's stopping you?

LirW

neverever1 wrote: »

Would you claim if it happened again?

No because that's life and sh*t sometimes happen. Everyone can be unfortunate and fall or so.

Also I grew up on the Mainland, there aren't claims like that and if so, the judge would most likely tell you to f off.
That was one thing that amused me a long time that this is an actual thing here in Ireland.

howamidifferent

LirW wrote: »

No because that's live and sh*t sometimes happen. Everyone can be unfortunate and fall or so.

Also I grew up on the Mainland, there aren't claims like that and if so, the judge would most likely tell you to f off.
That was one thing that amused me a long time that this is an actual thing here in Ireland.

What mainland?? WTF? This is the Republic Of Ireland, we are our mainland.

Samuel T. Cogley

The cash handouts are there for a reason though also, as a punishment/deterrant. If you, God forbid, had fallen and lost the baby rather than getting a sprained ankle, I'm sure the siutaion would have been different. Now one person has already had an accident, what happens if the next person is not as lucky as you and breaks a hip? Your claim would have likely avoided that issue, at much less cost and the person with the broken hip would probably prefer a good hip rather than the money. Now given we all know how effective the coucil are at repairing this sort of thing, or indeed a company is at fixing an issue, simply reporting it isn't enough. People have to hit these entities in the pocket.

Samuel T. Cogley

LirW wrote: »

No because that's life and sh*t sometimes happen. Everyone can be unfortunate and fall or so.

Also I grew up on the Mainland, there aren't claims like that and if so, the judge would most likely tell you to f off.
That was one thing that amused me a long time that this is an actual thing here in Ireland.

Mainland?

You mean France?

neverever1

LirW wrote: »

No because that's life and sh*t sometimes happen. Everyone can be unfortunate and fall or so.

Also I grew up on the Mainland, there aren't claims like that and if so, the judge would most likely tell you to f off.
That was one thing that amused me a long time that this is an actual thing here in Ireland.

Well for this person it caused them huge inconvenience, pain and stress. You're French? I thought they'd claim for injuries there?

ahnowbrowncow

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

The cash handouts are there for a reason though also, as a punishment/deterrant. If you, God forbid, had fallen and lost the baby rather than getting a sprained ankle, I'm sure the siutaion would have been different. Now one person has already had an accident, what happens if the next person is not as lucky as you and breaks a hip? Your claim would have likely avoided that issue, at much less cost and the person with the broken hip would probably prefer a good hip rather than the money. Now given we all know how effective the coucil are at repairing this sort of thing, or indeed a company is at fixing an issue, simply reporting it isn't enough. People have to hit these entities in the pocket.

The only people defending there ludicrous payouts are the con artists and people in the legal profession.

You're completely blinkered and biased by your background.

Samuel T. Cogley

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

The only people defending there ludicrous payouts are the con artists and people in the legal profession.

You're completely blinkered and biased by your background.

My background - oh pray tell