Buncrana pier victims family being sued

ItsLikeThis

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2018/03/26/woman-who-helped-save-baby-in-buncrana-drowning-tragedy-sues-victims-family/
I take what Donegal Daily says with a pinch of salt but then again, nothing surprises me anymore...

Will it not be through insurance or something?

Laneyh

Jesus, if that report is accurate she is the lowest of the low

Ursus Horribilis

And if it's true, Davitt is well rid. What an awful thing to do.

kneemos

How did she have loss of earnings?
All she did is hold the baby while the Ambulance arrived.

Graces7

What solicitor would do this? What a terrible thing this is .

liam7831

How low can you go? I think we have a winner

McMurphy

Jesus Christ, one would have thought that poor family have been through enough already.

I hope she gets the square root of fcuk all from them.

That's some low life scumbavggery if its true

Lollipops23

How on earth could she have loss of earnings? And what makes her think the family have money to spare??

Omackeral

I hope she gets bad diarrhea on a packed rush hour bus.

listermint

Deleted User wrote: »

Will it not be through insurance or something?

What insurance specifically?


..............................

myshirt

I'm struggling to see the cause of action here...

iamwhoiam

I am shocked to the core by this story . Words fail me

gozunda

ItsLikeThis wrote: »

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2018/03/26/woman-who-helped-save-baby-in-buncrana-drowning-tragedy-sues-victims-family/
I take what Donegal Daily says with a pinch of salt but then again, nothing surprises me anymore...

See the comments beneath the story for reaction ...

wakka12

I hope there is an aspect of the story that isn't being made available to us that could somehow clear this up. Because it seems verging on sadistic as it is

Is that the wan who's suing them? The girl with blonde hair at the top of the article?

listermint

listermint wrote: »

What insurance specifically?


..............................

Car.

Nekarsulm

The entire episode was an appalling tragedy.

A guy 3x times the drink driving limit drives his Audi 4x4 down onto a slipway.
In my opinion, probably showing off what "Vorsprung durch Technik" can do.
Due to algae etc, car can't reverse back up, and slides into the sea.

After the funerals etc, the widow announces she is going to sue Donegal Co. Council for not having barriers at the top of the slipway.

Now a bystander who witnessed the event is trying to sue the estate, probably on grounds of PTSD of some type.

Charmers, one and all.

the_pen_turner

there nust be more to it than whats reported. nobody would sue because they lost a few minutes saving a babies life.
she must have been out of work from the shock or something

frag420

Omackeral wrote: »

I hope she gets bad diarrhea on a packed rush hour bus.

What did the poor passengers do to deserve this...:rolleyes::D

Harry Palmr

Someone has been very badly advised by an ambulance chaser and will regret this.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/were-still-having-nightmares-buncrana-tragedy-hero-who-saved-baby-praised-at-water-safety-awards-35198842.html

Speaking to Independent.ie last night, Ms Knox, who had the presence of mind to take off the baby's wet clothes and wrap her in her coat to prevent her from dying from hypothermia, said she is still having nightmares over the tragedy.

But she said the trauma counselling that both she and Davitt have undergone to cope with the horror has helped.
They couple are also still in contact with Louise McGrotty, the baby's mother, when the unspeakable horror of losing her family unfolded as she returned from a trip to the UK.

However, Stephanie said they are giving her some space to come to terms with the tragedy, although they are in touch with the family and delighted to see Riognach Anne's progress as she nears her first birthday.

Defunkd

Link doesn't give enough detail. Am a bit suspicious about this tbh.

pxdf9i5cmoavkz

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I hope she gets the square root of fcuk all from them.

I would not be surprised if Ms.Knox gets something when Irish Judges award obscene amounts of money to people for stepping on a chip or not punishing those who blatantly abuse the dole system.

the purple tin

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Someone has been very badly advised by an ambulance chaser and will regret this.

Her reputation will be destroyed; never mind loss of earnings, who on earth would hire her after this? and said ambulance chaser will probably be quids in and come out of it squeaky clean.
I hate to see this parasitic litigation coming over from america.

neris

she wont be showing her face around donegal for a long time, what <snip>

Graces7

the purple tin wrote: »

Her reputation will be destroyed; never mind loss of earnings, who on earth would hire her after this? and said ambulance chaser will probably be quids in and come out of it squeaky clean.
I hate to see this parasitic litigation coming over from america.

She is a NURSE. Surely able to cope?

maxsmum

Is this her?
https://stephsscoliosisjourney.wordpress.com/page/2/

iamwhoiam

What insurance exactly would cover this ? Car insurance or what ?

pistolpetes11

Wow I thought your Wan on Room To Improve was one of the worst women I have come across but if true we have a new winner

iamwhoiam

Graces7 wrote: »

She is a NURSE. Surely able to cope?

You would think anyone would be so very proud to be able to help and their pride and a babys life would be all that mattered to them . I am shocked at this story to be honest .

the_pen_turner

pistolpetes11 wrote: »

Wow I thought your Wan on Room To Improve was one of the worst women I have come across but if true we have a new winner

never underestemate how bad or stupid someone can be

iamwhoiam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

What insurance exactly would cover this ? Car insurance or what ?

it was essentially the result of a car accident, so the car insurance would be the ones getting sued, not the actual family.

Omackeral

the_pen_turner wrote: »

never underestemate how stupid someone can be

iamwhoiam

Aegir wrote: »

it was essentially the result of a car accident, so the car insurance would be the ones getting sued, not the actual family.

Wow . I didn't know a bystander could sue for being upset after a crash.
My first thought would be that I was very lucky to be able to help .

Thepoet85

Gut wrenching read. I don't know what to think.

Conor Bourke

garbo speaks wrote: »

...and this **** is a nurse?

I didn’t see anywhere in the article that says she is a nurse. She’s described as a cardiac physiologist (whatever the fook that is) No record of a Stephanie Knox registered with the UK NMC or the NMBI.

Graces7 wrote: »

She is a NURSE. Surely able to cope?

Not condoning her actions for one moment, but nurses are human too, the trauma she and Davitt Walsh witnessed was horrific, anyone would struggle and I am sure all of the EMS involved were offered support/debriefing in the aftermath. Regardless of her profession however, the decision to sue the family is disgraceful.

biko

What an odd thing to do. What loss of earnings?
I feel there is more to this than meets the eye.

Nermal

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Someone has been very badly advised by an ambulance chaser and will regret this.

Why? I'm sure the woman who got €20,000 when she hit her knee sitting down at a table restaurant doesn't. Not the one who got €40,000 for slipping on a chip in a food court. Very few people regret visiting the four goldmines these days. Our judiciary are out of control, so you may as well roll the dice.

cantdecide

maxsmum wrote: »

Is this her?
https://stephsscoliosisjourney.wordpress.com/page/2/

I don't know for sure if it is or isn't but I'm sure anyone who feels like creating a blog to document their brave journey through.... scoliosis.... and expects other people to read is definitely NOT a complete narcissist.

iamwhoiam

Cornelius Crow wrote: »

I didn’t see anywhere in the article that says she is a nurse. She’s described as a cardiac physiologist (whatever the fook that is) No record of a Stephanie Knox registered with the UK NMC or the NMBI.



Not condoning her actions for one moment, but nurses are human too, the trauma she and Davitt Walsh witnessed was horrific, anyone would struggle and I am sure all of the EMS involved were offered support/debriefing in the aftermath. Regardless of her profession however, the decision to sue the family is disgraceful.

Nurses and medics and ambulance people are human of course . But they are better able to cope because of their profession . I once came across a horrible accident and till this day am so proud I could help . I came home and cried and shook and was terribly upset . At no stage would it enter my head to make it about me or burden a family even more
My god I am stunned that anyone would do that

Lucas Hood

I once saw someone get run over by oil tanker when I was a kid.

Can I now sue the the driver?

What a <snip>

the purple tin

Lucas Hood wrote: »

I once saw someone get run over by oil tanker when I was a kid.

Can I now sue the the driver?

What <snip>.

You suing the victims next of kin would be a more accurate comparison.

Spanish Eyes

Personally I think there is a rush to judgment here on the thread. We have little information as to the woman's reasons for taking action.

Anyway it is NOT against the family at all, it is against the car insurer. The family does not need to be involved in any way. This action will probably be the first of many in this case. Who knows?

It also reminds me of the case of Mark Pollock. He sued his very best friends for a fall out of their window. Well he sued their public liability insurers. Some thought it was quite cruel of him to sue his best friends like that. But it was their insurers, not them personally. He suffered devastating injuries but made sure that the payout was at the cap of his friends liability under the insurance policy and they had no legal costs to pay either.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0730/718165-mark-pollock-case/


That is what insurance is for.

cantdecide

Lucas Hood wrote: »

I once saw someone get run over by oil tanker when I was a kid.

Can I now sue the the driver?

What <snip>

Don't be daft. Sue the family of the victim.

iamwhoiam

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Personally I think there is a rush to judgment here on the thread. We have little information as to the woman's reasons for taking action.

Anyway it is NOT against the family at all, it is against the car insurer. The family does not need to be involved in any way. This action will probably be the first of many in this case. Who knows?

It also reminds me of the case of Mark Pollock. He sued his very best friends for a fall out of their window. Well he sued their public liability insurers. Some thought it was quite cruel of him to sue his best friends like that. But it was their insurers, not them personally. He suffered devastating injuries but made sure that the payout was at the cap of his friends liability under the insurance policy and they had no legal costs to pay either.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0730/718165-mark-pollock-case/


That is what insurance is for.

Bit of a difference with having catastrophic injuries and being upset or traumatised in my opinion

myshirt

The tort of outrage?

Is that what she is at?

This is sabre rattling at its worst.

yabadabado

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Personally I think there is a rush to judgment here on the thread. We have little information as to the woman's reasons for taking action.

Anyway it is NOT against the family at all, it is against the car insurer. The family does not need to be involved in any way. This action will probably be the first of many in this case. Who knows?

It also reminds me of the case of Mark Pollock. He sued his very best friends for a fall out of their window. Well he sued their public liability insurers. Some thought it was quite cruel of him to sue his best friends like that. But it was their insurers, not them personally. He suffered devastating injuries but made sure that the payout was at the cap of his friends liability under the insurance policy and they had no legal costs to pay either.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0730/718165-mark-pollock-case/


That is what insurance is for.

A huge difference between the two cases.

Spanish Eyes

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Bit of a difference with having catastrophic injuries and being upset or traumatised in my opinion

No, we do not know what trauma the person suffered AT ALL. Although I take your point that Mark Pollocks injuries were visible and life limiting.

Anyone can sue anyone. We have all seen some fairly trivial shyte cases that are awarded thousands, happens every day. It is up to the insurers to fight the cases that they deem to be ridiculous or fraudulent. But most settle on the steps and on it goes.

The woman in question is suing the insurers not the family. Whether she succeeds or not is another matter.

I suspect there will be many more claims associated with this case, in time.

backspin.

Even if she backs out of sueing the damage is done to even think of it. The money grabbing mare.

eviltwin

I ended up in counselling for a while after arriving at the scene of a car crash. The victim was quite young and it was a very graphic scene and really horrible. It would never enter my head to sue anyone, it was an accident and all involved have suffered enough. I can't believe anyone would even consider this let alone actually do it.

Del2005

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Personally I think there is a rush to judgment here on the thread. We have little information as to the woman's reasons for taking action.

Anyway it is NOT against the family at all, it is against the car insurer. The family does not need to be involved in any way. This action will probably be the first of many in this case. Who knows?

It also reminds me of the case of Mark Pollock. He sued his very best friends for a fall out of their window. Well he sued their public liability insurers. Some thought it was quite cruel of him to sue his best friends like that. But it was their insurers, not them personally. He suffered devastating injuries but made sure that the payout was at the cap of his friends liability under the insurance policy and they had no legal costs to pay either.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0730/718165-mark-pollock-case/


That is what insurance is for.

That's not what insurance is for. It's just become what it's become with our out of touch judiciary.

And worse it's anyone who pays insurance who is going to pay for yet another BS claim.

Spanish Eyes

Del2005 wrote: »

That's not what insurance is for. It's just become what it's become with our out of touch judiciary.

And worse it's anyone who pays insurance who is going to pay for yet another BS claim.

Well what is insurance for then?