Woman who fell at petrol pump when eight months pregnant has €60k claim denied

Cork Trucker

Interesting to see will this succeed on appeal



https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/woman-who-fell-at-petrol-pump-when-eight-months-pregnant-has-60k-claim-denied-939370.html

A woman who was eight-months pregnant when she fell at a Topaz petrol pump has had a €60,000 damages claim dismissed by the Circuit Civil Court.

Judge James O'Donohoe heard that Jennifer Bolger of Butterstream Drive, Clane, Co Kildare had stopped at the Topaz petrol station at The Old Belgard Road, Tallaght, Dublin 24 on the evening of February 8, 2011

kneemos

You don't get to make up the value of your claim in this country.
God knows where the Examiner got it.

emeldc

kneemos wrote: »

You don't get to make up the value of your claim in this country.
God knows where the Examiner got it.

€60k is the max that she can claim, but not necessarily the amount that would be awarded.

dudara

Moved from AH to CA

SteM

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Interesting to see will this succeed on appeal

Why would she appeal, they have CCTV footage of her tripping on the traffic island that the pumps are put on. How could Topaz be at fault in this case?

emeldc

SteM wrote: »

Why would she appeal, they have CCTV footage of her tripping on the traffic island that the pumps are put on. How could Topaz be at fault in this case?

They probably don't have a sign up saying that you have to lift your feet in order to clear the traffic island.

dartboardio

Haha she should not get a penny. It's not as if they were clumsy and left a trip hazard around?

My auntie is heavily pregnant and recently tripped in The Range over an empty crate that should not have been on the floor. That is claim worthy.

Not when you don't look infront of you

Cream crackers eh

BorneTobyWilde

Seemed a genuine claim, compared to others that is. Fuel can be spilt around the forecourt by clueless people who aren't capable of filling their vehicles correctly, when it is spilt it should have detergent put on it to dissolve it, and then saw dust throw on it. She should appeal it.

Effects

dartboardio wrote: »

My auntie is heavily pregnant and recently tripped in The Range over an empty crate that should not have been on the floor. That is claim worthy.

Not when you don't look infront of you

Surely if your aunt had looked in front of her then she wouldn't have tripped over the crate?

Noveight

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Seemed a genuine claim, compared to others that is. Fuel can be spilt around the forecourt by clueless people who aren't capable of filling their vehicles correctly, when it is spilt it should have detergent put on it to dissolve it, and then saw dust throw on it. She should appeal it.

Reads like the judge reckons from CCTV that she fell over the island and the spillage was elsewhere.

Effects

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Seemed a genuine claim, compared to others that is. Fuel can be spilt around the forecourt by clueless people who aren't capable of filling their vehicles correctly, when it is spilt it should have detergent put on it to dissolve it, and then saw dust throw on it. She should appeal it.

Didn't you read the article? She didn't slip on spilt fuel and her brother provided false evidence.

ChikiChiki

The fightback over nonsensical claims is on. Judges seem to be getting their act together under the scrutiny.

BorneTobyWilde

You'd have to see footage. If you stepped in oil , you could slip and fall many steps later if you stepped onto a different surface.

Effects

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

You'd have to see footage. If you stepped in oil , you could slip and fall many steps later if you stepped onto a different surface.

Yeah, I think the claims system needs to be based on posting the CCTV on the internet and letting the public vote. No point letting a judge see the footage and making a judgement based on the clearly presented facts.

Cork Trucker

SteM wrote: »

Why would she appeal, they have CCTV footage of her tripping on the traffic island that the pumps are put on. How could Topaz be at fault in this case?

Different judge different court, might end up with a different result. Interesting how it took 8 and a half years from incident to judgement.

TheShow

From what is reported in the article, sounds like the judge made the correct call.

Boggles

ChikiChiki wrote: »

The fightback over nonsensical claims is on. Judges seem to be getting their act together under the scrutiny.

Judges seldom get to make the decision relative to the amount of cases taken.

The vast majority of settlements posted on here have nothing to with the Judge.

They only approve them, it's a legal box ticking exercise.

The real question is, how close were the insurance company to paying her off?

Gatling

Here's another one involving a taxi driver with multiple claims open already .
Issueed predated receipts as evidence for the damage done to his car and medical bills

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/judge-refers-misleading-60000-car-claim-to-dpp-38344926.html

Cork Trucker

Gatling wrote: »

Here's another one involving a taxi driver with multiple claims open already .
Issueed predated receipts as evidence for the damage done to his car and medical bills

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/judge-refers-misleading-60000-car-claim-to-dpp-38344926.html

Was it a parking sensor that was replaced? If so a bit odd for a side on collision.

SteM

Effects wrote: »

Yeah, I think the claims system needs to be based on posting the CCTV on the internet and letting the public vote. No point letting a judge see the footage and making a judgement based on the clearly presented facts.

Sure you could make it into a Saturday evening TV show. You've Been Claimed.

Neyite

When heavily pregnant your sense of balance is very front heavy so it's easy to have a bad fall when ordinarily you'd just stumble and right yourself before you fall to the ground.



I had two trips while in the last month of pregnancy - one was on uneven paving and at least 14 people told me to sue the council, and the other was a dickhead in a bmw who saw me crossing the road (with ample time) and sped up towards me for the lols and I stumbled on the kerb. Skinned knees, an anti D injection and a few hours observation in maternity but luckily no harm done.

LirW

Neyite wrote: »

When heavily pregnant your sense of balance is very front heavy so it's easy to have a bad fall when ordinarily you'd just stumble and right yourself before you fall to the ground.



I had two trips while in the last month of pregnancy - one was on uneven paving and at least 14 people told me to sue the council, and the other was a dickhead in a bmw who saw me crossing the road (with ample time) and sped up towards me for the lols and I stumbled on the kerb. Skinned knees, an anti D injection and a few hours observation in maternity but luckily no harm done.

When I was 8 months pregnant I walked back to my car from the local post office and the footpath had a couple of really nasty potholes. My foot got caught in one of them, I fell and sprained my ankle badly, couldn't walk for days.
Had a laugh that I should sue. If I would've done it there would be a good chance I would have won.
Scary thought.

drunkmonkey

The big concern here is the date evening of February 8, 2011.

Are the courts that backed up with so much bull crap, we've still 8yrs worth of cases to appear. Were only at the start of the insurance problem no where near the end of it.
Did you break something, did your blood get infected. Could you have avoided the spilt milk if you were paying attention. Do you look before your leap? Answers no to any of those questions and you should get a hug from a homeless person and not a pay out.

SEPT 23 1989

She couldn't just be happy that her baby was unharmed?

dudara

Effects wrote: »

Didn't you read the article? She didn't slip on spilt fuel and her brother provided false evidence.

To be fair, the article doesn’t say she or her brother provided false evidence. It says that the judge wasn’t satisfied with the evidence produced and that they failed to provide sufficient evidence for a case. There is a difference.

Boggles

dudara wrote: »

To be fair, the article doesn’t say she or her brother provided false evidence. It says that the judge wasn’t satisfied with the evidence produced and that they failed to provide sufficient evidence for a case. There is a difference.

I don't think it was the brother who provided the photos to the court.

It was this evidence ultimately that got the case thrown out.

Gatling

dudara wrote: »

To be fair, the article doesn’t say she or her brother provided false evidence. It says that the judge wasn’t satisfied with the evidence produced and that they failed to provide sufficient evidence for a case. There is a difference.

But he also said that the photographs were in a different area to where she fell ,
Most garages would have some kind of sheen on its surfaces by the nature of the business and our wet climate

Boggles

This one did give me a chuckle.

Fat Tax!

Judge cuts damages award in half for crash victim

Judge O'Donohoe said that, as the crash had been only 50pc responsible for Mr Noyek's injuries, he would award him €44,835 general damages and reduce it by half.

He said Mr Noyek was grossly overweight, had not exercised and had not made any effort to rehabilitate himself.

dudara

Gatling wrote: »

But he also said that the photographs were in a different area to where she fell ,
Most garages would have some kind of sheen on its surfaces by the nature of the business and our wet climate

I’m not arguing that point. What I’m trying to say is that they were not declared by the court as false evidence. That has a different connotation.

jmreire

Gatling wrote: »

Here's another one involving a taxi driver with multiple claims open already .
Issueed predated receipts as evidence for the damage done to his car and medical bills

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/judge-refers-misleading-60000-car-claim-to-dpp-38344926.html

Pre-dated receipts, plus 4 previous claims...professional litigant, how did his barrister fail to see the receipt's??? and a rear parking sensor ( fitted to the rear bumper, got damaged in a side collision??? That stretches the imagination... )
On the brighter side, maybe he will need all the cash he received from the 4 previous claims to pay the legal costs, plus what ever sentence he may get if the prosecution goes ahead. Beginning to see a faint sliver of light at the end of the claims tunnel, with Judges kicking out claims they are not happy with.:)

jmreire

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

You'd have to see footage. If you stepped in oil , you could slip and fall many steps later if you stepped onto a different surface.

Sure you could, but walking around a filling station, you should be looking to see where you are going, and taking care. Personal responsibility seems to be a very scarce commodity these day's. This Lady was unlucky enough to have a fall, but how many thousand's of people have used that service station, without any problem?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

dartboardio wrote:

My auntie is heavily pregnant and recently tripped in The Range over an empty crate that should not have been on the floor. That is claim worthy.

Stupidity is not a reason to claim. Why are some people so fcuking entitled? Where's the personal responsibility? Crate should not have been there, nonsense. Maybe your heavily pregnant aunt shouldn't have been there without adult supervision.

jmreire

Madden Rancid Wildcat wrote: »

Stupidity is not a reason to claim. Why are some people so fcuking entitled? Where's the personal responsibility? Crate should not have been there, nonsense. Maybe your heavily pregnant aunt shouldn't have been there without adult supervision.

Same as Marie Reilly...from their "advisor's ".

ELM327

Delighted for her. Hopefully more fake compo claims go the same way

Amalgam

I think the photos, 'from another location' was what swung it against them.

If the photos had not been supplied by a relative, the claimant might have been successful.

Judge O’Donohoe had been shown pictures taken by Bolger’s brother on the evening of the accident which had shown a substance on the ground at the back of the car.

Judge O’Donohoe said that the substance had been seen in a different place that where Ms Bolger had fallen.

Read the OP's article!

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/woman-who-fell-at-petrol-pump-when-eight-months-pregnant-has-60k-claim-denied-939370.html

Effects

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

She couldn't just be happy that her baby was unharmed?

Who knows the baby was unharmed?
Haven't people successfully claimed damages on behalf of their unborn children before?

Guy:Incognito

dudara wrote: »

To be fair, the article doesn’t say she or her brother provided false evidence. It says that the judge wasn’t satisfied with the evidence produced and that they failed to provide sufficient evidence for a case. There is a difference.

To me it sounds like the judge wanted to say "**** off you chancer, you tripped on the kerb, nothing to do with the petrol miles away" but went for more diplomatic language.

Guy:Incognito

Effects wrote: »

Who knows the baby was unharmed?

The doctors? It says in the article the baby was unharmed.

Damien360

tonybowie wrote: »

No win no fee is the problem.
Solicitors are throwing cases at the wall hoping something sticks. It does not cost much to bring these cases to court.
A simple fee of €1,000 non refundable paid by the Solicitor before every case begins would cut out this fake claim culture.
If the case is turned down the solicitors will be out of pocket, they will soon cut out the nonsense cases

Surely she has to pay Topaz lawyer fees ?

Failure of a person to pay either from their assets or cash should fall on the solicitor. No win no fee would die in an instant.

This case should never have seen the courts.

biko

ChikiChiki wrote: »

The fightback over nonsensical claims is on. Judges seem to be getting their act together under the scrutiny.

They must have been told off by the government as Ireland and its claims culture makes us fools abroad.

Once the bloodsucker lawyers gets wind of this they will stop promoting stupid cases to go to court.

fritzelly

The sooner these false compo claims are seen for what they are - fraud - the better and the plaintiff charged for such and all costs charged to them the better. Make people think twice about wasting everyone's time
Same with this "whiplash" rubbish

Should also be made illegal for so called "solicitors" to be contacting people who have had no contact with them before encouraging them to make a claim so they can get their commission


When I was a kid and hurt myself in a playground or whatever my parents would never dream of suing someone, more likely to get a whack on the backside and told don't do that again!

lola85

tonybowie wrote: »

Little interesting fact
Whiplash was unknown in Eastern Europe before the fall of the Soviet Union, people in a crash who got "whiplash" where given a few pain killers and within a week back to normal.
It was only with capitalism that the whiplash injury became a thing.

Chernobyl was also unknown in Eastern Europe before the fall of the Soviet Union.

So you know...

fritzelly

tonybowie wrote: »

Now a few of the chines i know where completey unaware of the tiananmen square massacre when they came to Ireland, could not believe it when they where shown videos on Youtube, now that was a eye opener for them and me.

Heavily censored internet that blocks anything talking bad about China (or anything that goes against the Party politics)
Remember at the time it was happening that it was totally unknown within the country outside of people that were there or knew how to circumvent their blocks

Chernobyl secrecy didn't last long at all

Glass fused light

Effects wrote: »

Who knows the baby was unharmed?
Haven't people successfully claimed damages on behalf of their unborn children before?

One of the original cases used as an example in " proximity " and " cause and effect " is about a preganent woman seeing a traffic accident (person v tram(?)) and suffering shock and if I remember correctly a miscarriage(?)

Effects

Here it is, only February this year: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/child-4-injured-while-in-womb-when-mother-collided-with-shopping-trolley-awarded-45000-37843347.html

Woman bumped into her own shopping trolley, completely her own fault.

Boggles

Effects wrote: »

Here it is, only February this year: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/child-4-injured-while-in-womb-when-mother-collided-with-shopping-trolley-awarded-45000-37843347.html

Woman bumped into her own shopping trolley, completely her own fault.

No it wasn't. The travellator malfunctioned.

Another settlement, the Judge didn't get to rule on it.

ohnonotgmail

Effects wrote: »

Here it is, only February this year: https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/child-4-injured-while-in-womb-when-mother-collided-with-shopping-trolley-awarded-45000-37843347.html

Woman bumped into her own shopping trolley, completely her own fault.

that is about as wilful a misreading of a newspaper article as i've seen in quite a while.

Effects

Boggles wrote: »

No it wasn't. The travellator malfunctioned.

Really? I had thought that the wheels locked when it went onto the travellator, as they are designed to do, and she wasn't expecting it.

Effects

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is about as wilful a misreading of a newspaper article as i've seen in quite a while.

A new born baby had to spend a week in hospital with jaundice. This actually happens all the time and is no real danger to the baby.

Does she really need €45,000 for something that she won't remember and won't have a lasting effect on her life whatsoever?

Boggles

Effects wrote: »

Really? I had thought that the wheels locked when it went onto the travellator, as they are designed to do, and she wasn't expecting it.

There was a thread on this case all ready.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/3787214/unborn-child-injured-trolley-tesco-compo/

Young Siwan Stewart, who is now four, was injured when her pregnant mum collided with her shopping trolley after the travelator it was on suddenly stopped without warning

ohnonotgmail

Effects wrote: »

A new born baby had to spend a week in hospital with jaundice. This actually happens all the time and is no real danger to the baby.

Does she really need €45,000 for something that she won't remember and won't have a lasting effect on her life whatsoever?

what does this have to do with your assertion that it was completely her own fault?