Child awarded €32,500 for cut eyebrow

Cork Trucker

Mammy thought the settlement was on the low side.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/boy-who-cut-eyebrow-in-fall-at-dublin-cr%C3%A8che-awarded-32-500-1.4043786

jam_mac_jam

I should sue my parents, I had a number of falls including when I feel off a chair onto my forehead, split my head open. Also on my bike, split my head open. Both of which I have tiny little scars.

Cork Trucker

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I should sue my parents, I had a number of falls including when I feel off a chair onto my forehead, split my head open. Also on my bike, split my head open. Both of which I have tiny little scars.

If my kids sued me for every mark they ever got I’d be bankrupt. Utterly crazy country we live in

Cork Trucker

Weepsie wrote: »

Medical expenses are all that should ever be covered. and if a parent has to take a day or 2 off work, maybe that too, but this is complete BS.

Given the mother’s attitude towards the settlement I’m wondering does she work.

jam_mac_jam

Its a cut eyebrow ffs. This is insane.

LollipopJimmy

The mother felt the award was a little on the light side. Jesus ****ing wept. Now on the other hand the creche were a bit thick having the child stand on a stool to wash their hands but 32 and half grand? **** me pink

ednwireland

i got nothing when another kid threw a rock at me on a school trip had concussion the works, got sent home on public transport the next day and got home and started throwing up just got a bandage slapped around my head wasnt even taken to hospital

those were the days (1970's)!

Gatling

LollipopJimmy wrote: »

Now on the other hand the creche were a bit thick having the child stand on a stool to wash their hands

It's actually quite common due to the younger ages taken in crèche and preschools

punisher5112

Absolutely ridiculous....

Many a fall I had and my family etc...

Little one face planted a small stage in a pub and similar to the boy burst her eye brow.

You can still slightly see it but we didn't sue as it was an accident and nobody else's fault.

Same as me walking around my house falling over and getting a bruise or a cut, I tend to shake it off or go ouch and continue on....

I don't have nightmares of walking again or that of been in the house I fell etc....

How are these claims even entertained and exactly as previously said costs for medical if other found at fault.

Why would he need €32k for a cut....

Cork Trucker

punisher5112 wrote: »

Absolutely ridiculous....

Many a fall I had and my family etc...

Little one face planted a small stage in a pub and similar to the boy burst her eye brow.

You can still slightly see it but we didn't sue as it was an accident and nobody else's fault.

Same as me walking around my house falling over and getting a bruise or a cut, I tend to shake it off or go ouch and continue on....

I don't have nightmares of walking again or that of been in the house I fell etc....

How are these claims even entertained and exactly as previously said costs for medical if other found at fault.

Why would he need €32k for a cut....

Imagine the legal & associated costs of the claim on top of the €32,500, all this will do is incentivise more of these types of claims. The book of quantum needs to be shredded.

is_that_so

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Mammy thought the settlement was on the low side.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/boy-who-cut-eyebrow-in-fall-at-dublin-cr%C3%A8che-awarded-32-500-1.4043786

From experience two-year-old boys cannot be left alone in bathrooms! Award is probably high but no evidence in the story that anyone was watching the child. If that's the case that's going to be seen as negligence.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Why is there no sink for the children to use? It's a creche, their main clientele are are little ball bashing midgets.

32K is a bit much.

Cork Trucker

is_that_so wrote: »

From experience two-year-old boys cannot be left alone in bathrooms! Award is probably high but no evidence in the story that anyone was watching the child. If that's the case that's going to be seen as negligence.

No one is disputing negligence, merely the scale of the award.

punisher5112

Need to put in sinks for mice next....

Why not just furnish them with a doll's house....

Have you ever seen someone fit a lower sink at home....

It's probably best they learn some skills but this will now have to be looked at and maybe just take the sinks away and give them wet wipes ...

Sir Oxman

The cool eyebrow scar will stand to him when he grows up.

Cork Trucker

Sir Oxman wrote: »

The cool eyebrow scar will stand to him when he grows up.

Reminds me of the kid in the Ali G movie with slits on both eyebrows

PatrickSmithUS

Sounds like they had a very good barrister.

Trauma is difficult to define, hence the parent's saying they were unhappy with the award. Fair play to the judge for telling them to take what they were offered.

Boggles

Cork Trucker wrote: »

No one is disputing negligence, merely the scale of the award.

There was no award.

The insurance company / creche settled.

Borgo

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Mammy thought the settlement was on the low side.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/boy-who-cut-eyebrow-in-fall-at-dublin-cr%C3%A8che-awarded-32-500-1.4043786

And we wonder why insurance policies are through the roof. What an absolute joke of a country.The best one was a few years ago im sure someone remembers a woman hit her leg off the end of a table in a restaurant as she sat to have her meal. 20k she got.

kildare lad

I had to get stitches twice when I was younger, in both cases it wasn't my fault . I got brought to a & e, got stitched up and all the compensation I got was a Happy meal on the way home. Do the two scars bother me ...no , I've no problem with genuine claims but the ridiculous amounts they pay out is a joke . My dad employed this fella for a while. The bloke told another employee of my dad that he got 20,000 for getting 3 stitches on his hand , he even told him, that he was back working the next day after getting the stitches. The other employee told my dad and my dad let him go a week later . You can't have people like that working for you

Outlaw Pete

Nothing wrong with the award. They should have taken better care of the kid / had sinks which kids can access without the need to stand on a stool.

Clear negligence.

Cork Trucker

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Imagine the legal & associated costs of the claim on top of the €32,500, all this will do is incentivise more of these types of claims. The book of quantum needs to be shredded.

Cost for the legal defence, plaintiff's legal costs, barrister fees and a whole host of other costs. The legal profession is a goldmine.

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the award. They should have taken better care of the kid / had sinks which kids can access without the need to stand on a stool.

Clear negligence.

What does the child need that sum of money for? His hospital fees should have been covered and no more.

Outlaw Pete

He's left with a scar. He was just two years old.

Maybe some of it should be kept for him until he's 18 but the amount is fine.

Cork Trucker

Borgo wrote: »

And we wonder why insurance policies are through the roof. What an absolute joke of a country.The best one was a few years ago im sure someone remembers a woman hit her leg off the end of a table in a restaurant as she sat to have her meal. 20k she got.

I remember that case. A photo of her appeared in the media smiling after leaving court. No wonder, €20k of easy money.

Cork Trucker

Boggles wrote: »

There was no award.

The insurance company / creche settled.

Judge had to approve it, therefore award.

Cork Trucker

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He's left with a scar. He was just two years old.

Maybe some of it should be kept for him until he's 18 but the amount is fine.

Is there interest in that money until the child reaches 18?

FTA69

When I was a kid I fell through bars on a fire escape stairs and bruised my kidneys, I was in hospital for five days.

Still raging my mam didn’t sue them, I’d have a deposit for a house handy. Funnily enough at the time loads of people were urging her to take legal action and her response was something along the lines of “he shouldn’t have been bloody climbing around the thing and he’ll think again now next time.”

Sensible woman, something getting rare nowadays unfortunately.

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He's left with a scar. He was just two years old.

Maybe some of it should be kept for him until he's 18 but the amount is fine.

So if he can live with his scar from age 2 to 18 without this money then why would he suddenly need it at age 18?

Boggles

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Judge had to approve it, therefore award.

No it isn't.

A Judge approving it is a legal box ticking exercise which brings court proceedings to an end.

If a Judge awarded it, he would set the amount and explain why.

Strumms

When I saw the headline I too was thinking ‘fûck that’s way too harsh’ but on reading the details where a kid had to climb on and stand on a fûcking plastic stool, without assistance to perform a simple and necessary task to wash his hands... sorry this is ALL on the creche.. they should have had facilities where by the smallest of children can access wash facilities without endangering themselves or climbing things ie. two sinks at different levels... THEY actively chose not to provide this or assistance...

Also before opening did they engage with anyone to provide a health and safety assessment / audit of the facilities ? Unlikely as this would have been obviously flagged as a problem.... they clearly have more interest in their pockets than the welfare of the children in their care...

Cork Trucker

Boggles wrote: »

No it isn't.

A Judge approving it is a legal box ticking exercise which brings court proceedings to an end.

If a Judge awarded it, he would set the amount and explain why.

Right we'll agree to disagree.

Next!

Boggles

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Right we'll agree to disagree.

Next!

You aren't disagreeing with me, it's not my opinion.

biko

Dublin compo culture strikes again.

ohnonotgmail

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Judge had to approve it, therefore award.

Boggles wrote: »

No it isn't.

A Judge approving it is a legal box ticking exercise which brings court proceedings to an end.

If a Judge awarded it, he would set the amount and explain why.

you're both wrong. the case involved a minor. The judge is under no obligation to accept the settlement. The only accepts the settlement if it is in the best interests of the child.

Boggles

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you're both wrong. the case involved a minor. The judge is under no obligation to accept the settlement. The only accepts the settlement if it is in the best interests of the child.

I never suggested he was.

Castlekeeper

Strumms wrote: »

When I saw the headline I too was thinking ‘fûck that’s way too harsh’ but on reading the details where a kid had to climb on and stand on a fûcking plastic stool, without assistance to perform a simple and necessary task to wash his hands... sorry this is ALL on the creche.. they should have had facilities where by the smallest of children can access wash facilities without endangering themselves or climbing things ie. two sinks at different levels... THEY actively chose not to provide this or assistance...

Also before opening did they engage with anyone to provide a health and safety assessment / audit of the facilities ? Unlikely as this would have been obviously flagged as a problem.... they clearly have more interest in their pockets than the welfare of the children in their care...

Grand, a 2 to bangs its head, but apart from the medical expenses, a band aid, what was the money for?

Castlekeeper

downtheroad wrote: »

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He's left with a scar. He was just two years old.

Maybe some of it should be kept for him until he's 18 but the amount is fine.

So if he can live with his scar from age 2 to 18 without this money then why would he suddenly need it at age 18?

😂😂😂in a nutshell.

Sparkey84

there was a duty of care to the child, and that duty was neglected.
the cash amount seems ridiculous though. will he even give the scar a second thought as he ages? i can't know for sure but i don't think i would have.

more serious note though what if the little fella was coming to a birthday for your child at your home? would you be worried about it?

shesty

Or you were hosting a party at a playcentre for your kids or something?

ohnonotgmail

Boggles wrote: »

I never suggested he was.

A Judge approving it is a legal box ticking exercise which brings court proceedings to an end.

it is not a box ticking exercise.

Boggles

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

it is not a box ticking exercise.

In 99% of cases it is merely a formality in the Circuit Court.

It's rare that a Judge would rule that compensation is not adequate.

Ironically this is one of those cases.

Another Judge turned down a settlement of 25K from the PIAB.

The case got dragged out for another 2 years for a "measly" 7 extra grand.

No wonder the mother was pissed. :pac:

ohnonotgmail

Boggles wrote: »

In 99% of cases it is merely a formality in the Circuit Court.

It's rare that a Judge would rule that compensation is not adequate.

Ironically this is one of those cases.

Another Judge turned down a settlement of 25K from the PIAB.

The case got dragged out for another 2 years for a "measly" 7 extra grand.

No wonder the mother was pissed. :pac:

so not a box ticking exercise then. i'm glad we established that.

Cork Trucker

Boggles wrote: »

In 99% of cases it is merely a formality in the Circuit Court.

It's rare that a Judge would rule that compensation is not adequate.

Ironically this is one of those cases.

Another Judge turned down a settlement of 25K from the PIAB.

The case got dragged out for another 2 years for a "measly" 7 extra grand.

No wonder the mother was pissed. :pac:

An extra 2 years for €7k extra in the settlement, what were the hidden legal costs though. The legal costs are more than the settlements in a lot of cases.

Boggles

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so not a box ticking exercise then. i'm glad we established that.

In 99% of the cases it is.

But again the main point is, a settlement isn't an award.