What to do with insurance premiums for creches and schools.

political analyst

I've read about the difficulties that creches and schools have with regard to the cost of insurance - the banning of running on playgrounds and the struggle of creches to stay open at all.


Although insurers are, obviously, profit-making businesses, there must still be room for empathy among them. Have creche and school managers said to insurance managers: "If you have children, would you not like them to be able to run around the playground at school during break-times or be able to put them in creches before they reach school-going age without having to pay extremely high fees?"

elperello

Insurance managers only implement what is decided by the board of the company.

The board are obliged by law to prioritise the interests of the shareholders.

Empathy that reduces the dividend to shareholders is unlikely to be forthcoming.

Apart from the government writing cheques legal reform is the only way to go. Don't hold your breath.

enricoh

Government won't do anything to cut payout awards so insurance companies are jumping ship.
Bars n restaurants to get hammered in the new year now apparently.

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMioQFodHRwczovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5pZS9pcmlzaC1uZXdzL3dlLXBhaWQtMTBrLWluLWluc3VyYW5jZS1mb3Itb3VyLWJ1c2luZXNzLWEtZGVjYWRlLWFnby1ub3ctaXRzLTEyNWstb3duZXItb2YtcG9wdWxhci1mb29kLWhhbGwtYW5kLXJlc3RhdXJhbnQtMzg4MDEzMjUuaHRtbNIBoQFodHRwczovL2FtcC5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5pZS9pcmlzaC1uZXdzL3dlLXBhaWQtMTBrLWluLWluc3VyYW5jZS1mb3Itb3VyLWJ1c2luZXNzLWEtZGVjYWRlLWFnby1ub3ctaXRzLTEyNWstb3duZXItb2YtcG9wdWxhci1mb29kLWhhbGwtYW5kLXJlc3RhdXJhbnQtMzg4MDEzMjUuaHRtbA?hl=en-IE&gl=IE&ceid=IE%3Aen

antiskeptic

political analyst wrote: »

I've read about the difficulties that creches and schools have with regard to the cost of insurance - the banning of running on playgrounds and the struggle of creches to stay open at all.


Although insurers are, obviously, profit-making businesses, there must still be room for empathy among them. Have creche and school managers said to insurance managers: "If you have children, would you not like them to be able to run around the playground at school during break-times or be able to put them in creches before they reach school-going age without having to pay extremely high fees?"

Creches are industrialized childminders. Playgrounds (not your swings and roundabouts type) are industrialized entertainment. I'm not so sure I'd be mourning their loss.

Of course, you have the problem of it requiring two earners to support what it used to take one earner to support. It's crept up on us and won't be easily solved.

antiskeptic

enricoh wrote: »

Government won't do anything to cut payout awards so insurance companies are jumping ship.
Bars n restaurants to get hammered in the new year now apparently.

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMioQFodHRwczovL3d3dy5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5pZS9pcmlzaC1uZXdzL3dlLXBhaWQtMTBrLWluLWluc3VyYW5jZS1mb3Itb3VyLWJ1c2luZXNzLWEtZGVjYWRlLWFnby1ub3ctaXRzLTEyNWstb3duZXItb2YtcG9wdWxhci1mb29kLWhhbGwtYW5kLXJlc3RhdXJhbnQtMzg4MDEzMjUuaHRtbNIBoQFodHRwczovL2FtcC5pbmRlcGVuZGVudC5pZS9pcmlzaC1uZXdzL3dlLXBhaWQtMTBrLWluLWluc3VyYW5jZS1mb3Itb3VyLWJ1c2luZXNzLWEtZGVjYWRlLWFnby1ub3ctaXRzLTEyNWstb3duZXItb2YtcG9wdWxhci1mb29kLWhhbGwtYW5kLXJlc3RhdXJhbnQtMzg4MDEzMjUuaHRtbA?hl=en-IE&gl=IE&ceid=IE%3Aen

Piece on the radio Friday re defamation case tourism. People defamed (say by a newspaper article) take their cases here if there is any prextext for doing so. Payments are 10 times more than the UK

political analyst

elperello wrote: »

Insurance managers only implement what is decided by the board of the company.

The board are obliged by law to prioritise the interests of the shareholders.

Empathy that reduces the dividend to shareholders is unlikely to be forthcoming.

Apart from the government writing cheques legal reform is the only way to go. Don't hold your breath.

Why would the board oblige managers to settle an injury claim if the claimant's testimony is, at best, questionable? Does the customer (e.g. a school's board of management) not have a say in it?


Regarding legal reform, if a solicitor knows that the claim is bogus and still proceeds with the action then he or she would be facilitating perjury and may be subjected to proceedings by the Law Society with a view to strike-off the solicitors' register.

FishOnABike

political analyst wrote: »

Regarding legal reform, if a solicitor knows that the claim is bogus and still proceeds with the action then he or she would be facilitating perjury and may be subjected to proceedings by the Law Society with a view to strike-off the solicitors' register.

I'd believe this when I see it happening!
[sarcasm]
No matter how unbelievable you or I or practically everyone else consider a claim, the solicitor is always only acting in the utmost good faith based on their clients instructions.
[/sarcasm]
For a profession full of people smart enough to get a degree, pass professional exams and take part in continuous professional development there can seem to be a surprising number of gullible members of the profession.

political analyst

elperello wrote: »

Insurance managers only implement what is decided by the board of the company.

The board are obliged by law to prioritise the interests of the shareholders.

Empathy that reduces the dividend to shareholders is unlikely to be forthcoming.

Apart from the government writing cheques legal reform is the only way to go. Don't hold your breath.

Then appeal to the shareholders' better nature. Presumably, some of them have children who are attending ordinary (as opposed to fee-paying) schools.

SEPT 23 1989

empathy and multinational insurance companies ?

What age are you?

Eggs For Dinner

political analyst wrote: »

Then appeal to the shareholders' better nature. Presumably, some of them have children who are attending ordinary (as opposed to fee-paying) schools.

You would be better served appealing to the parents to take their solicitors off speed dial

dxhound2005

What happens to children who run in the schoolyard?

Dravokivich

antiskeptic wrote: »

Creches are industrialized childminders. Playgrounds (not your swings and roundabouts type) are industrialized entertainment. I'm not so sure I'd be mourning their loss.

Of course, you have the problem of it requiring two earners to support what it used to take one earner to support. It's crept up on us and won't be easily solved.

Requiring 2 earners? Some of us are single and need somewhere to put the kid while working.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

People are reaping what they sow in relation to seeing €€€ if anything happens their child. I know one person who tried sue on her parents home insurance for an accident her child had in their home.

elperello

political analyst wrote: »

Then appeal to the shareholders' better nature. Presumably, some of them have children who are attending ordinary (as opposed to fee-paying) schools.

It's a nice idea and if someone wants to try then give it a go.

Bear in mind that the shareholders of the insurance companies underwriting policies in Ireland mostly don't live in Ireland.

Ubbquittious

Simple. bin the requirement for creches to have insurance

dxhound2005

A far bigger outlay for creche owners is wages. And for those who don't own their own premises, rent. They could appeal to the good nature of their employees and landlords to help them out.

elperello

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Simple. bin the requirement for creches to have insurance

Not quite so simple.

Your kid is left paralysed for life due to injuries caused by the negligence of the creche.
The creche operator is renting the property and has no assets.
There is no money to make the child's life bearable.
You are left to live out your days minding the unfortunate child because of another persons negligence.

Need I go on?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

elperello wrote: »

Not quite so simple.

Your kid is left paralysed for life due to injuries caused by the negligence of the creche.
The creche operator is renting the property and has no assets.
There is no money to make the child's life bearable.
You are left to live out your days minding the unfortunate child because of another persons negligence.

Need I go on?

Sure if that’s how you feel about it stay at home and mind them yourself

Eggs For Dinner

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Simple. bin the requirement for creches to have insurance

There is no statutory requirement for any business to operate with Public Liability insurance. However, you would be a gob****e to do it.

elperello

Zeke Rancid Scout wrote: »

Sure if that’s how you feel about it stay at home and mind them yourself

The thread is about insurance in creches.
That's not necessarily my personal situation, I'm just participating in the debate.
What do you think would help the creches?

elperello

dxhound2005 wrote: »

A far bigger outlay for creche owners is wages. And for those who don't own their own premises, rent. They could appeal to the good nature of their employees and landlords to help them out.

As for the employees, often on low wages, why should they subsidise the care of better off parents children?

Any landlord will need to get the market rent for a commercial premises or else face income reduction and devaluation of the asset.

jmreire

elperello wrote: »

Not quite so simple.

Your kid is left paralysed for life due to injuries caused by the negligence of the creche.
The creche operator is renting the property and has no assets.
There is no money to make the child's life bearable.
You are left to live out your days minding the unfortunate child because of another persons negligence.

Need I go on?

Not trying to be argumentative here, but realistically, how many incidents like this has this happened in say the last 20 years? We know that there has been lot's of scrapes and scratches, but where a child has suffered life changing injuries ?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

elperello wrote: »

The thread is about insurance in creches.
That's not necessarily my personal situation, I'm just participating in the debate.
What do you think would help the creches?

Parents refraining from milking the cash cow?

Ubbquittious

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

There is no statutory requirement for any business to operate with Public Liability insurance. However, you would be a gob****e to do it.

Are you sure about that? I know for a simple market stall you need public liability up to 6 odd fecking million before they hand you your 'casual' traders license.


The government would have to remove some of the laws that let people sue for simple trips and falls and other mishaps in order to make running a creche without insurance more feasible.


We are collectively lining the fat pockets of a few wealthy foreigners in order to support the nation's suing system.

ted1

political analyst wrote: »

I've read about the difficulties that creches and schools have with regard to the cost of insurance - the banning of running on playgrounds and the struggle of creches to stay open at all.


Although insurers are, obviously, profit-making businesses, there must still be room for empathy among them. Have creche and school managers said to insurance managers: "If you have children, would you not like them to be able to run around the playground at school during break-times or be able to put them in creches before they reach school-going age without having to pay extremely high fees?"

Why single out schools and crèches. Every Individual and business in Ireland is experiencing high costs. Many leisure activities have had to shut already

elperello

jmreire wrote: »

Not trying to be argumentative here, but realistically, how many incidents like this has this happened in say the last 20 years? We know that there has been lot's of scrapes and scratches, but where a child has suffered life changing injuries ?

No problem.
Of course such incidents are rare.
The reason people take out insurance is to cover them in event of an incident. Most who have assets will not wish to risk being put on the side of the road due to a claim.

jmreire

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

There is no statutory requirement for any business to operate with Public Liability insurance. However, you would be a gob****e to do it.

Really? I thought that it was mandatory, like car insurance? If so, why not get parents to sign a form stating that they accept that the Creche accepts no liability for any injuries sustained while the child is there?
Because there are crèches out there who have never had a claim,,ever. Because, unless a solution is found, it is going to a seriously big problem going forward. What will happen? People will have to find alternative's to the "official" crèches....and that will not be an easy thing to do.

dxhound2005

elperello wrote: »

As for the employees, often on low wages, why should they subsidise the care of better off parents children?

Any landlord will need to get the market rent for a commercial premises or else face income reduction and devaluation of the asset.

Those are much bigger costs than insurance. The insurance company won't care too much if a creche closes, but it is certainly in the interests of the employees and landlords to keep them open.

elperello

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Are you sure about that? I know for a simple market stall you need public liability up to 6 odd fecking million before they hand you your 'casual' traders license.


The government would have to remove some of the laws that let people sue for simple trips and falls and other mishaps in order to make running a creche without insurance more feasible.


We are collectively lining the fat pockets of a few wealthy foreigners in order to support the nation's suing system.

Your market stall example is a good one. It shows how seriously the local authorities take public liability insurance when handing out licences.

I don't think running a creche without insurance is a good idea.

Good summary of what we are doing.

Eggs For Dinner

People are mixing up statutory requirement with agreeing to contract conditions. Motor insurance is the only compulsory insurance in Ireland

As for signing disclaimers, don't waste your time or the ink.

Ubbquittious

elperello wrote: »

Not quite so simple.

Your kid is left paralysed for life due to injuries caused by the negligence of the creche.
The creche operator is renting the property and has no assets.
There is no money to make the child's life bearable.
You are left to live out your days minding the unfortunate child because of another persons negligence.

Need I go on?

You couldn't do it until you have a decent working universal healthcare system. Once you have that you can get rid of all the parasites - the insurance companies, the lawyers squabbling over whodunnit, the people getting massive claims for small injuries.

Eggs For Dinner

Ubbquittious wrote: »

You couldn't do it until you have a decent working universal healthcare system. Once you have that you can get rid of all the parasites - the insurance companies, the lawyers squabbling over whodunnit, the people getting massive claims for small injuries.

Nonsense. Irish people are in to profit following an "accident" . Covering your costs doesn't come close to being sufficient

Mrs OBumble

How about a New Zealand style no fault 24x7 all age, tax-funded accident insurance scheme.

Remove the right to sue. Ban all lump sum payments.

In return, private ( ie fast) treatment and aggressive rehabilitation, and 80% income replacement.

The only losers are lawyers, and those making a living off of false claims.

Eggs For Dinner

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Thd only losers are lawyers, and those making a living ofc of false claims.

That's why it will never fly

political analyst

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

That's why it will never fly

Why would the government be afraid of those lawyers?

jmreire

political analyst wrote: »

Why would the government be afraid of those lawyers?

They are mortally afraid of something anyway....used to be a belt of the Crozier !!! But now? Have a guess.... :mad:

Nate--IRL--

political analyst wrote: »

Why would the government be afraid of those lawyers?

That's a great question. Of all the reforms laid out by the Troika at the time of the bailout, only the reforms of the legal profession were fiercely resisted by government and never implemented.

Why would the government fight the corner of the legal profession above all else in the bailout?

Nate