Compensation paid on the basis proximity to Windfarm may be a health threat

BluePlanet

In a stunning decision sure to have repercussions and devoid of any scientific basis, an irish judge awarded damages to a family that claimed a windfarm, 700m from their home caused them injury.

Three children who allegedly became ill and had to move out of their family home as a result of disturbance from a nearby wind farm have secured a total €225,000 as settlement of their High Court damages claims.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/children-who-were-made-ill-by-wind-farm-near-their-home-get-225000-38991415.html

Doubtless this opens a floodgate of similar claims.

Pintman Paddy Losty

BluePlanet wrote: »

In a stunning decision sure to have repercussions and devoid of any scientific basis, an irish judge awarded damages to a family that claimed a windfarm, 700m from their home caused them injury.


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/children-who-were-made-ill-by-wind-farm-near-their-home-get-225000-38991415.html

Doubtless this opens a floodgate of similar claims.

I don't normally agree with the judiciary but glad to hear this. Not a fan of these windfarms. They're loud, a blight on the scenery and possibly a public health hazard.

I'm sure lots of jackeens will be on now to.tell me I'm wrong in the comfort of knowing they'll never have to live near them.

Pawwed Rig

The article indicates it was settled out of court. Did I misunderstand something??

riffmongous

OP is totally wrong

The defendants had denied all the claims. The case yesterday came before Ms Justice Leonie Reynolds, who was told by John Rogers SC, for the Kellehers, the case had been settled.


The defendants, in denying the claims, said the wind farm was operated in a lawful manner. Mr Rogers said the settlement arose following mediation between the parties conducted by retired Judge Paul Gilligan.

silver2020

This is a classic example fo how journalism has fallen to the gutter.

They have a click bait story. Badly written. Someone half reads it and then screams on boards "Irish Judge decides proximity to Windfarm is a health threat"

May I suggest to the OP you read the article fully, understand the level of poor journalism and realise that the judge #1 was a retired judge and acting as a mediator. #2 - no confirmation of health risk has been mentioned. #3 Understand the mind is powerful and the power of suggestion is significant.

So here's the reality.

These people were possibly told that this wind farm would affect them by some nimbys. They believed it and it became an obsession and their mental state started to cause health issues. A settlement was reached with a relatively small amount paid out for disturbance.

Similar story a few years ago when high powered electricity pylons were erected in the midlands. Again nimbys put it in the mind of a couple that it wold cause heath issues. She believed these fools and her mental state changed and she claimed all sorts of ailments. - She claimed these went away almost immediately if she stayed elsewhere.

ESB Networks had no power going through those lines for about 6 weeks without saying anything but she still got all the ailments.

People with agendas will try and exert control over people without any regard for their health. These are usually busy body nimbys and unfortunately you get them a lot in rural areas where they want to be seen as the sage of the area.

Try and cut these people down and the sheep that follow them will bleat you out of it.

facehugger99

silver2020 wrote: »

A settlement was reached with a relatively small amount paid out for disturbance.

€225k according to the article.

Bass Reeves

facehugger99 wrote: »

€225k according to the article.

And parts of the case are still outstanding. The children's case has been settled, the parents case not.

Kivaro

facehugger99 wrote: »

€225k according to the article.

That's sizeable.
Expect more cases to follow.

While I'm all for sustainability, I am not sure about all of these wind farms popping up all over the place in the Irish countryside. There are a number of questions to be answered e.g. health risks, the non-recyclable massive turbine blades and the length of time that they last, the initial costs, the cost/benefit of the wind farms, and has it become more of a visual effect of Ireland trying to lower their carbon footprint more than a real solution to sustainable energy?

Tacitus Kilgore

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

I don't normally agree with the judiciary but glad to hear this. Not a fan of these windfarms. They're loud, a blight on the scenery and possibly a public health hazard.

I'm sure lots of jackeens will be on now to.tell me I'm wrong in the comfort of knowing they'll never have to live near them.

I live beside a wind farm and you are full of shite.


TBH it's gas watching all the ex-bnm office furniture in the midlands viciously opposing windfarms because "they'll wreck the view and scenery" as if depleting the bog and filling it back up with rubbish was a good thing.


This payout is a joke, I sincerely hope this is not a floodgates moment. :mad:

Beta Ray Bill

Read this yesterday:

https://www.thejournal.ie/high-court-siblings-settle-wind-farm-action-5021713-Feb2020/

Surprised it wasn't posted already

3 children aged 17, 15 and 10 received a combined (out of court) settlement of €225,000 over alleged illnesses caused by a wind farm situated 700m from where they lived.

It was alleged that noise, vibration and light flicker from the farm (which went into operation in early 2016) caused nosebleeds, ear aches, skin rashes, swollen and painful hands, loss of power in their limbs, sleep disturbance, and headaches.

They ended up moving 8 miles away.
Their parents case has been postponed until March.

2 things from this:
1: I am very surprised the Energy company settled, given the claimants injuries.
2: This is a massive hit to "Green Energy" in Ireland, every Tom, Dick and Harry is going to cite this case now in their claims against wind turbines/farms.

_Brian

House near us gets shadow flicker from turbines, have to say it would drive me nuts if it were my house.

Alun

Beta Ray Bill wrote: »

Surprised it wasn't posted already

It was ...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058057218

Beta Ray Bill

Alun wrote: »

It was ...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2058057218

My Apologies.

seamus

Settled without admission of liability is usually shorthand for "how much can we pay to make this go away".

It's also worth remembering that while they mention the name of the company as paying out, it's usually an insurer who pays out on their behalf and has been making a call on it.

The insurance company will run some figures that will work out how much the legal costs will be versus the likelihood that they will be able to recoup those costs from the family.

Then the team assess it and work out that paying the family €225,000 to fvck off is cheaper than defending the case and having it dismissed.

They don't care what precedent it sets, it's all about minimising the cost of this case.

Bass Reeves

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

I live beside a wind farm and you are full of shite.


TBH it's gas watching all the ex-bnm office furniture in the midlands viciously opposing windfarms because "they'll wreck the view and scenery" as if depleting the bog and filling it back up with rubbish was a good thing.


This payout is a joke, I sincerely hope this is not a floodgates moment. :mad:

I suspect that there are other issues at play here. There must have been an issue with the wind farm. It is unlikely a wind farm company would have settled unless they had made errors.

This may only be a one off case.

Plumbthedepths

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

I live beside a wind farm and you are full of shite.


TBH it's gas watching all the ex-bnm office furniture in the midlands viciously opposing windfarms because "they'll wreck the view and scenery" as if depleting the bog and filling it back up with rubbish was a good thing.


This payout is a joke, I sincerely hope this is not a floodgates moment. :mad:

So what's your house value like? Appreciating?

Tacitus Kilgore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

So what's your house value like? Appreciating?

Not sure tbh, I don't own it.


What do property values have to do with anything anyway?

Plumbthedepths

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Not sure tbh, I don't own it.


What do property values have to do with anything anyway?

It's not really hard to figure out, I live within 3 miles of a couple of windturbines. No effect on the value on my home but I do know it has effected the value and quality of life of a few people I know that live within close proximity to them. One of the houses is a lovely dormer bungalow which has sat on the market for over 6 years, no offers strange when there is such a demand for housing locally. Wonder what the reason could be?

Tacitus Kilgore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It's not really hard to figure out, I live within 3 miles of a couple of windturbines. No effect on the value on my home but I do know it has effected the value and quality of life of a few people I know that live within close proximity to them. One of the houses is a lovely dormer bungalow which has sat on the market for over 6 years, no offers strange when there is such a demand for housing locally. Wonder what the reason could be?

Figure what out? Are we all supposed to be guaranteed a certain value for our houses now?

Quality of life, would like to hear more on this.

I know plenty folk who didn't have a motorway beside them when they built/bought their houses, and now they do. Should we ban motorways?


I wonder have they got their house priced too high, perhaps they should lower it - might get an offer that way.

Plumbthedepths

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Figure what out? Are we all supposed to be guaranteed a certain value for our houses now?


Since you don't own the house value is of no concern to you, but to home owners it is particularly if they ever wish to sell.
Quality of life, would like to hear more on this.


The people I know refer to flicker during bright days and say it's annoying , they also maintain they hear a low background buzz. No interest in calling them liars as I never stay at their home long enough to get bothered by it.
I know plenty folk who didn't have a motorway beside them when they built/bought their houses, and now they do. Should we ban motorways?

That's awesome but this is about wind turbines.
I wonder have they got their house priced too high, perhaps they should lower it - might get an offer that way.

Actually the house is 15k below homes of similar spec and location, excluding the wind turbine.

Tacitus Kilgore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Actually the house is 15k below homes of similar spec and location, excluding the wind turbine.

Possibly something to do with the turbine so - but tell me, who said anyone is guaranteed a value on a property?

Plumbthedepths

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

Possibly something to do with the turbine so - but tell me, who said anyone is guaranteed a value on a property?

Let me know your thoughts when you become a home owner.

Tacitus Kilgore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Let me know your thoughts when you become a home owner.

I will be one, very soon! and I'm under no illusion that I will be guaranteed any kind of value on it in the future. It's not an investment, it's a house.

If I wanted guaranteed values I'd be buying prize bonds or something - not houses.



Pretty much the textbook definition of a mé féiner above, "don't build anything near me because I might want to sell my house sometime and I feel entitled to a high price for it"

Plumbthedepths

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

I will be one, very soon! and I'm under no illusion that I will be guaranteed any kind of value on it in the future. It's not an investment, it's a house.

Great stuff, excellent value to be had close to a windfarm, floodplane etc.

Tacitus Kilgore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Great stuff, excellent value to be had close to a windfarm, floodplane .

what?


Have you dropped all the straws?

facehugger99

There's a sizable cohort in this country, who want every mod-con available to them but will whinge and whine if a necessary part of the underlying infrastructure, to support their modern lives, is placed within a few miles of them.

Tacitus Kilgore

facehugger99 wrote: »

There's a sizable cohort in this country, who want every mod-con available to them but will whinge and whine if a necessary part of the underlying infrastructure, to support their modern lives, is placed within a few miles of them.

In addition - They want cheap purchase prices for houses, and high selling prices for them too.

Thelonious Monk

They'll wreck the scenery! Says someone living in a pink mansion on the top of a hill.

Plumbthedepths

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

what?


Have you dropped all the straws?

No straws dude but if you think the value of a house beside a wind turbine is not adversely affected you are being wantonly naive.
Anyway best of luck with your property purchase.

Raisins

Thread title should be charged IMO. Irish judge didn’t decide anything - more garbage attacks on the judicially which are baseless.

Tacitus Kilgore

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

No straws dude but if you think the value of a house beside a wind turbine is not adversely affected you are being wantonly naive.
Anyway best of luck with your property purchase.

I accepted it can be affected in an earlier post sure, I'm still waiting to be told why that should be anyone's concern other than the property owner themselves.


Again, if they wanted a solid investment, they should not have picked a house.

SusieBlue

That isn't the first spurious claim that family has been involved in, they are well known for these kinds of antics.

Runaways

Soooo....wind causes injuries and we now can all claim

Just hilarious

Runaways

We could heat every house in Ireland for decades with the hot air from this very forum and here they are getting angry about some wind or some gawl making money from an imaginary injury from the wind.

Never change ireland

10000maniacs

They should do what they do in Holland and the UK. Put the wind turbines out at sea. Hugh arrays of wind turbines doing nobody any harm.

Cordell

_Brian wrote: »

House near us gets shadow flicker from turbines, have to say it would drive me nuts if it were my house.

Sure, but will it cause your nose to bleed, skin to rash, hands to swell and ears to ache?

TheBoyConor

10000maniacs wrote: »

They should do what they do in Holland and the UK. Put the wind turbines out at sea. Hugh arrays of wind turbines doing nobody any harm.

hazard to shipping, hazard to marine life, vastly more expensive to construct and vastly more difficult and expensive to maintain and operate.

Plumbthedepths

Runaways wrote: »

Soooo....wind causes injuries and we now can all claim

Just hilarious

Hilarious that you ignored the fact the injuries are attributed to a wind turbine .
Doubt you can claim injuries caused by a wind turbine if you live nowhere near one.
Well done on the outrage though.

Muahahaha

Would imagine that ruling is pretty serious for the wind industry, especially when trying to get permission for new turbines as well as more claims coming down the track.

Was reading before that land based turbines are pretty inefficient compared to what can be achieved at sea where the turbines can be a lot bigger. Isnt there plans afoot for a large wind farm off the east coast?

The Satanist

There's turbines about 75km from me and everytime I drink 26 pints I have a rotten headache. Where's my ****in money?

jiltloop

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

I accepted it can be affected in an earlier post sure, I'm still waiting to be told why that should be anyone's concern other than the property owner themselves.


Again, if they wanted a solid investment, they should not have picked a house.

I think your logic on buying a house is flawed. I bought a house, not as an investment but to live in for the rest of my life. I (like everyone else) pay a level of interest on the house which means by the time the mortgage is paid off I will have paid the value of the house plus around 50-60% (if i'm lucky!). Also anytime I need to switch my mortgage providers I have to pay for a valuation on the house, this valuation could have serious repercussions on the rate I must pay on my mortgage or even the ability to switch at all. If you were not able to switch you are forced to accept the rate of the bank you are currently locked in with.

If you're buying a house to live in and you don't consider the future value of the house then I think you are very ill advised.

Tacitus Kilgore

jiltloop wrote: »

I think your logic on buying a house is flawed. I bought a house, not as an investment but to live in for the rest of my life. I (like everyone else) pay a level of interest on the house which means by the time the mortgage is paid off I will have paid the value of the house plus around 50-60% (if i'm lucky!). Also anytime I need to switch my mortgage providers I have to pay for a valuation on the house, this valuation could have serious repercussions on the rate I must pay on my mortgage or even the ability to switch at all. If you were not able to switch you are forced to accept the rate of the bank you are currently locked in with.

If you're buying a house to live in and you don't consider the future value of the house then I think you are very ill advised.

I am considering it, I am considering that the value can both go up, which in simple terms would reduce my LTV, and that the value can also go down, decreasing my LTV.

I am not going into the purchase without being wise to the fact that these values and many of the factors that go into the assessment of same are completely out of my control.

Using house values as an argument against creating infrastructure is not acceptable from my viewpoint.

jiltloop

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

I am considering it, I am considering that the value can both go up, which in simple terms would reduce my LTV, and that the value can also go down, decreasing my LTV.

I am not going into the purchase without being wise to the fact that these values and many of the factors that go into the assessment of same are completely out of my control.

Using house values as an argument against creating infrastructure is not acceptable from my viewpoint.

Generally I agree but it would be unreasonable to completely disregard the investments people have made in their homes. Because no matter how much you say that a home isn't or shouldn't be an investment it most certainly is even if you intend to never resell and that's my point.

That's not to say I agree with opposing wind farms being built beside someone's home. In most cases as long as there is some consideration by planners to nearby residents I don't think they should be opposed. the effects of wind farms on residents is definitely blown (pun intended) out of proportion but's not to say that there is no effect on them (for example, look up strobing effects from wind turbines).

Beasty

Thread merged

10000maniacs

Muahahaha wrote: »

Would imagine that ruling is pretty serious for the wind industry, especially when trying to get permission for new turbines as well as more claims coming down the track.

Was reading before that land based turbines are pretty inefficient compared to what can be achieved at sea where the turbines can be a lot bigger. Isnt there plans afoot for a large wind farm off the east coast?

I hope there were no army deafness claimants making claims about the noisy turbines.

hatrickpatrick

In fairness, this would drive you absolutely mental after a while:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQksc1-5Zoc

It's fairly obvious that these things shouldn't be built in locations where they will impact somebody's day to day home life to this extent. That kind of pulsating light for hours at a time would drive anyone up the wall IMO.

mikemac2

facehugger99 wrote: »

There's a sizable cohort in this country, who want every mod-con available to them but will whinge and whine if a necessary part of the underlying infrastructure, to support their modern lives, is placed within a few miles of them.

Crying about the health hazards of mobile phone masts while blasting the networks for poor coverage is the most common example in rural Ireland

Gynoid

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

In fairness, this would drive you absolutely mental after a while:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQksc1-5Zoc

It's fairly obvious that these things shouldn't be built in locations where they will impact somebody's day to day home life to this extent. That kind of pulsating light for hours at a time would drive anyone up the wall IMO.

Horrible.
They also create a very low but noticeable "whomp" sound. A pal of mine who had them built very close to their house says there is an actual feeling in the body when outside. I think it is quite plausible.