RTE finally calls out compo culture

BattleCorp

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Did I say anything about the initial consultation? The fact that you left it a year and a half should evoke a little caution from the solicitor. The solicitor will meet the client, hear their version of events and begin the process of examining the accident report, medical report and hear the other side's position. At this stage it should be fairly obvious

The solicitor either takes on the case or declines the case based on the initial consultation so the choices are limited for the solicitor. Either they represent the person or they don't. Once they take on representation, they usually need to have a very good reason to 'come off record'. Suspecting your client is guilty is usually not considered a 'very good reason'.

Leaving a claim for a year and a half is not very unusual. I've been involved in a case where someone applied to PIAB with two days to go before the statute of limitations expired (1 year and 363 days had expired). My theory is that many people wait that long in the hope that the CCTV evidence has been deleted or maybe witnesses have been lost track of. But delaying applying for compensation for a year and a half is not really a good reason for a solicitor to refuse to take on a case.

I'm on your side by the way. I think it's scandalous that so many frivolous claims are being taken and when someone is caught out in a lie, there's feckall that the courts can do to them.

AlekSmart

whomitconcerns wrote: »

That list of claims is something else. The poor petal was held up twice in different bookies and needed 5k each time.

What are the odds of that ?

arctictree

I hope he paid full taxes on all those compo claims over the years....

BattleCorp

arctictree wrote: »

I hope he paid full taxes on all those compo claims over the years....

Tax free my old bean.

lawrencesummers

arctictree wrote: »

I hope he paid full taxes on all those compo claims over the years....

Maybe awards of this nature should only be paid over once someone has a tax clearance cert...

smurgen

Good to hear.Will they be doing a follow up show on a few a dodgy claims related to FG TD's?

Skyrimaddict

To be honest, there isnt anything to lose by going to court, but everything to gain.
Thats why it makes it so appealing.

Reminds me of a now-deceased Limerick Solicitor, had a great name for working with those type of cases, made him Millions, but no one would touch him for any reputable cases. He always sung the " I'm the champion of the unfortunate people" Line when asked. People in his own profession thought him a joke, but unfortunately, when you dealing with any case like this, you don't need to prove your right, just the others don't have enough evidence to prove you wrong.

BattleCorp

One firm local to me has a pretty good tactic for making money. It's two solicitors in partnership. One guy does the local district/circuit court cases representing the local 'elite' and his partner does the personal injury cases.

The guy who does the criminal cases told me the only reason he represents the local scum is so that they will come to him when they have personal injury cases and he can pass them on to his business partner. Representing them in court is an advertising tactic to get them for the more lucrative personal injury cases.

arctictree

BattleCorp wrote: »

Tax free my old bean.

Didn't know that - nice little earner!

lawrencesummers

BattleCorp wrote: »

One firm local to me has a pretty good tactic for making money. It's two solicitors in partnership. One guy does the local district/circuit court cases representing the local 'elite' and his partner does the personal injury cases.

The guy who does the criminal cases told me the only reason he represents the local scum is so that they will come to him when they have personal injury cases and he can pass them on to his business partner. Representing them in court is an advertising tactic to get them for the more lucrative personal injury cases.

Don’t hate the player hate the game.


Reform of the legal system in Ireland would solve a massive amount of this countries problems.

BattleCorp

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Don’t hate the player hate the game.


Reform of the legal system in Ireland would solve a massive amount of this countries problems.

I help defend my employer against personal injury claims so I find it frustrating sometimes how easy it is to get money for pretty much nothing.

We are far too generous with our awards for starters. We are many multiples of what is awarded by our nearest neighbours. And then it can cost a fortune to defend a case and even if you successfully defend it, we are significantly out of pocket. I think many people don't realise that it could cost in excess of €100k to defend a complicated High Court claim and if you win, there's often zero chance of getting one cent of your costs.

But yep, reform of the legal system would be a help but I won't hold my breath.

lawrencesummers

BattleCorp wrote: »

I help defend my employer against personal injury claims so I find it frustrating sometimes how easy it is to get money for pretty much nothing.

We are far too generous with our awards for starters. We are many multiples of what is awarded by our nearest neighbours. And then it can cost a fortune to defend a case and even if you successfully defend it, we are significantly out of pocket. I think many people don't realise that it could cost in excess of €100k to defend a complicated High Court claim and if you win, there's often zero chance of getting one cent of your costs.

But yep, reform of the legal system would be a help but I won't hold my breath.

Ain’t nobody on the gravy train looking for it to stop.

El Tarangu

mikemac2 wrote: »

In September 2010, he was stabbed at a wedding and got €5,500 compensation

.
I’ve been at some wild weddings but nothing like this

Venues really are stuck between a rock and a hard place - if they discriminate against Travellers, they will get taken to court.

If they allow the event to go ahead, they still get taken to court - presumably they are being sued over having not fulfilled their duty of care towards clients - by hosting functions for the type of person that would stab an acquaintance at a family event.

Stovepipe

a couple of hundred travellers tried to enter Harrods the other day and were stopped, with four being arrested after "scuffles" with security staff.

El Gato De Negocios

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Don’t hate the player hate the game.


Reform of the legal system in Ireland would solve a massive amount of this countries problems.

Nothing really to do with legal reforms tbh. Recalibaration of injury awards is the only way to remove many of these nonsense claims. The EU average for whiplash claims is around €2000. The Irish average is in the region of 10 times that amount.

A modicum of common sense should be applied. If an accident happens and the damage to the car is not visible or does not require anything more than a lick of paint to redress then on the balance of probabilities any kind of significant injury is unlikely. Capping awards for claims of this nature at the EU average means they arent worth pursuing for solicitors and PIAB will be used instead. If there is no money to be made from frivolous awards there wont be many solicitors to represent them.

I attended a fraud seminar a while back and one of the keynote speakers was an ED doctor working in Cork. He specialises in trauma and made the point that in many cases that go before the courts medical records are rolled out for claimants showing degeneration to the spinal column. What he then said is that IIRC around 60% to 70% of the population will all have some level of spinal degeneration if they were fully assessed due to normal wear and tear and not because of some traumatic event.

lawrencesummers

Legal reforms in Ireland could bring about massive improvements to society.

From insurance claims to the asylum seeking process and direct provision, from planning permission to repeat offenders and prison time the legal system here isn’t fit for purpose but the people who work in it don’t have any appetite to make it more efficient because they are coining it.

PatrickSmithUS

Another huge one recently. Considering the alleged contributory negligence the award of €2m to an intoxicated homeless man seems high - regardless of the injuries he sustained.

€2m for homeless man left paralysed after falling under a bus

PatrickSmithUS

PatrickSmithUS wrote: »

Another huge one recently. Considering the alleged contributory negligence the award of €2m to an intoxicated homeless man seems high - regardless of the injuries he sustained.

€2m for homeless man left paralysed after falling under a bus

I don't really mind that one to be honest. €2m will be eaten up swift enough when he has to fork out for medical care, HSE costs, solicitors and ongoing care for the rest of his life, along with never walking again.


I wouldn't swap places with him.

Nermal

Deleted User wrote: »

I wouldn't swap places with him.

Is that the standard our judiciary are operating to now?

Nermal

Nermal wrote: »

Is that the standard our judiciary are operating to now?

No, I don't think our judiciary are setting standards that high, just yet.




That said, how much do you reckon it costs to be in a wheelchair, for the rest of your life? How much of the €2m will the HSE take for operating on him, performing surgeries and ultimately a lot of aftercare when they realise he's never walking again?


How much is a wheelchair, and what are the ongoing costs of a wheelchair?


You can be homeless when you're able bodied. Do it by choice if you like, but not if you're in a wheelchair. And wherever you do end up living, money will be spent on building ramps, lowering light switches, etc.


Any rehabilitation required? That'll cost you.


What price would you put on never being able to just drop your pants and sit on the toilet again? Now it's a big chore - and that's after you adapt to it - for the first few months I'd imagine his sister is helping him onto the toilet, into the shower and in and out of bed.




I can't see any issue with a €2m payout here, at all.

beerguts

Is there any groups advocating/lobbying members of Dáil Éireann for wholesale reform of the legal profession and statute laws. If there isnt the compensation culture and free for all immigration will never be addressed.
There has been no one since Alan Shatter making any serious attempt at reform.

katiek102010

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't really mind that one to be honest. €2m will be eaten up swift enough when he has to fork out for medical care, HSE costs, solicitors and ongoing care for the rest of his life, along with never walking again.


I wouldn't swap places with him.

So a company should have to pay when someone has an accident while under the influence and not responsible enough to take care of themselves.

Detritus70

El Gato De Negocios wrote: »

Not necessarily travellers but in alot of cases, a nominal amount will be paid out for what are known as "nuisance" claims. This would happen where there has been an accident eg innocent person tipped a third parties car. Rather than spend a ball of money defending these claims and knowing on the balance of probability they will likely end up having to pay more if it got to court, they (insurers) will throw the claimant a couple of grand to piss off. I feel sorry for drivers that get caught up with stuff like this but its for the greater good. If insurers fought every single claim then their losses would be an awful lot more than they are.

I would just like to come back to this post from a few pages ago.
I would say initially yes, but in the long run no.
If insurance companies were to fight every single case for a while (or every case they deemed fraudulent or a nuisance at least), it would initially cost more money.
But if word got around that the days of "ouch my neck hurts", "oh you poor diddums, here, have a few grand" are finally over, things would eventually change.
Once they cop on to the fact that easy handouts are a thing of the past and they'll have to take this thing all the way, their necks would miraculously become a lot tougher.
I used to live in Ireland and I'm back in Germany now, I have a 2002 Fiesta 1.6 insured for €300.
And they didn't even accept my Irish no claims, I have only three years in a country where no claims can go back 20-30 years.
Friend of mine has a mid 90's BMW insured for about 350, the age of the car is no problem.

The payout for "ow my neck" in Germany is €600, going up to a few thousand for actual, real, verifiable damage. And verified not by a quack.
In Ireland, according to the book of quantum, the bidding starts at €12-15k.
I'm the kind of guy who is sickened by this, but even I am thinking that I wouldn't be upset if I got into a minor tip whilst back in Ireland, the money would come in handy.

whisky_galore

beerguts wrote: »

Is there any groups advocating/lobbying members of Dáil Éireann for wholesale reform of the legal profession and statute laws. If there isnt the compensation culture and free for all immigration will never be addressed.
There has been no one since Alan Shatter making any serious attempt at reform.

No because so many profit from dysfunction.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't really mind that one to be honest. €2m will be eaten up swift enough when he has to fork out for medical care, HSE costs, solicitors and ongoing care for the rest of his life, along with never walking again.


I wouldn't swap places with him.

Theres a big big gap between "that person has costs and troubles" and "regardless of your own input into your situation everyone else should pay your costs"

F34

PatrickSmithUS wrote: »

Another huge one recently. Considering the alleged contributory negligence the award of €2m to an intoxicated homeless man seems high - regardless of the injuries he sustained.

€2m for homeless man left paralysed after falling under a bus

Ah Justice Kevin Cross a guaranteed decent payout no matter how frivolous the claim.

El Gato De Negocios

Came across an interesting case on LinkedIn this morning.

https://www-irishexaminer-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-40187325.html?type=amp

Now its obviously unfortunate that the claimant suffered the injuries he suffered but to award damages against the shop and security firm is frankly astonishing and is setting a very dangerous precedent. Shops and the like have hard enough time getting and paying insurance and then trying to mitigate risk, this though, its way over and above what should be acceptable as a duty of care.

Nermal

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't see any issue with a €2m payout here, at all.

Other than the inconvenient fact that this drunkard was entirely the author of his own misfortune?

Detritus70 wrote: »

If insurance companies were to fight every single case for a while (or every case they deemed fraudulent or a nuisance at least), it would initially cost more money.
But if word got around that the days of "ouch my neck hurts", "oh you poor diddums, here, have a few grand" are finally over, things would eventually change.

Until the power to make these ludicrous awards is removed from our judiciary, it will always be cheaper in the long run to settle even the most spurious claims.

Detritus70

Nermal wrote: »

Until the power to make these ludicrous awards is removed from our judiciary, it will always be cheaper in the long run to settle even the most spurious claims.

I still believe that making it harder to claim would deter some.
If you can go to an insurance company and five minutes later have a few grand in your back pocket for a cock and bull story, a lot of people will do it. And they are.
But if they knew that getting money from them is going to be a long trek through the courts and if they lose they could be faced with massive legal bills, a lot of people would think twice before claiming for that stubbed toe or scraped knee.
This could be seen as an investment. If you keep giving the child sweets without ever saying no, you'll have a spoilt child. It will take a few weeks of harsh treatment and ignoring screaming and crying, but it's the only way to straighten that child out.
Same needs to happen with the public. They know there are always sweets and you can always get them.
But the legal system needs overhauling as well. If you can get €20k for banging your knee, which is obscene and wrong, yeah, people will go for it.

BattleCorp

Deleted User wrote: »

I can't see any issue with a €2m payout here, at all.

It's nice to see that personal responsibility has gone completely out the window.

The dude was fcukin twisted, couldn't stand up, and fell against the bus and then under the wheel.

In my eyes, that was his own fault.

By all means, have the State look after him as they would look after anybody in that situation, but don't reward him with €2m on top of the care you are going to give him.