Employer liability

Sam the Sham

I recently developed a potentially life-threatening heart condition that may have been related to workplace stress of a kind I notified my employer about on multiple occasions.

This condition has been treated (successfully I believe) with the various procedures costing my health insurer a large 5-figure sum of money.

My question: in cases of employer negligence leading to illness, is it possible in Ireland for the health insurance company and the injured party to join forces, as it were, in legal action?

I ask because, while I've contemplated legal action on this, when I spoke to a solicitor, he indicated that the legal costs of pursuing it would be prohibitive.

BattleCorp

I think you are on your own there.

I can't see the insurance company joining forces with you in a claim against your employer. Not going to happen.

The insurance company have lost money covering your condition. They aren't going to throw more money away by joining you in a case against your employer.

Sam the Sham

BattleCorp wrote: »

I think you are on your own there.

I can't see the insurance company joining forces with you in a claim against your employer. Not going to happen.

The insurance company have lost money covering your condition. They aren't going to throw more money away by joining you in a case against your employer.

You’re answering a question I didn’t ask. I want to know if it’s possible for such a joining of forces to take place, not whether it’s likely or advisable in my particular circumstances, which I deliberately left vague enough that nobody here could respond on the merits (e.g. whether joining my case would be ‘throwing more money away.’).

jimmycrackcorm

Sam the Sham wrote: »

You’re answering a question I didn’t ask. I want to know if it’s possible for such a joining of forces to take place, not whether it’s likely or advisable in my particular circumstances, which I deliberately left vague enough that nobody here could respond on the merits (e.g. whether joining my case would be ‘throwing more money away.’).

I think he did answer your question. You've given no rationale for why your health insurer would join such an action.

I presume you are thinking they will share the costs of you taking action, but they won't. Here is an example of how they do get involved when it comes to legal claims, and it's not very good.

You might try to sue your employer and if the health insurer gets wind of payout, you might be required to repay medical costs out of that. If you aren't making your own legal claim then it's simply not in the interests of the health insurer to act as an ambulance chaser unless, as in the case of motor insurance, there is a clear path to do so.

Sam the Sham

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I think he did answer your question. You've given no rationale for why your health insurer would join such an action.

Again, that is still not an answer to the question, regardless of what you think.

The question is: IS IT POSSIBLE for an insurance company to join an individual's legal action under Irish law? Or, alternatively, are there prohibitions on such joining of forces?

Your insurer has no issue with your employer so won't be joining in on your action.

Health insurance isn't interested in root cause, if you ate yourself sick they wouldn't pursue you for negligence par exemple.

They don't have a case against your Employer... That's as simple as we can put this for you.

AndrewJRenko

There is a provision in health legislation for hospitals (and possibly health insurers) to go after motor insurance companies in case where injuries were caused by a motorist, which is probably a very substantial number of the serious injury cases that come into hospitals.

I've never heard of it happening in this kind of case.

Anything is possible OP.
Whether it is likely or whether it would be entertained in court is as you note a different question.

Sam the Sham

Augeo wrote: »

Your insurer has no issue with your employer so won't be joining in on your action.

Health insurance isn't interested in root cause, if you ate yourself sick they wouldn't pursue you for negligence par exemple.

They don't have a case against your Employer... That's as simple as we can put this for you.

Again: still not understanding the question. But blithely jumping in with both feet.

Sam the Sham

Deleted User wrote: »

Anything is possible OP.

Really? Anything?

Are class action lawsuits, like those they have in the US, possible here? Must be, since anything is possible.

snowgal

Jaysus you’re a bit full on for ppl trying to help! Breathe

Sam the Sham

Sam the Sham wrote: »

Again: still not understanding the question. But blithely jumping in with both feet.

They don't have a case against your Employer... That's as simply as we can put this for you.

kippy

Sam the Sham wrote: »

I recently developed a potentially life-threatening heart condition that may have been related to workplace stress of a kind I notified my employer about on multiple occasions.

This condition has been treated (successfully I believe) with the various procedures costing my health insurer a large 5-figure sum of money.

My question: in cases of employer negligence leading to illness, is it possible in Ireland for the health insurance company and the injured party to join forces, as it were, in legal action?

I ask because, while I've contemplated legal action on this, when I spoke to a solicitor, he indicated that the legal costs of pursuing it would be prohibitive.

It's possible.
But so are many things that never actually happen.

Lenar3556

Sam the Sham wrote: »

Again: still not understanding the question. But blithely jumping in with both feet.

Possible alright. Also possible for the local parish priest to join you, together with the postman if he was so inclined.

Also possible that the local undertaker could want in on the action and bring proceedings against you seeking a determination that the treatments you had carried out were unnecessary and that the large five figure sum be repaid by you to the insurer as such claims were inflating his premium.

There is a constitutional right of access to courts and almost anyone can bring proceedings however hopeless the case may be.

listermint

Sam the Sham wrote: »

Again: still not understanding the question. But blithely jumping in with both feet.

Have you considered the possibility... That perhaps your employer has nothing to do with your heart condition or how highly strung you come across.

At all.

Peregrinus

It's usually term of your health insurance policy that, if you are injured by someone else's negligence or breach of duty, and your health insurer pays for your treatment, etc, you assign to your health insurer the rights you have against the wrongdoer to claim for damages for the cost of the treatment.

So, if I negligently injure you and your health insurer spends €50,000 treating the injury, your health insurer can sue me to recover the €50,000. They are essentially bringing the action that you could have brought against me if you had no health insurance, had to pay the €50,000 yourself, and were looking to recover it from me.

It makes no difference to you whether your health insurer sues me or not. You've already got the €50,000 from the health insurer; if they succeed in recovering it from me you won't get it again. They are suing me for their benefit, not yours. You are obliged to assist them in the action; if they need you to give evidence, for example, you have to give it. But you won't get any share of any money they win.

If they do decide to do this, there is nothing to stop you also suing me, to recover any damages which weren't covered by insurance - say, compensation for your pain and suffering, and the cost of the round-the-world holiday you had to cancel because of your injuries. You'll need to instruct your own lawyers on this; the insurance company's lawyers will not act for you. The two actions may be heard together, but they are still two actions, and you will have to fund your action yourself.

Curious1002

Why would OP only want to sue to cover the exact cost of the treatment? What about the compensation for pain and suffering? It's like when a building scaffolding collapses on you when you walk your dog, killing the dog, breaking your legs and ribs...and you only sue for your medical costs. It's ridiculous!
OP, sue the employer with or without the insurer on board, if the employer was aware of some major negligence causing you the loss of your health or even if they were not aware of the negligence - they are already at fault anyway since the accident had happened. It doesnt matter that the insurer covered 100% or 95% of your med cost, you have a good case to sue. Call a meeting with the insurer, tell them your case and ask if they want to join you or not. Go ahead with the case even on your own, plenty of solicitors who will work for you pro bono or for the % of the compensation won. Good luck with your case!

AnRothar

Curious1002 wrote: »

Go ahead with the case even on your own, plenty of solicitors who will work for you pro bono or for the % of the compensation won. Good luck with your case!

The OP has spoken to a solicitor.
The solicitor has tried to gently tell them they have no case.

when I spoke to a solicitor, he indicated that the legal costs of pursuing it would be prohibitive.

Peregrinus

Curious1002 wrote: »

Why would OP only want to sue to cover the exact cost of the treatment? What about the compensation for pain and suffering? It's like when a building scaffolding collapses on you when you walk your dog, killing the dog, breaking your legs and ribs...and you only sue for your medical costs. It's ridiculous!
OP, sue the employer with or without the insurer on board, if the employer was aware of some major negligence causing you the loss of your health or even if they were not aware of the negligence - they are already at fault anyway since the accident had happened. It doesnt matter that the insurer covered 100% or 95% of your med cost, you have a good case to sue. Call a meeting with the insurer, tell them your case and ask if they want to join you or not. Go ahead with the case even on your own, plenty of solicitors who will work for you pro bono or for the % of the compensation won. Good luck with your case!

Nothing in the thread suggests that the OP has a good case against his employer. He tells us that "I recently developed a potentially life-threatening heart condition that may have been related to workplace stress of a kind I notified my employer about on multiple occasions."

The OP won't succeed in an action against the employer unless he has evidence that will justify him changing "may have been" to "was" and "related to" to "caused by".