nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Luas surfer

Odyssey 2005

This is a great little country altogether.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews//ireland/girl-injured-following-fall-when-tram-surfing-settles-personal-injury-claim-for-550000-876892.html

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wishbone Ash

Working class heroes wrote: »

They knew they were negligent. They settled.
If they thought they weren’t they would hardly have settled, would they?

My employer settles cases all the time when they are not at fault because they are advised that it is often cheaper to do so.

robp

Working class heroes wrote: »

trellheim wrote: »

They are not the facts. Was the company found negligent ? Was that actually proved in court ? I think you will find not so

They knew they were negligent. They settled.
If they thought they weren’t they would hardly have settled, would they?

Companies settle all the time without liability been found because the costs of fightening a case can simply so high. The people arguing the Luas operators are not being pragmatic at all. Even if the driver saw her what he do? Chase them off with a stick? If she feel from a stationary Luas she could still have gotten badly hurt. The Luas is run with every reasonable provision to safety possible considered how many dangers there are from congested and moron kids. This case isn't even an exception. Mad compensation cases occur all the time.

Grab All Association

What happened in the immediate aftermath of the case.

Odyssey 2005

fritzelly wrote: »

Compensation culture is way outta control in this country
She admitted everything was her fault (stupid, shouldn't have done it blah blah) yet the company has to pay out over half a million because...well I'm not sure why?

What is going on in this country seriously?

With robbers suing owners of the shop they were robbing because they hurt themselves - time for some politicians/party to come down hard on this crap.
End of the day its normal people who end paying for all this.

Makes my blood boil

Politicians will saySFA. Look what is happening to Peter Casey .

Garciag5

Can any of the H&S affiliates here find any kind of similar case abroad...

fritzelly

Compensation culture is way outta control in this country
She admitted everything was her fault (stupid, shouldn't have done it blah blah) yet the company has to pay out over half a million because...well I'm not sure why?

What is going on in this country seriously?

With robbers suing owners of the shop they were robbing because they hurt themselves - time for some politicians/party to come down hard on this crap.
End of the day its normal people who end paying for all this.

Makes my blood boil

kravmaga

Aravo wrote: »

She was 13 at the time so a minor. Case was taken through the parent which is standard. All "minor" settlements have to be rubber stamped by a judge even if it's agreed by both sides before hand. If it was an adult case it would be an out of court settlement that no-one would ever hear about. But the minor ones have to get rubber stamped and that's why the media always have them and why they always have the story of the toddler falling in the creche etc etc.

Not agreeing with the settlement amount myself. It's total crazy.

ah I know she was a minor and I know that the case was taken by her mother on her behalf, but she at 13 should have know right from wrong, I mean coomon sense went out the window here with the Judge Cross awarding such a large payout, I see she is a mother now pushing the pram into court, so there is no medical evidence as to how bad or not as the case maybe be on the brain injury she sustained when she fell off the moving tram

Damien360

Working class heroes wrote: »

They knew they were negligent. They settled.
If they thought they weren’t they would hardly have settled, would they?

No. If they operate like CIE/IR/BE they always go to the steps of the court and settle. They don't want to risk a big reward. Settling at 550k is odd. No mention of what brain injury occured but I am assuming she can't work for life and a possible judge payout might have reflected that.

Working class heroes

trellheim wrote: »

They are not the facts. Was the company found negligent ? Was that actually proved in court ? I think you will find not so

They knew they were negligent. They settled.
If they thought they weren’t they would hardly have settled, would they?

Aravo

She was 13 at the time so a minor. Case was taken through the parent which is standard. All "minor" settlements have to be rubber stamped by a judge even if it's agreed by both sides before hand. If it was an adult case it would be an out of court settlement that no-one would ever hear about. But the minor ones have to get rubber stamped and that's why the media always have them and why they always have the story of the toddler falling in the creche etc etc.

Not agreeing with the settlement amount myself. It's total crazy.

kravmaga

This pay out sends out the wrong message to others, its good to train surf and guess what we will pay you over half a million euro to do it also.

Absolutely unreal here the decision by the Judge and in my opinion she caused the injury to herself by endangering safety plus little regard for her own life.

Whats happened where is very poor form, you couldnt make this up.

trellheim

Don’t take my word for it.
The company settled for god sake, they knew they were negligent. If it went before the judge they( following legal advice) obviously thought they would loose. I’m not saying it is right or wrong but those are the facts.
Can you not see that?

They are not the facts. Was the company found negligent ? Was that actually proved in court ? I think you will find not so

Bambaata

I can't understabd how she's any more brain damaged than she was before the fall! Didn't seem to have much going on upstairs to do that in the first place!

[Deleted User]

Absolute f*cking joke. It's cases like this that will inspire other skangers to do the same as her. Meanwhile the rest of us who actually have jobs and pay tax fund their m!ckey money and dole.

richiepurgas

I feel sorry for any young person paying a high price for horseplay, but this settlement has me baffled. I just cannot see how the company was negligent.

cfuserkildare

So if I step in front of a car I can claim half a million because the car has no cushioning system?
Even although I admit it was a stupid thing to do?

Legal system here is a joke!!!

Working class heroes

trellheim wrote: »

Get up the YARD with that how are they negligent the passengers travel on the inside, the door closes and the passengers are transported carefully and safely by a licensed driver. CRR are legally responsible AFAIR for approving their safety case or they could not run.

Dublin bus dont have a rear facing camera showing if scrotes are hanging on the back either and yet they are not found negligent.

I wonder why they did not appeal

Don’t take my word for it.
The company settled for god sake, they knew they were negligent. If it went before the judge they( following legal advice) obviously thought they would loose. I’m not saying it is right or wrong but those are the facts.
Can you not see that?

trellheim

However the company were extremely negligent in this case.

Get up the YARD with that how are they negligent the passengers travel on the inside, the door closes and the passengers are transported carefully and safely by a licensed driver. CRR are legally responsible AFAIR for approving their safety case or they could not run.

Dublin bus dont have a rear facing camera showing if scrotes are hanging on the back either and yet they are not found negligent.

I wonder why they did not appeal

Working class heroes

Infini wrote: »

That reward is an utter load of bollocks. She got herself injured through her own stupidity and noone elses. The fact that this was actually settled instead of being fought really makes it even more disgusting. They need to tighten up some of these compo culture loopholes so people who get themselves injured through their OWN stupidity and negligence cant get a payout like this its one of the reasons insurance is so damn high.

You are correct, to a point.
However the company were extremely negligent in this case. They knew there was a problem with the set up which could have been fixed had a proper risk assessment been carried out. This is H&S class 101. This was a major contributing factor in this case.
Yes there was a lot of stupidity here but it was not all exclusive to a 13 year old girl.

I agree, with the information available the award seems excessive.

Infini

That reward is an utter load of bollocks. She got herself injured through her own stupidity and noone elses. The fact that this was actually settled instead of being fought really makes it even more disgusting. They need to tighten up some of these compo culture loopholes so people who get themselves injured through their OWN stupidity and negligence cant get a payout like this its one of the reasons insurance is so damn high.

Phen2206

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Anyone thinking claimants in cases like this come from a specific socio economic background are massively mistaken.

Agreed - people from all walks of life are involved in cases like this - its nothing more than opportunism and greed which are traits found in people across the socioeconomic spectrum.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

If the Tram doesn't pull out from the platform this doesn't happen. If the driver switched camera he would have seen someone hanging from the tram, he wouldn't have pulled out from the platform and it wouldn't have happened.

Again, not ranting at you, but if this is the logic of the law as it stands then where do you draw the line? So with that logic and the case of jumping off a cliff (an obviously and inherently dangerous thing to do - just like what she did), I could argue that someone failed to put up a fence and IF they did I could not have jumped and my accident couldn't have happened. Using this logic to endorse and reward human stupidity is an abuse of the law or a consequence of poorly constructed legislation, or both. Furthermore, cases like this setting a precedent will only encourage more people like her and the associated legal vultures to push more cases like this through the system. A sad day for Irish justice. :mad:

The mind baffles.

LuckyLloyd

Phen2206 wrote: »

No it is not. Jumping onto a moving vehicle of any kind is idiotic and I cannot see how anyone can regard the company or the driver in any way liable for her injury in the face of such carelessness. If she was knocked down by a tram crossing the road then yes, but as for what she did? Please. Would you inspect the exterior of your car before you move at every green light in case someone is hanging on to it? I think not. We need some cop on in the courts these days. (Not ranting at you LuckyLloyd - just in general)

I would have to argue it is 0% Transdev's fault and 100% her own. What a sad day when outright stupidity is being rewarded.

Well that's the thing, it can't be 0% Transdev's fault. Not logically, and most certainly not within the parameters of tort law which is what matters here. If the Tram doesn't pull out from the platform this doesn't happen. If the driver switched camera he would have seen someone hanging from the tram, he wouldn't have pulled out from the platform and it wouldn't have happened.

So we end up here. As I noted earlier, cases like this just highlight the delta that exists between the law and the perception of the average person on responsibility and fault. So be it - the law has been like that a very long time. And rants like the above from XPS_zero are unfortunate examples of how successful divide and conquer narratives can be. Anyone thinking claimants in cases like this come from a specific socio economic background are massively mistaken.

Phen2206

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Is that a reasonable expectation at every stop every time?

No it is not. Jumping onto a moving vehicle of any kind is idiotic and I cannot see how anyone can regard the company or the driver in any way liable for her injury in the face of such carelessness. If she was knocked down by a tram crossing the road then yes, but as for what she did? Please. Would you inspect the exterior of your car before you move at every green light in case someone is hanging on to it? I think not. We need some cop on in the courts these days. (Not ranting at you LuckyLloyd - just in general)

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It might only have been 2% Transdev’s fault but how much is your brain worth?

I would have to argue it is 0% Transdev's fault and 100% her own. What a sad day when outright stupidity is being rewarded.

mloc123

I read that as 55k first... And then saw it was 550k, wtaf

Phen2206

Absolutely and utterly outrageous. Shame on the judge and system that approved this settlement - this case should never have been allowed to proceed and should have been thrown out at the start. Unbelieveable that someone who intentionally endangers themselves with no regard for their own safety gets rewarded for doing so.

If I go and jump off a cliff and survive, can I sue the county council for allowing me to do so? What next...

Working class heroes

XPS_Zero wrote: »

Didn't you all just know what she'd look like, right down to the look on her face, before you opened the link? Didn't you know the type she'd be?

I have a nuclear hatred for people of her class because they create a stereotype that I suffered under while I was on Social Welfare & a Disability Allowance for an actual illness. 4/5 people on Disability allowance got their illness or injury during their working lives but because of creatures like this ^ those of us who were/are dying of boredom during the day, and think hanging around during daytime hours with nothing to do is weird and uncomfortable, are stereotyped as all being like her ^
...and no, I do not mean working class, which would imply employment, tax paying and paying your own way.

They are much smaller than Niall Boylan would have you believe, but there is an entire subclass out there who don't serve society like the rest of us. Most of us will kick into the pot and take out of the pot at some time in our lives. This sort just take take take take take. They won't even pay VAT half the time cos they'll be pocketing the goods in the local store or stuffing it into the buggy.

As they grow up, they see their own parents get their money through a hatch in the post office, ie they don't get their money in exchange for doing something else...they JUST GET IT. They are dragged up, not brought up, so concepts like safe sex are not taught to them, and half of them would not be in school to learn them anyway, so they get "preggars" as fast as possible often between 14-17 by some rake skinny scrote with a name like "Jayo" or "Tommo" whos runners and tracksuit are blazing white (freshly stolen you see) but who's face has never seen a sponge or a cleanser since the day he was born, bbcap is pointing north and hair has more grease than a deep far fryer. Then off to the welfare office they go to collect a litany of benefits from the social insurance fund, a fund neither they nor their parents have ever paid into.

Now THEY are getting money with nothing in return.

Then (according to my doc and a person at my DSP office) when the jobseekers time limits were brought in (after which they force you into part time work usually for the council) they try to get on other payments like disability or carers, twisting and lying to try to qualify. Illnesses crop up with remarkable timing that they had never shown signs off before, the doctor thinks its odd that their patient is describing symptoms of 2 different types of depression that are mutually contradictory, when it's explained to them they don't qualify they make threats, and suddenly think they qualify for some other scheme and the previous illness is miraculously healed!

Since they never paid into the social insurance fund where does the money for this come from? Their lives are paid for by people getting up at 6am and coming home from work at 7pm, who have to watch as their PRSI and USC go to fund a subclass of people who are not just scamming people, but attacking them to...

...not content with robbing those of us who actually worked and contributed, they wanna attack us too, rob us, steal our cars, throw bricks through our windows "for a laugh" and instead of forcing them to pay for the damage via deductions from said dole, some other way make ammends to their victims or being thrown in a cage or sending the younger ones to a boot camp, they rack up "thirty prior convictions" and end up with suspended sentences.

They are the only segment of society who contribute absolutely NOTHING but consume costs and do damage and they are constantly getting rewarded for it with our f---g money!

If bad behavior is rewarded and being a leech on society is considered ok, why would they be any different? Were giving them all the wrong incentives.
We don't have to go overboard and throw the baby out with the bathwater like the UK did with their welfare reforms (or the US) by privatizing them to unqualified multinationals and throwing suicidal people off disability.
There are a few simple ways, starting with that 2 year limit, if you've never had a job you should be assigned one at the beginning.
We also need to stop paying people to have bloody kids , I'd consider paying nothing if the person with the kid has never had a job. "But then I can't take care of my kid", don't worry, the foster parents will take care of that, and bonus! he won't turn into a skanger like you! He'll actually have a chance in life! Win win!

What should have been said here was "you did something stupid, it's your own fault, bye!"

I would also propose a few simple rules to deter people like this, a few good places to start:

-Any criminal convictions in the last 10 years make you ineligible for a FT pass regardless of your medical situation
-Nobody can get compensation for any action which breaks the rules of a transport company or is transparently foolish on it's face.

-No compensation may be paid to anyone who has not been in paid employment for more than six months.
-The full cost of damage to public transport is deducted from wages or welfare at 50% of their pay until the cost is fully repaid.
-Transport Police. Transport Police. Transport Police.
-Anyone convicted of an offense on public transport is banned from it for a year.

Nice rant. Feel better?

XPS_Zero

Didn't you all just know what she'd look like, right down to the look on her face, before you opened the link? Didn't you know the type she'd be?

I have a nuclear hatred for people of her class because they create a stereotype that I suffered under while I was on Social Welfare & a Disability Allowance for an actual illness. 4/5 people on Disability allowance got their illness or injury during their working lives but because of creatures like this ^ those of us who were/are dying of boredom during the day, and think hanging around during daytime hours with nothing to do is weird and uncomfortable, are stereotyped as all being like her ^
...and no, I do not mean working class, which would imply employment, tax paying and paying your own way.

They are much smaller than Niall Boylan would have you believe, but there is an entire subclass out there who don't serve society like the rest of us. Most of us will kick into the pot and take out of the pot at some time in our lives. This sort just take take take take take. They won't even pay VAT half the time cos they'll be pocketing the goods in the local store or stuffing it into the buggy.

As they grow up, they see their own parents get their money through a hatch in the post office, ie they don't get their money in exchange for doing something else...they JUST GET IT. They are dragged up, not brought up, so concepts like safe sex are not taught to them, and half of them would not be in school to learn them anyway, so they get "preggars" as fast as possible often between 14-17 by some rake skinny scrote with a name like "Jayo" or "Tommo" whos runners and tracksuit are blazing white (freshly stolen you see) but who's face has never seen a sponge or a cleanser since the day he was born, bbcap is pointing north and hair has more grease than a deep far fryer. Then off to the welfare office they go to collect a litany of benefits from the social insurance fund, a fund neither they nor their parents have ever paid into.

Now THEY are getting money with nothing in return.

Then (according to my doc and a person at my DSP office) when the jobseekers time limits were brought in (after which they force you into part time work usually for the council) they try to get on other payments like disability or carers, twisting and lying to try to qualify. Illnesses crop up with remarkable timing that they had never shown signs off before, the doctor thinks its odd that their patient is describing symptoms of 2 different types of depression that are mutually contradictory, when it's explained to them they don't qualify they make threats, and suddenly think they qualify for some other scheme and the previous illness is miraculously healed!

Since they never paid into the social insurance fund where does the money for this come from? Their lives are paid for by people getting up at 6am and coming home from work at 7pm, who have to watch as their PRSI and USC go to fund a subclass of people who are not just scamming people, but attacking them to...

...not content with robbing those of us who actually worked and contributed, they wanna attack us too, rob us, steal our cars, throw bricks through our windows "for a laugh" and instead of forcing them to pay for the damage via deductions from said dole, some other way make ammends to their victims or being thrown in a cage or sending the younger ones to a boot camp, they rack up "thirty prior convictions" and end up with suspended sentences.

They are the only segment of society who contribute absolutely NOTHING but consume costs and do damage and they are constantly getting rewarded for it with our f---g money!

If bad behavior is rewarded and being a leech on society is considered ok, why would they be any different? Were giving them all the wrong incentives.
We don't have to go overboard and throw the baby out with the bathwater like the UK did with their welfare reforms (or the US) by privatizing them to unqualified multinationals and throwing suicidal people off disability.
There are a few simple ways, starting with that 2 year limit, if you've never had a job you should be assigned one at the beginning.
We also need to stop paying people to have bloody kids , I'd consider paying nothing if the person with the kid has never had a job. "But then I can't take care of my kid", don't worry, the foster parents will take care of that, and bonus! he won't turn into a skanger like you! He'll actually have a chance in life! Win win!

What should have been said here was "you did something stupid, it's your own fault, bye!"

I would also propose a few simple rules to deter people like this, a few good places to start:

-Any criminal convictions in the last 10 years make you ineligible for a FT pass regardless of your medical situation
-Nobody can get compensation for any action which breaks the rules of a transport company or is transparently foolish on it's face.

-No compensation may be paid to anyone who has not been in paid employment for more than six months.
-The full cost of damage to public transport is deducted from wages or welfare at 50% of their pay until the cost is fully repaid.
-Transport Police. Transport Police. Transport Police.
-Anyone convicted of an offense on public transport is banned from it for a year.

Working class heroes

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

You kidding. Her brain injury didn't stop her ridin. Probably single parent allowance, HAP,child allowance,medical card...the list goes on.:(

Link to all that?

AlekSmart

JPCN1 wrote: »

Do we need to start electing judges here?
The whole legal system here appears to be a racket with the taxpayer picking up the bill.

I wonder if it was open to the learned Judge NOT to "approve the settlement",on the grounds that it was excessive and discriminatory against law abiding Luas customers ?

The extent of the baloobaism in and around this stretch of Red Line is all too apparent,and any reasonable minded person would see the benefit of NOT rewarding such carry on with a gigantic non-taxable award such as this.

There is indeed some merit in a total reform of Judicial Appointments,with also perhaps a strict requirement on Judges to justify to the general public,inappropriate and outrageous payments such as this.

Even more ridiculous when the Judge himself accepts that the plaintiff was well aware that the practice of Tram Surfing was incredibly dangerous,but he chose to infer a far lesser description....

Approving the settlement Mr Justice Cross said it was not necessary for the court to tell Rebecca Kelly she did a silly thing as she knew that. However, he commended her for her honesty.

Justice Cross would have been performing a somewhat higher service to his Public,had he underlined her prior awareness of the risks,rather than nodding through a massive cash award such as this.

LuckyLloyd

They settled because they knew they’d lose at trial and end up paying more, possibly a lot more. The driver could have switched cameras and checked the other side of the tram. Is that a reasonable expectation at every stop every time?

Ultimately there is a significant delta between the public perception of personal responsibility and accident liability and that defined as per the law. It’s why companies are so H&S conscious, and the likes of Irish Rail seem overly concerned with it at times.

It might only have been 2% Transdev’s fault but how much is your brain worth?