Fine Gael TD sues Dublin Hotel after falling off swing

jmayo wrote: »

And here he is 4 months after accident even though he was having back spasm for 18 months after "accident".
[PICTURE]
Fooking chancers.

Can anyone read the yellow signs on the pole in that picture?
I zoomed in, but can't figure out why ESB would put them there. It must be an in-house joke.. :rolleyes:

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

A fg candidate who is running for the council for the first time called round earlier. Now, I know I live in a county that some of you believe is just a fabled land but I joked to him saying I hope your garden swing is secure and he hadn’t a clue what I was talking about! I then said “swing, Maria Walsh” (I got surname wrong) and he was still none the wiser though. He genuinely didn’t have a clue about this story.

I dunno what to make of that tbh.

There will be a foot messenger from The Pale arriving this weekend with the national news for him.

whatever about the case, what was she doing on a swing???..even if ye did get up on the swing and if ya did fall off it wouldn't ya be mortified to let it be known, let alone go seeking compensation for the incident, just goes to show the neck these people have, that's how some people get on in life, easy climb the social ladder of who's who when claiming things like this...most would be embarrassed. That's my view on the case, what a former Justice Minister is doing commenting on it, whether before the court or not is nothing new in this country, wouldn't be surprised if McDowells people were representing the hotel defence or something and this was done to get case thrown out or something by it now being commented on by even Fianna Fail at this stage, now they would know what pulling fast ones are in fairness..apart from McDowell commenting on the case in our national parliament, only he would be cocky enough to do that, I also think him, and other current Ministers should NOT be allowed write any columns/articles in newspapers with their views on current affairs. If they are still serving in public capacity, they do their talking in the national chamber, not in the column of a newspaper read only by people in their own circles...

Odyssey 2005 wrote: »

This bint will cost the FG party many thousands of votes. Couldn't have come at a better time for them. Hope she loses her shirt (shes already lost a seat )

The timing of this right before an election is sublime. I'm now wondering did the McKillen group leak the story as a bit of revenge for Josepha Madigan objecting to their planning permission of 450 apartments in Mount Merrion. Madigan has been very vocal in saying that this development should not go ahead despite the housing crises. Then her law firm sues the McKillen group on behalf of Maria Bailey falling off a swing in their hotel. Great time for them to ring a journalist

Nunu wrote: »

I have an observation that I don’t think has been mentioned?
I never heard of these Sophie’s swings so I google imaged them.
You can’t even truly swing on them because they are backed up by a wall.
You can basically only sit on them. Obviously she sat down and her backside continued off the seat, against the wall and onto the floor. nothing more than an embarrassment for her.
If she gets a payout from this I genuinely despair.

I've sat on them many, many times and I'm still struggling to figure out how anyone falls off in the dramatic manner she describes. You do actually have a fair bit of swinging room, but even at that I'd say you're far more likely for your head to hit the wall behind if you fall backwards from it. If anything, she's lucky she didn't break her neck if she truly fell at the angle and in the manner described.

I still say liability should be with the end-user. I've never agreed with this duty of care sh!te when it comes to places that serve alcohol - grown adults (and Sophies is either over 20s or 21s most nights so we're not even talking about barely-adults here) know exactly how alcohol affects them and how swings work, as far as I'm concerned it should in no way be the pub's responsibility to hold peoples' hands while they're sitting on it. This idea that things which are dangerous to some people shouldn't be there at all "just in case" is the epitome of the nanny state - it's like suggesting that no pub should sell peanuts because some people are allergic to them. If you know you're locked or that you can't handle your booze, then choose to stay the f*ck away - but if you don't, it's your own feckin' fault for being an eejit.

That's the general direction I'd like to see compensation law going in if the government are truly going to reform it. Forget about the size of the payouts, the real issue is what counts as personal vs establishment responsibility. The establishment's responsibility should end at making sure the swings are functional, well supported, and meet basic safety checks standard for all swings. The punter's responsibility should be any form of idiocy they choose to engage in whilst sitting on them.

I'd apply that to all personal injury law. That whole issue with Brian Crowley for example - I have a close relative who is paralysed from a severe spinal cord injury (ironically, from a fall off a seat very similar to what Ms Bailey is describing) so I have nothing but sympathy and respect for people who have to deal with this utterly devastating area of injury. However, Crowley was trespassing on a roof when he fell off and broke his neck. That's his own fault - end of story. It shouldn't be for anyone else to insure the safety of their private property in the event that some idiot breaks in when they're not supposed to - it should be for individuals to respect the law and other peoples' property, and their own tough sh!t if they choose not to and it goes wrong for them. My relative's injury happened in a hotel, but do you think for one second that they or anyone else in my family thought about taking legal action against the place? What should they have done, had no seats at all outdoors without backs to them, just in case someone has a freak accident? These things happen, FFS. Our thoughts were entirely with recovering as a family and with helping my relative to recover, not with trying to blame someone else for what was simply an unfortunate accident and in many ways an act of God with regard to how severe the consequences happened to be.

It really, really pisses me off that this isn't being discussed. Even now, with all the furore over insurance and compo culture, it's all about payouts being too big. There's no talk at all about changing or clarifying the law to ensure that if you do yourself an injury by your own hand, it's not someone else's fault just because you happen to be on someone else's property when it happens. I wouldn't get a payout if I fell off a swing in my own back garden FFS, regardless of whether I'd chosen to consume alcohol beforehand - so why should it be different if it happened in a business which is, by its nature, restricted to adults only? Are we not allowed to expect any level of common sense from people anymore - and do we have to do away with things which are fun and safe for the majority of us, like the Sophies swings, in order to protect the minority of morons who can't handle them?

Muahahaha wrote: »

Lol, especially this bit



Its become the subject of ridicule at this stage. But will Maria drop the case or will she brazen it out? Given her fathers track record I would say the latter.

She’ll take the money if she can, she doesn’t give a toss what we think, beyond shame.

Muahahaha wrote: »

Lol, especially this bit



Its become the subject of ridicule at this stage. But will Maria drop the case or will she brazen it out? Given her fathers track record I would say the latter.

Has to brazen it out to save what little face she can. I can only imagine her colleagues are massively pissed off with her. Spectacular own goal with a wonderful assist from Madigan and co. Best we can hope for is for her to be taken off the ticket which is extremely unlikely but maybe the case will hang around until the election...